The Dilemma of Prixis Anarchism and Education: A Comparative Approach to Theory and Practice Luke Trenwith Thesis Submitted for the Degree in Masters of Arts in the Discipline of Politics University of Adelaide June 2007 The Dilemma of Praxts Table of Contents Table of Contents .ii Abstract iii Statement of Originality iv Acknowledgements....... Introduction. .. .1 Chapter One Community, Autonomy and Education ........ 9 Chapter Two Integral Education and Autonomy 31 Chapter Three Francisco Ferrer and the Escuela Moderna 52 Chapter Four Anarchism, Autonomy and Aesthetic Education 74 Chapter Five Tolstoy and his School at Yásnaya Polyána.... 97 Conclusion 720 Bibliography t26 ll The Dilemma of Praxts Abstract Anarchists argue that public (or state) education is antithetical to the idea of freedom because state education is a central controlling agency in society. This thesis addresses two questions. First, in order to liberate students, what kind of pedagogy did the anarchist propose? Second, in a practical sense, did anarchist educational experiments achieve the libertarian results for which they were hoping? I argue throughout this thesis that while anarchism presents a systematic education strategy to effect radical social change, the practical application ofthis theory was both contradictory and a failure. In order to expose this failure, this thesis uses the positive and negative conception of liberty as a navigational tool. I argue that both forms of liberty are equally important to anarchists and this importance feeds into their educational methodology. To anarchists, education possessed a responsibility to remove constraints in the classroom, while education also had a responsibility to fully develop all human faculties. A stress on both forms of liberty led to an irreconcilable tension emerging in their educational experiments because both concepts of freedom could not develop side by side consistently. This thesis identifies and compares two separate educational traditions emerging in anarchism. The first is integral education and the second is aesthetic education. The First Chapter of this thesis draws together the goals of anarchism and illuminates how these goals feed into their educational theory. Chapter Two develops an exposition on integral education. Chapter Three evaluates an historical attempt by the Spanish anarchist/educator Francisco Ferrer to put some of these ideas (broadly) into practice. Chapter Four develops an exposition on aesthetic education while Chapter Five examines Leo Tolstoy's educational experiment that, (broadly), represents an example of the aesthetic educative tradition. I argue that a close examination of these practical experiments, using the positivelnegative liberty model, reveals the inherent paradox evident in anarchist education, at least at a practical level. 111 The Dilemma of Praxis Statement of Originatity This work contains no material that has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma of any university or other tertiary institution and, to the best of my knowledge, contains no material previously published or written by another person, except when due reference has been made in the text. I give consent to this copy of my thesis, when deposited in the University of Adelaide Llbrary,being made available to all forms of media, now or hereafter. Signed L,lo sl, t Luke Trenwith Date IV The Dilemma of Praxis Acknowledgements A great deal of encouragement, criticism, and support has gone into developing the ideas and argument of this thesis. Much support has come from friends, colleagues and teachers. First, I wish to thank Dr. Lisa Hill who has been my supervisor in the last two years. She has been extremely patient with the progress of this thesis and has read numerous (and often ill-conceived) drafts. Her insights and perceptive recommendations have been of immense service. I am also appreciative of Dr. Lisa Hill for kindly taking on the added responsibility of being my primary supervisor after the sudden and tragic loss of Professor Paul Nursey-Bray. Paul Nursey-Bray's initial assistance and advice was of considerable help-in particular, his aid in suggesting scope and direction of this thesis. In addition, several friends have been instrumental to the completion of this thesis. First, I would like to thank Dr. Kim Sørensen who has provided exceptional editorial recommendations and insights along with valuable advice and assistance with small queries. Similarly, Bronwyn Donaghey's editorial recommendations and insightful suggestions have illuminated problematic areas. Her helpful formatting suggestions have also been of considerable aid and been most appreciated. Without the support of both parties in the final stages of this thesis, the completion of this thesis would have been made exceptionally more daunting. I also wish to thank Mark Bode who has listened (with great patience) to my queries in the last year. His sharp recommendations and suggestions have been invaluable. Furtherrnore, Dr. Vicki Spencer's help in perusing this thesis, at different times, was highly appreciated, while Patrick Allington's final edit was also of great assistance. Last, but not least, I wish to thank Zoë Glll, Mark Rainbird, Jonathan Louth and Paul Tsoundarou, who, in their unique way, have kept a smile on my face with their humour, conversation and support during this process. The Dilemma of Praxis Introduction Anarchists are preoccupied with the relationship between education and the state. When thinking about education, anarchists do not take the existing political and social structure for granted.l Rather, they argue that education is a tool used by the state to ensure the state's continued future. For anarchists, state education is authoritarian in practice, and, for the student, this diminishes a sense of independence and appreciation for critical thought. As a consequence, students 'willingly' accept the status quo without question. Somewhat paradoxically, anarchists also assert that if education encourages a sense of independence by developing all faculties of the human condition, education is potentially revolutionary. In such an instance, state authority will be undermined by a shift in public opinion, as education possesses the capability of transforming culture from 'the old relationship of master-slave (capitalist-proletarian)' to a 'relationship of egalitarian co-operation.'2 At the heart of anarchist education is therefore a keen stress on freedom and the removal of authority, in order to create conditions where critical thought and new forms of socialisation develop unhindered. This raises the question of whether anarchist education can achieve these ends and, in doing so, whether the consequences are revolutionary. I argue in this thesis that anarchist education fails in its endeavour to reach these goals through critically assessing two of its best-known experiments. Education has always occupied the minds of anarchists as one means to create a new libertarian social consciousness.3 If education 'designates [the]...basic social process whereby individuals acquire the culture of their society,'4 anarchists hope to radically change culture using aradical libertarian educational approach to education. They believe this radicalism will drive the development of new forms of socialisation. Leonard Krimerman and Lewis Perry argue in t Judith Suissa, 'Anarchism, Utopias and Philosophy of Education' The Journal of Philosophy of Education,35, no. 4 (Nov. 2001), p.629. 2 Herbert Read, 'The Necessity of Anarchism' in Anarchy and Order: Essays in Politics (Beacon Press, Boston, 197 l), p. 92. t George Woodcock, 'Liberating Education' in The Anqrchist Reader, ed. George Woodcock (William Collins Sons and Co, Glasgow,l9T'7),p.266. o James Bowen and Peter Hobson, 'Introduction' to Theories of Education: Studies of Significant: Innovation in Western Educational Thought, ed. James Bowen and Peter Hobson (John Wiley and Sons, Brisbane, 1987),p.2. 1 The Dilemma of Praxrs Patterns of Anarchy that anarchist education 'does not simply lay the groundwork for subsequent achievements; at its best it constitutes the most complete and most feasible paradigm of those achievements.'5 Krimerman and Perry go on to say that anarchist education is 'the living center and clearest model of what is ultimately desirable in human relations.'6 Education, put simply, has the potential to secure a commitment to the anarchistic principles,T or, at it's very least, it possesses the capability of preparing individuals for radical social change. An Anarchist Response to Education From this brief introduction, this thesis addresses two key questions. First, in the anarchist tradition is there an educational philosophy? Second, did their pedagogical thought, in a practical sense, have the intended affect? That is, were historical anarchist educational experiments successful in going some way to producing students who were imbued with a'new' revolutionary consciousness? In response to the first question, I argue in this thesis that what emerges from the anarchist tradition is a systematic educational programme. At the heart of any educational programme is an inseparable connection to questions about what society ought to be like. As Bowen and Hobson note, 'no philosopher of education can be fully neutral, but make certain normative assumptions and in the case of the liberal-analysts [for instance] these will reflect the values of 5 Leonard I. Krimerman, Lewis Perry, 'The Anarchists and Education' in