S11, School Students, and the End of Liberalism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
s11, school students, and the end of liberalism Paper presented to the AARE Conference University of Sydney, December 4-7, 2000 Dr Tom Griffiths Faculty of Education University of Newcastle. NSW. 2308 (02) 4921 6658 [email protected] FIRST DRAFT Abstract This paper reviews the world-systems perspective on the collapse of communism a decade ago, seen as marking not the triumph of capitalism, but the end of liberalism as the dominant geoculture of the capitalist world-system. The recent "s11" protest movement in Melbourne, Australia is considered in terms of this perspective, as a potential part of an 'antisystemic' movement challenging the legitimacy of the capitalist world-system and working for its transition into an alternative world-system. In this context, the responses of 14 and 15 year old school students to a comprehensive survey are examined, in terms of their support for and / or questioning of the fundamental promises of liberalism. On several points, students' views are seen to be contradictory, expressing support for the official rhetoric of meritocracy in schooling and society, while acknowledging that wider social and economic factors directly undermine these processes. The youth surveyed provide some support for the argument that dominance of liberalism is ending, offering hope for educators and activists working to construct an alternative, democratic, just and egalitarian world-system. Introduction The collapse of real existing socialism a decade ago, and subsequent incorporation of almost the entire globe into the capitalist world economy, were seen by some as marking the ultimate triumph capitalism as the only, if not the natural, alternative for the world. In contrast, world-systems theorising has argued that these events in fact marked the 'end of liberalism' as the dominant geoculture and ideology of the world-system, and with it the beginnings of the transformation of the capitalist world-system. At face level, recent protests against the global institutions at heart of the capitalist world-system, in Seattle, Washington, Prague, and recently in Melbourne, appear to provide some support for this thesis. There actions are arguably signs of a growing movement in core industrialised countries, with links to the periphery, demanding an alternative and radically different world-system. This paper briefly reviews the s11 protest in Melbourne earlier this year, in terms of a world- systems approach to contemporary world events, before going on to review responses from Australian youth to a number of questions concerning school education, work, and Australian politics and society. This data, from the Australian component of the international EGSIE study, is analysed in terms of students' indications of their support for and / or rejection of the promises of liberalism on the one hand, and other aspects of the current world-system. These responses are mixed and seemingly contradictory, suggesting at the least some cracks in the geoculture of liberalism amongst Australian youth. The end of liberalism This paper takes as its starting point the work by Immanuel Wallerstein on the capitalist world-system, and specifically the argument that world political events from 1989 have marked the end of liberalism as the dominant geoculture of the world-system. In a similar way to arguments from sections of the 'New Left', Wallerstein's thesis argues that the so- called triumph of capitalism signifies the beginnings of its demise at a global level. Boswell and Chase-Dunn similarly situate the revolutions of 1989 in the larger and longer-term development of the capitalist world-system, and the spiral or capitalist and socialist movements within the structure of an encompassing world-system. The dominant feature of Wallerstein's world-systems approach is its claim that the so-called 'real existing' socialist and communist states, up to 1989, remained within and functional to the capitalist world-economy . From this perspective, the coming to power of communist movements provided stability for the world-system, via their pursuit of a "mercantilist strategy of "catching up" and "surpassing" rival states" , thus maintaining relative peace and stability in their sphere of influence within the interstate system. Wallerstein acknowledges "real differences" between the projects of the so-called socialist and non-socialist states, particularly the consequential impact of states like the USSR and Cuba in terms of legitimising revolutionary struggle; pressuring for and producing welfare reforms in the core; and challenging the legitimacy of the capitalist world-system (pp. 110 & 239). These differences, however, are presented in practice as extreme reforms that remain within the bounds of the capitalist world-system. Wallerstein argues that 'liberalism' has been the dominant ideology or "geoculture" (p. 166) of the world-system, the concept of liberalism encompassing what he describes as its two variants of liberal-conservative and liberal-socialist (p. 88). While socialist and communist parties throughout the twentieth century claimed to be opposed to liberalism, Wallerstein (1995) argues that the socialist and communist variants came in practice to be "one of its avatars" (p. 89). In making this argument, Wallerstein highlights some central characteristics of both the capitalist and so-called communist variants of liberalism: "The possibility of the (economic) development of all countries came to be a universal faith, shared alike by conservatives, liberals, and Marxists. The formulas each put forward to achieve such development were fiercely debated, but the possibility itself was not. In this sense, the concept of development became a basic element of the geocultural underpinning of the world-system" . A number of characteristics or aspects of a worldview shared by socialist and capitalist states can be summarised from the world-systems arguments of Wallerstein, including: • the goal of achieving state power coupled with the principle of self-determination for sovereign states; • full membership and participation in the interstate system; • the state objective of national development, aimed at catching up to more developed core states and achieving modernisation; and • the belief that this development, and progress, was possible through the application of a rational and state planned development strategy. Put another way, these common assumptions and objectives of socialist and non-socialist states, within the capitalist world-system, are described by Wallerstein who emphasises that "both conservatives and socialists accepted the world-scale liberal agenda of self- determination (also called national liberation) and economic development (sometimes called the construction of socialism) (p. 103). On this basis, he concludes by noting that "the essential dispute between them was merely about the path to such national development" (p. 109). This argument is detailed extensively by Wallerstein in a number of publications . Under this argument the belief in the possibility of national economic development for all states is presented as the "geocultural underpinning of the world-system" (p. 163). It is this shared underpinning, and the beliefs that it entails, that have arguably lost their footing over the past decade or more. The collapse of the real existing socialist economies, and so-called triumph of capitalism, has highlighted the incapacity of the current world-system to deliver the promises of global liberalism. My purpose here is not to attempt to resolve, or even address in any major way, debates about alternative world-systems approaches. As noted, I take Wallerstein's critique as the starting point, with its focus on the capitalist world-economy, and description of principles within and underlying this in terms of liberalism as a shared, global geoculture of development. By implication, there are elements of a world-culture legitimating the shared principles of this geoculture globally. My focus is on the 'end of liberalism' thesis and its implications, in terms of recent event in Australia and globally, and the views of school students recorded in the EGSIE youth survey. A fundamental aspect of Wallerstein's work on the capitalist world-system focuses on its end, and the transition to a new world-system. This idea is predominant in early work, such as The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist System from 1974, tracing the development of the capitalist world-system and the conditions required for its political stability . More recently, Wallerstein focuses more exclusively on alternatives, on the premise that we are currently "living in the transition from our existing world-system, the capitalist world-economy, to another world-system or systems" (p. 35). The thesis here is that the outcome of this transition is in no way inevitable, but that in this transitional period the collective and conscious efforts of people can have more effect on the structuring of the world than in 'normal' times (p. 35). Boswell and Chase-Dunn critique Wallerstein's failure to address in any detail what may come 'after liberalism', and the strategies and institutions required to transform the current world-system into a progressive, socialist world-system (pp. 159-64). They focus instead on Wagar's utopian novel, with its detailed discussion of possible scenarios for political organisation and action at local, national and global levels, as part of the process of constructing an alternative world-system. Like Wagar, however,