{"word_count": 1489, "character_count": 8834}
This is an extract of a lecture given as part of the Melbourne Free University’s course ‘What if...?’What makes some people so scared of free education?Recently, one of my articles was picked up by a so-called “leading libertarian centre-right” blog. Amongst the insults, one of which attacked me for my name, I was surprised to see two of the commenters attack the Melbourne Free University. One of them quoted our website which states that at the MFU, ‘there is no enrolment, no registration, no fee; you are free to come to any session’. This really upset him. His reaction clearly showed anger:Sweet cheeses on a stick the man is a loon, i need to soak my brain in paint stripper to cleanse it from visiting maximus fuknuts webpage. Curse you for your links.That made me think that it is not so much the idea of free education that is the issue here, but the fact that we have to even discuss it, the fact that free education can actually be thought of as something bad, something that needs to be fought against. In a way, it is not surprising that the fear of free education came from a more conservative than libertarian website, like the one I just quoted. It is not surprising either that the Melbourne Free University (MFU) failed to find someone willing to argue against free education as a principle.Free education is clearly to be feared by those in power and those who believe they are losing it. It is nothing new. In times of crisis, many white males will find comfort in exclusivist ideologies. This will be expressed in racism or sexism and always against equality. Free education is therefore their mortal enemy.One of the core beliefs of the MFU is that education currently fails to provide a proper emancipatory outlet. Our experience as university tutors and lecturers has showed us that emancipation and the pursuit of knowledge, despite our efforts and enthusiasm, ranks low in the reasons why students come to our classes. Education and knowledge is not for its own sake, it is to get a degree, a job, status, or simply because that's what you do. Therefore, more than the content of the courses studied, what matters increasingly is the mark. More than the chance to engage in critical thinking, what matters is the reputation of the university in which a subject is taught. It is striking to see that in some universities, bell-curves no longer accommodate fails. Attendance is made compulsory to force students who would otherwise spend their time doing something else come to a tutorial unprepared and unreceptive. Education has become little more than a mere commodity whose value could only be quantified in the hegemonic neo-liberal framework.While necessary, this kind of education offers limited possibilities for emancipation. First, the price put on education limits its basic accessibility. One must make sure that his or her education will not be a waste of money. One cannot afford to ‘lose’ years studying something that might not offer good job opportunities. This type of education is also limiting as it reinforces hierarchies. In such a competitive model, the master/student dichotomy cannot be challenged as it should be. Rather than engaging in a critical, original, risky analysis, students often feel more comfortable to work within the safe framework drawn by their teachers. The mark is all that matters and strategic thinking has become what is central to a good essay; thinking for its own sake comes second if at all. Of course, not all students react in this manner. However, I believe it is safe to say a majority do and by doing so forfeit their capacity for emancipation.You might say that this is not really new and that it has always been that way. That it's all nice and well to think of a world where education is free from the barriers mentioned above but that it hardly seems possible in the world we live in. Indeed, can we have an educational system which provides space for emancipatory learning without funding? How would people find jobs if they spend their time studying impractical things?This leads me to a more positive point. We do not need the system or anyone to grant us free emancipatory education. It has often been said, in various emancipatory struggles, that the oppressed should not wait to have their freedom granted, as it is their responsibility to take and uphold it. Similarly, one is not given education, one takes it. Only when one is aware of one's power of emancipation do possibilities become limitless and oppression and inequality intolerable.The principles of such an intellectual emancipation are not new and many have written about them. Breaking the dichotomy between student and teacher was central to the 60s movements that took place across the globe. It was also central to Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed in the early 70s. Similarly, French philosopher Jacques Rancière based the premise of his book The Ignorant Schoolmaster on an experiment led by Joseph Jacotot in the early nineteenth century. Jacotot was forced into exile by the counter revolutionary forces in 1815 and went on to teach in a Dutch university. Since he did not speak Dutch, communication proved impossible. Jacotot therefore sent his students away to learn French by comparing two versions of the same book, one in Dutch, one in French. Within a few weeks, most students came back and were able to express themselves in French. Their ability to learn French rested on their wish to understand what another human being was trying to tell them. Necessity had forced them to learn. This left the teacher with revolutionary questions: was will more important than ability? Was every man virtually able to understand what others had done and understood? Acknowledging will as the key to ability made the inherent equality of intelligence a logical conclusion. If Jacotot’s students were able to learn French, it was because they had the will to understand what Jacotot had to say, but more importantly the will to partake in a conversation, in an equal conversation.This method of learning is particularly well-exemplified in our capacity to learn our mother tongue without explanation. The will to be understood forces a child to repeat, try, fail and eventually succeed in mastering their parents' language well before schooling or any form of explanatory teaching. In its emancipatory understanding, teaching is therefore no longer meant to explain to the student what he or she cannot understand without the explanation, but rather to share of one's knowledge on an equal footing, with the teacher's willingness to take part in the learning process. Education is for anyone who puts their open-mind at it.As a result, the question is not 'what if education was free', but rather what if we acknowledged education is free?In a way, this is perhaps not so different to what is happening at the moment across the world. Everywhere, and most recently in New York (even in Melbourne from Saturday), we are witnessing the rise of seemingly incoherent movements. Nothing tells us for sure that anything good, or even anything at all, will rise up from these movements. Yet what is already an immense achievement is the will for ordinary people to get together and discuss what they are commonly told to take for granted. Quite logically, these movements started from the beginning; by challenging what they see as a wrong and unjust system. This is a feat in itself after 30 years of hegemonic neo-liberalism which made many of us believe history had ended. These movements have refused the decisions made by their masters and the apparently implacable logic of the market. They have also refused to sign up to any old dogma which provided a solution already written, that would only require them to follow obediently. Instead, they have reclaimed our public space and begun to exchange, to communicate, to share amongst equals and to learn from each other. While these movements might well bring nothing, they are essential in providing a new impetus for free education and its emancipatory possibilities.The title of this article might be misleading. I did not talk about how to educate, nor did I provide solutions on how to make education free. Simply because what I believe to be the most essential type of education is already here and is already free. Possibilities present within us all to educate ourselves and push our own boundaries are freely accessible. However they demand hard work and require a constant faith in our equal capacity to achieve emancipation. This is not to say that we will all learn the same things or as much, as quickly. This is merely to say that we are all able to think, learn and discuss anything we apply our mind to; that we are all able to share and exchange freely and equally.First published on the Drum on 14/10/11