The term education is being thrown around as a primarily global economic function, as though education has been entirely divorced from learning.
The fact that children are pawns in this political mendacity is twisted and pathetic.
“Education” is a huge industry. An awful lot of us have put food on our table by playing our parts in this education business. And yet, we are at a turning point — a much overdue correction of many problematic institutions sapping the energies of our nation’s health.
Sensible food production (sustainable farming) is the obvious criterion by which we should measure where the status quo is serving us, and where our hope for change propels us further into a sustainable 21st century game-plan. Currently, discussion is taking place regarding our federal Department of Agriculture, which goes something like: “Let’s be clear about what the focus of agriculture should be: sustainable healthy food production.”
Shorn of institutional babble, the essense of agriculture, nay food, is eating – eating as a human necessity that isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. Whatever your position in America, regardless of your creed, healthy food — after clean water — is what you mostly care about. The current movement of Americans calling for amending the title of Secretary of Agriculture, to indicate a national priority of sensible farming of healthy food, is what our times demand of us.
This push for actualizing terms that were previously held as appropriate, and yet are part of the fundamental malaise of our nation, is a natural evolution of our collective consciousness — a consciousness that naturally begins to place our progenies’ viability above the hitherto lust for material acquisition and the rest.
National and local political discussion of education is owed a similar reconstruction of semantic strategy — in pursuit of peaceful liberty and global health. Painfully obvious to sensible people the world over is the fact that world health necessitates that mendacity (bullshit, if you like) in all of its forms be replaced with sober understanding and solidarity concerning our crucial next moves.
As such, just as agriculture is really about eating, so too, education is really about learning.
This doesn’t deny that education is a national industry of the highest order — putting food on many tables. What is does affirm is that it is time that we get our labels straight if we are sincerely, in economically sound manner, reforming systems that have led us astray.
Programs for national productivity will only righteously return on our investments if the basis for the commitment of national wealth is predicated by clear and rational ideas. And lest you think this notion of “Secretary of Learning” too radical, think about how a fundamental flaw in any system will only compound itself if the defining terms were inaccurate to begin with.
The pragmatic challenge for the incoming administration will be one of appeasing the massively entrenched system of “educators” who have come to expect a living wage from participating in and supporting the status-quo — referred to using the noun: education (to say nothing of those being paid exorbitant public money through what is essentially corporate directed plunder).
Ask yourself or your fellow community member, “What term best articulates the issue? education? or learning?” — as an indicator of how one views this national calling for change — slogans notwithstanding.