61 Fragmentation and Subjectification 1 First, it is important to understand that education within schools, as we know them in the West, emerged in the very context of modernity. Schools obtained their functionality as part of the economic system of the capitalist labour market. This functionality differs widely, as argued in the introduction to this dissertation, from the classical function of schools as halfway houses, cultural fora or mini-societies. Martha Nussbaum (2010) characterised it as ‘education for profit’ (p. 13). ‘Education for economic growth needs basic skills, literacy, and numeracy’, she stated, adding ‘It also needs some people have more advanced skills in computer science and technology’ (Nussbaum, 2010, p. 19). Critical thinking is less important in this model. Indeed, the focus is much more on qualification and socialisation than on subjectification, as Biesta (2022) would put it, drawing on Levinas’ (1969) philosophy. The increase in directional, religious, cultural and ethnic diversity, however, has led to a new kind of complexity felt at the level of society. In the Netherlands, for example, preoccupations with social cohesion were put on the political agenda. One of the leading politicians in the 1990s, Liberal Party leader Frits Bolkestein (1998), called for attention to the lack of ‘bezielend verband’—of an inspiring connection between individuals and groups that fosters national ‘togetherness’ (p. 57). In England, Ted Cantle led an independent review team that was asked by the British government to advise after a number of disturbances took place in 2001, mostly in the north of England. The resulting report called for a national debate to establish shared principles of citizenship, resulting in local community cohesion plans ‘to combat the fear and ignorance of different communities which stems from the lack of contact with each other’, including ‘the promotion of cross cultural contact’ (Cantle, 2001, p. 11). In a report issued by the Council of Europe, Cantle (2013) later stated that schools should teach interculturalism (which is a step ahead of multiculturalism)—namely, ‘the acquisition of an intercultural competence, a certain frame of mind, which in a diverse society becomes as important a competency as basic numeracy and literacy’ (p. 87). As the report stated, ‘No child should leave school without it’ (p. 87). Interestingly, Cantle (2013) underlined that he was not advocating for a secular society, instead proposing ‘multi-faith society in which space should be provided for genuine belief systems as part of democratic debate’ and in which faith-based communities ‘must expect their views to be contested to’ (p. 86). Cantle’s (2013) influential advise can be compared with what Martha Nussbaum (2010) termed ‘education for democracy’. She juxtaposed that with the previously mentioned ‘education for profit’ (Nussbaum, 2010, pp. 13–14). This model is very much in need of critical thinking, including more than a
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw