|
The inclusive society and its elites
Editorial by Henrik Stenius
Does the new information technology create a more inclusive or a more
exclusive society? This important question was raised in a discussion at
the Finnish Institute in June involving the Finnish Parliamentary
Committee for the Future and members of the Administrative Council of the
Finnish Broadcasting Company (see article elsewhere).
Of course, more inclusiveness and more exclusiveness are both possible
options. But there is no going back which means that the only way to
prevent widening disparities in levels of education in society is to make
information technology accessible to as many as possible, through schools,
public libraries and a pricing policy which enables everyone to afford
it.
The value of the Finnish tradition of profound faith in education for
all is undeniable. After all, the creation of the Finnish nation did
involve a mixing of cultural and economic elements which could not, at a
later stage in this century, be defended by cultural and economic means
alone. Against this background, one can more easily understand why
education, including higher education, is highly esteemed by all sections
of society. Youngsters with a working-class background are not branded as
traitors if they opt to go into higher education.
In England, the cause of education for all became important in a
different way. It developed relatively late, only after the formation of
an autonomous labour movement and working class. The middle classes saw
education as a means to instil discipline into the lower classes. In an
earlier period, political thinkers like Thomas Paine, who had a great
impact on the forming of the British concept of citizenship, did not
connect the concept with ideas of education. Debate focused instead on
freedom of speech, belief, thought, and so on. How different this is to
attitudes in the Nordic countries (even today)!
For all eminent theoreticians in the Nordic countries during the
formative period of national political culture, such as N.F.S. Grundtvig
in Denmark or Johan Vilhelm Snellman and Santeri Alkio in Finland, the
idea of education was fundamental to their vision of a good patriot and a
more democratically empowered citizen. It was more or less a variation of
the Ancient Greek idea of paideia, which defines life as the
maturing of individuals as human beings.
The degree of inclusion or exclusiveness in the field of education can
be judged by the existence of educationally deprived sub-cultures or
"knowledge ghettos" in society. But, of course, you can also look upon the
problem from the opposite side and ask to what extent you can find elites
living their own hermetic lives. The Fennomanians were Finns, not just
Friends of the Finnish People (Fennophiles). They did not regard
themselves, like the Narodniks in Russia, as a group of intellectuals
apart from the people, as intellectuals who just fell in love with the
people (that is what the word narodnik means).
There are, so far as I know, no comparative studies about how elites
define their relationship to the rest of the population. I think that
Finland totally lacks those kinds of arrogant artists who, in a more or
less cynical frame of mind, resign themselves to the fact that ordinary
men and women will never be acquainted with their works.
Finland may have schools which cream off the best pupils, but it also
has ordinary comprehensives and upper secondary schools some of which have
specialised classes for subjects such as music or sport. These schools
have been successful, and their pupils are doing well, performing clearly
above average. These schools may also explain the success of young Finnish
musicians. What is important, though, is that such schools do not serve
narrow vocational or career aims and do not foster a mentality of
superiority. The pupils remain ordinary children with ordinary feelings of
belonging.
Despite these observations, there is no reason to believe that
everything in the Finnish educational tradition has been a blessing for
Finns. There are more encyclopaedias in Finnish homes than in those of
other nations. The sad part of this particular story is that it seems to
fit a cultural pattern based on authoritarian epistemology: there is just
one positive, coded Truth, and consequently one true solution to every
problem in society. What is supposedly needed in this context is
knowledge, not social and political skills. Finland is certainly a
'knowledge society', which has had an impact on our concept of tolerance:
in Finland, as in other Nordic countries, tolerance has less to do with
acceptance of differences; it is more closely related to patience - the
laborious task of drawing stubborn fools into the sphere of enlightenment.
Young Finns will probably put an end to this four-century-old story. On
the other hand, one could also mention other, more modern one-dimensional
forms of culture and education. |