EMERY J. HYSLOP-MARGISON AND ALAN M. SEARS

CHALLENGING THE DOMINANT NEO-LIBERAL DISCOURSE

From Human Capital Learning to Education for Civic Engagement

INTRODUCTION Neo-liberalism has dramatically shifted the context of contemporary society by dismantling the public mechanisms that previously protected individuals from the ravages of ‘capitalism with the gloves off’ (McLaren & Farahmandpur, 2000, p. 26). Within the sphere of education, public schools and universities have not escaped the influence of neo-liberal policies, as these institutions are focused more and more on human capital development and far less on critical inquiry into the economic, social and political conditions that lie at the heart of democratic citizenship. Universities, once a bastion of social critique and intellectual freedom, face increasing pressure to conform to the dictates of neo-liberal regimes and a corporate hegemony that places profit over people (Chomsky, 2002). In this chapter and in response to this trend, the authors argue that educators must mount a more concerted resistance to the myriad of contemporary challenges to authentic citizenship education. We propose that meaningful democratic dialogue requires revealing neo-liberal ideologies to students and reclaiming such educational concepts as lifelong learning, critical thinking and literacy as primary democratic learning practices (Hyslop-Margison & Sears, 2006).

THE NEO-LIBERAL CONTEXT: PRIVATE PROFIT AS A PUBLIC GOOD The 1970s witnessed a dramatically shifting political and economic paradigm among virtually all industrialised countries. These nations, including the US, Canada, Great Britain and other members of the then G7, were about to suffer a series of crippling recessions that continued throughout the decade. In Das Kapital Marx accurately predicted that capitalism, by its very nature, experiences inexorable and recurring crises of over-accumulation that inevitably result in unavoidable cycles of economic decline (Marx, 1933). In periods of over- accumulation like the 1970s, capital becomes so plentiful that industry cannot dispose of its product profitably and production is therefore correspondingly reduced. The tightening of consumer spending through increased interest rates results in widespread job losses among the working class members of society. The

M.A. Peters, A. Britton and H. Blee (Eds.), Global Citizenship Education: Philosophy, Theory and Pedagogy, 299–315. © 20087 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved. EMERY J. HYSLOP-MARGISON AND ALAN M. SEARS economy eventually recovers from each over-accumulation crisis but with each recovery the entire cycle begins all over again with every subsequent collapse, according to Marx, more serious than its predecessor. The economic fallout from the over-accumulation crisis of the 1970s and early 1980s impacted negatively on many citizens of the world’s industrialised democracies. As industry limited production and lending institutions tightened the reins on available capital, mass layoffs of workers throughout the manufacturing and transportation sectors occurred to protect corporate profits. Interest rates witnessed a significant jump that in turn prompted a dramatic increase in the number of personal and small business bankruptcies (Hyslop-Margison & Welsh, 2003). One noted economist describes the fiscal decline of the 1970s as ‘a disaster that would rival the great crash of 1929’ (Mahar, 2003, p. 39). Many members of the working class lost their jobs, homes and savings as they struggled to carve out a new niche for themselves in the emerging leaner, and decidedly meaner, neo- liberal order. Neo-liberalism has not only redefined the role of the democratic citizen but also our understanding of what constitutes the national or state interest. As the Cold War faded with a triumphant capitalist victory, most notably symbolised by the demolition of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, the challenges facing Western democracies became increasingly viewed in economic terms rather than in political or moral ones. Success no longer depended on winning hearts and minds from communism to capitalism but in maintaining the economic stature and advantage of the corporate class. The complete collapse of Eastern European and Soviet communism removed the only substantial obstacle to unfettered capitalism. With the spectre of socialism all but vanished from the political horizon, capital was free to reach into the far corners of the globe for new exploitative opportunities. In the Communist Manifesto Marx and Engels (1998) anticipated this global assault by observing that, The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilization. The cheap prices of its commodities are the heavy artillery with which it batters down all Chinese walls, with which it forces the barbarians’ hatred of foreigners to capitulate. It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In one word, it creates a world after its own image. (p. 40) In the two decades preceding the 1970s, governments from industrialised countries adopted a range of policies and programmes that enhanced quality of life for many of their most vulnerable citizens. In Canada, unemployment insurance programmes, national healthcare and enhanced social assistance programmes protected the most susceptible members of the population from slipping below subsistence levels of income. In the US, where the welfare state was far less instantiated in a national consciousness founded on romanticised notions of rugged

300