“To read, write, and cast accounts”: Foucault, Governmentality, and Education in Upper Canada/Canada West by Michael Gerard McGarry A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Humanities, Social Sciences and Social Justice Education University of Toronto © Copyright by Michael Gerard McGarry 2013 ABSTRACT “To reads, write, and cast accounts”: Foucault, Governmentality, and Education in Upper Canada/Canada West Michael Gerard McGarry Doctor of Philosophy 2013 Department of Humanities, Social Sciences and Social Justice Education University of Toronto Contributing to the work of philosophers of education who have been examining issues of economy and emancipation, this dissertation employs a set of critical lenses drawn from Foucault’s investigation of governmentality to trace correspondences between economic liberalism and public schooling in Upper Canada/Canada West, the historical antecedent of present day Ontario. The analysis adheres to Foucault’s advice that philosophical critique involves a question asked of the present but answered in history. Thus through a Foucauldian genealogy it is argued that a series of transformations in the deployment of governmental power occurred in Upper Canada/Canada West that entailed the entry of an economic rationality into deliberations over the creation of a school system. To support this argument evidence is presented that demonstrates how race, biopolitics, and the burgeoning science of political economy combined in the first half of the nineteenth century to form the conditions of possibility for governmental control of schooling. In particular, it is illustrated how these conditions favoured a pedagogy based in Locke’s epistemology, and were legitimized by the providential status accorded political economy. This pedagogy, which was promoted as mild and so conducive to student engagement, and the authority of political economy are revealed as integral to the methods of instruction and curriculum of the province’s common schools, and indicative ii of the legacy of economic liberalism that persists, albeit transformed, in Ontario education to this day. The result of this critical analysis is a redescription or, in Foucault’s terminology, a “countermemory” of Ontario educational history that challenges the presumed naturalism of the ideals characteristic of economic liberalism, such as autonomy, accountability, entrepreneurialism, and consumer choice. The dissertation contends that these ideals are active in local educational regimes long legitimized by economy, and dangerously aimed at fostering political consent by manipulating subjects into locations of restricted agency. Providing insight into the historical role played by liberal governmentality and economy in the local context contributes to the study of Foucault and the philosophy of education, and also suggests a change in approach to questions regarding the corporatization or marketization of education. Instead of viewing economy as either a necessary component of schooling or a contemporary affront to educational ideals, it is proposed that it be re-evaluated according to its persistent, but contingent, historical correspondence with liberal government and its institutions. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The generosity of many people made this dissertation possible, and I will be forever appreciative of their support. The list is far too long to thank each individually, so I will limit myself to mentioning those who made vital contributions. I am grateful to Maureen Ford for inspiration and guidance during the early stages of my research. Many thanks go to Jamie-Lynn Magnusson, who provided timely and enthusiastic supervision, and to Elizabeth Smyth for conscientious advice. My special thanks go to Jeff Stickney, whose formidable knowledge and encouragement have been invaluable as well as exemplary. I am extremely fortunate to have friends who sustained me throughout this endeavour. In particular, I wish to thank Kate Hollett, who validates my conviction that life is best lived creatively. It has been my great pleasure to receive wise counsel from Dieter Misgeld. I am especially grateful to Mina Volpe, who never fails to remind me what matters most. Thank you to the Ontario Ministry of Education for financial support of my doctoral research. Finally, this dissertation is dedicated to my mother, Gloria McGarry, who has long nurtured my love of ideas. iv CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: SETTING THE STAGE 1 I. A Curious Political Detail 1 II. Navigating the Governmental History of Education in Ontario 16 II. Two “intellectual therapies” for Rethinking the School 24 III. Public Schooling and the Question of Popular Assent 33 IV. The Labyrinth Ahead 45 CHAPTER 2: FOUCAULT AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE SELF 50 I. Foucault’s Nominalism 53 II. The Importance of Kant Part 1: Negatively 57 III. The Importance of Kant Part II: Positively 64 IV. Nietzsche, Foucault, and Effective History 75 V. Notes on Power 84 CHAPTER 3: “PEACE, GOOD GOVERNMENT, AND PROSPERITY” 92 I. Beyond “The Social Control Thesis” 93 II. “Soulcraft as well as statecraft” 101 III. A Nominalist View of the State 108 IV. Cartography/Reconnaissance 118 CHAPTER 4: “A PHENOMENAL REPUBLIC OF INTERESTS” 128 I. “The general feeling is in total opposition to the execution of these men” 134 II. Rule by Other Means 142 III. Biopolitics and Racism 151 IV. Governing the Species Body 157 V. A “citizenry fit to rule” 163 VI. “Assimilation to English habits is already commencing” 175 VII. Race as the “organizing grammar” of Public Schooling 183 VIII. “What knowledge is most worth?” 189 CHAPTER 5: “THE RIGHT DISPOSITION OF THINGS ARRANGED SO AS TO LEAD TO A SUITABLE END” 200 I. The “appropriate sequel to the domestic” 208 II. Political Economy and the Immanence of Liberal Government 210 III. “One will then no longer have to hear the obey; or rather, the obey will be founded on autonomy itself” 228 IV. “Interest will Not Lie” 237 V. Secular Salvation 245 v VI. “It is very seldom seen that anyone discovers mines of gold or silver in Parnassus” 269 VII. A “right disposition” 281 VIII. “To read is to wander through an imposed system” 292 IX. Curricular Standardization of Economic Interest 304 X. “Bildung of the market” 310 XI. “An implicit pedagogy of civility” 318 AFTERWORD 323 BIBLIOGRAPHY 328 vi CHAPTER 1 SETTING THE STAGE In all questions of political change, there are two dangers, of an opposite direction, to be considered. The first is the danger of doing too little; the second that of doing too much.1 I. A Curious Political Detail A wealth of literature takes up the nineteenth century obsession with developing systems of mass public instruction. Many commentators note how schooling was truly an international affair with educational reformers on both sides of the Atlantic exchanging advice and “borrowing from all what ever is good” in order to efficiently reach as many members of their populations as possible. 2 Among the mass of correspondence exchanged between reformers, one text is often singled out. The “Rapport sur l’état de l‘instruction publique en Prusse”3 presented in 1831 by Victor Cousin4 to the French Minister of Public Instruction and Ecclesiastical Affairs describes in detail the Prussian educational administrative structure, curriculum, pedagogical practices and the organization of the Prussian Normal School. This text, and the system it portrays, was 1 James Mill, “Emancipation of Spanish America,” Edinburgh Review 13 (1809) 277-311, in Murray Milgate and Shannon Stimson, After Adam Smith (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2009) 139. 2 Egerton Ryerson, “Report on a System of Public Elementary Instruction for Upper Canada, 1846,” in Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada, Vol. VI, ed. John George Hodgins (Toronto, ON: Warwick Brothers, 1899) 140. 3 Victor Cousin, “Report on the State of Public Instruction in Prussia,” in Reports on European Education, ed. Edgar W. Knight (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 1930) 123-242. 4 Victor Cousin was one of the leading French philosophers of the time. His thought involved an eclectic perspective that combined elements of Scottish Realism and German Idealism. He was also a controversial figure. For his support of the royalists he had once been imprisoned in Berlin and later barred from teaching in French universities. Yet as the upheavals that followed the demise of Napoleon abated his teaching privileges were reinstated and his enthusiasm for mass public instruction made him appear the Minister’s obvious choice to provide assistance to the project of educational reform. Within a decade Cousin’s efforts would result in his leading the French Ministry of Public Instruction. 1 celebrated as a blueprint for at least two decades after its publication. We5 know that it was foundational to Horace Mann’s design of the Massachusetts system as well as Egerton Ryerson’s 1846 “Report on a System of Public Elementary Instruction for Upper Canada.” Indeed, as Ryerson notes in the preface to his “Report,” “the experience of Germany, (says M. Cousin,) particularly of Prussia, ought not to be lost upon us.”6 Although all of this is evident in the literature that addresses the widespread nineteenth century political resolve to make mass instruction a prime responsibility of the state, I have chosen for a different reason to draw attention to this vital text. Before Cousin makes “the machinery of public instruction in Prussia intelligible…as a whole,” he briefly comments on the “double character” at the heart of the system that operates so “nothing escapes the eye and power of the minister, yet at the same time each” of its various branches “enjoys sufficient liberty of action.”7 This is a curious political detail. How is it that the governing authority of the educational minister, especially in Prussia where this influence would be warranted by an absolute monarch, is distributed forcefully yet permits flexibility at its extensions? It appears as if Cousin is describing a paradoxical situation wherein administrative power is at odds with itself, but no further explanation is provided.