Political Development of Subaltern Education in Great Britain, the United States, and India A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Ph.D.) In the Department of Educational Studies College of Education, Criminal Justice and Human Services 2012 By Steven Napier Committee Chairperson: Dr. Marvin J. Berlowitz, Ph.D. Abstract My dissertation research is an integrated design and analysis based on archival records and artifacts that examines the effectiveness of various civic organizations and collective agency of the populace in the development of education in Great Britain, the United States, and India. This research focuses on political development, and other areas concerning religious and ethnic diversity, multiculturalism, peace, international political economy and how those forces helped or hindered the development of education in those three countries. Further, this dissertation investigates the ancient and medieval origins of Indian education and its subsequent developments during the British Empire and during post-colonial development periods. My findings have led me to conclude that civilization is driven by perceived immediate self interest and divisions along various racial, ethnic, class/caste lines have served to further impede the development of education in Great Britain, the United States, and India. Moreover, increasing globalization and modernization of economies have provided many countries with increased opportunities, but also have served to create many challenges in regards to education in effectively dealing with those challenges. This dissertation challenges the concept embodied by a whole realm of post-modern literature that purports that educational institutions including science, learning, literacy, and technology was developed by the bourgeoisie. Instead, this dissertation argues that these educational institutions were developed by the populace through the use and implementation of actions by labor unions and civic organizations. Post-modern literature is dominated by the social control thesis, which, emphasizes the instruments of control, but deemphasizes the role of the populace in implicating the development of education, literacy, science, technology, etc. In the U.S., the ‘new historical revisionists’ have taken the position that free, compulsory, public ii education was imposed upon a passive working class as a means of social control, while Marxist scholars have countered with a labor education thesis which emphasizes the initiative of the working class in the struggle for public education. Subaltern studies is typically defined as a person of ‘lesser rank’. Thus, social science from this point of view is history from the bottom up. This dissertation studies subaltern education from the standpoint of the labor-education thesis which observes that various instruments of social control have been exerted by the bourgeoisie on the populace, but simultaneously observes that education for the masses has come about by pressure from the populace organized through labor unions and civic organizations. The debate of the labor- education as it relates to political economy and British, U.S., and Indian history is traced throughout this dissertation in an intellectual historiography. Additionally, the validity of the labor-education thesis is investigated and applied to India. My findings conclude that the actions of labor in India were primarily responsible for the development of education. My research, comparing educational activities and policies has given rise to the opportunity of expanding investigations into research in other countries. iii Copyright © 2012, Steven Napier iv For Rukmani v Acknowledgements This dissertation is the culmination of over twenty years of reading, research, and study. I am especially grateful to all the member of my doctoral committee including Professors Vanessa Allen-Brown, Mary Benedetti, Thomas A. Kessinger, and Dinshaw Mistry. I extend special thanks to Professor Stephen Sunderland. Professor Barbara Ramusack at the University of Cincinnati provided additional mentoring and guidance. As did, Professors S.N. Sangita and Tejaswini Niranjana in India. This research would not have been possible without the generous support of research fellowships including, the Centre for the Study of Culture and Society and the Institute for Social and Economic Change in Bengaluru, India. In Great Britain, I am especially thankful to the British Museum, the British National Library, Delia Fernandez Manzanero at the University of Oxford, and Jack Goody, Patrick Baert, and Juliet Mitchell at the University of Cambridge for awarding me a Graduate Scholar Award for this dissertation research. Monisha Bajaj of the faculty at Columbia University and Supriya Baily of George Mason University for all of her helpful comments and insights as part of the 2010 Comparative and International Education New Scholars Dissertation Fellowship. At the Library of Congress, I would also like to thank Anchi Hoh and Allan Thrasher for the prestigious 2010 Florence Tan Moeson Fellowship. In addition, I would also like to thank the library staff at the Indian National Archives, Indian National Library, Karnataka State Archives, University of Cincinnati, Chicago, Yale and Harvard Universities. I would also thank the late Leo Vincent Krzywkowski for his insights and guidance and to my family members for their support. Most of all I extend my special warmest gratitude to Professor Marvin J. Berlowitz who has been an absolute inspiration and guidance for the completion of the doctoral dissertation. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS: Introduction p. 1 Chapter 1: Advances of the Dialectic Materialism p. 8 Chapter 2: Marxist Comparative Analysis of Race, Class, Gender, Ethnicity p. 32 Chapter 3: Capitalistic Dominance of Western Democracies & International Organizations p. 60 Chapter 4: Labor Education Thesis in Great Britain & the United States p. 85 Chapter 5: New Revisionist Social Control Thesis p. 112 Chapter 6: Indian Historiography p. 137 Chapter 7: Ancient & Medieval Indian Education p. 152 Chapter 8: Education Under British Colonialism and Beyond p. 182 Bibliography: p. 212 vii Political Development of Subaltern Education in Great Britain, the United States, and India “The physicist who is only a physicist can still be a first-class physicist and a most valuable member of society. But nobody can be a great economist who is only an economist – and I am even tempted to add that the economist who is only an economist is likely to become a nuisance if not a public danger.” – (Friedrich August von Hayek, 1974).1 INTRODUCTION: This dissertation is concerned with the meaning, scope, implications and applications of Subaltern studies, or, the history of the social from the perspectives of the broad populace. The „Subaltern‟, coined by Marxist scholar Antonio Gramsci2, simply means a person of lesser rank. Such histories have been such referred to in the West as „Peoples History‟ in famous works by Howard Zinn3, Chris Harman4, Page Smith5, and many others who have incorporated various components and aspects of the history of the social as told from the bottom up. In most of these inquiries Karl Marx‟s philosophical approach to historical inquiry, known as a dialectical materialism lies just below the surface.6 1 Friedrich August von Hayek, “The Preface of Knowledge”, in Nobel Lectures in Economic Sciences, 1969-1980, vol. 1, Assar Lindbeck, Ed. (Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Company, 1980), p. 179-189; Hayek, winner of the 1974 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences, is also quoted by James J. Heckman who is also the 2000 winner of the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences in, “The New Economics of Child Quality”, at the T.W. Schultz Keynote Address at the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting (Chicago: January 5, 2007), p. 2, http://www.kidsfirstcanada.org/heckman-2007.pdf. 2 Chris Harman, “Gramsci, the Prison Notebooks, and Philosophy,” International Socialism, Iss. 114 (April 9, 2007), http://www.isj.org.uk/index.php4?id=308&issue=114; Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks (New York: International Publishers, 1971). 3 Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States: 1492 – Present (New York: Harper Collins, 2005). 4 Chris Harman, A People’s History of the World: From the Stone Age to the New Millennium (London: Verso, 2008). 5 Page Smith, A People’s History of the United States, 8 Vols. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1976-1987). 6 See Chris Mathew Sciabarra‟s, “Karl Marx”, International Encyclopedia of Economic Sociology, Jenas Beckert and Milan Zafiroski, Eds. (New York: Routledge, 2006), p. 434-437; William H. Sewell, Jr., “Crooked Lines” American Historical Review, vil. 113, no. 2 (Apr., 2008), p. 393-405; Geoff Eley, “The Profane and Imperfect World of Historiography” American Historical Review, vil. 113, no. 2 (Apr., 2008), p. 425-437; Geoff Eley, A Crooked Line: From Cultural History to the History of Society (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2005); Geoff Ely and Keith Nield The Future of Class in History: What’s Left of the Social? (Ann Arbor, MI: In the age of Marx and beyond, the study of collective agency of the populace has often centered on trade unionism and related topics. For the historian/social scientist these topics are good starting place for inquiry and the records contained in labor archives are rich primary sources for social histories that