Education empowers individuals by enabling them to utilize their faculties, freeing themselves from tyranny. With reasonably educated individuals dominating the society, the creation of a liberal society becomes more possible than ever. Self-empowerment is the seed to the creation of a liberal society and education is the key to such empowerment. Without the empowerment, individuals would forever stand timid in the face of tyranny, unable to rationalize the reason for liberty.
Education is the sculpture of a society and its importance cannot be overemphasized. Yet, the issue of education has always bogged me down. I struggle to answer the question whether the state is required in providing individuals with education, especially in poor societies.
I am predisposed to answer no.
The path is chosen due to my minarchist tendency which seeks to limit the roles of government to simply the protection of individual liberty and private property only. This is the only social contract which a libertarian seeks. Anything more increases the opportunity for tyranny.
All other areas should be left to means of individuals in the society. The reason for that is the market in many cases has proven to be more than capable to play roles played by statist state as effective if not better. It is part of the spontaneous order doctrine so close to the heart of libertarianism.
The issue of education and the state arises when I come to consider the effect of endowment on eventual outcome. In a poor society, attainment of education requires a quantum leap. Resources well beyond the means of the poor are required to invest in education.
It is not uncommon for children of poor families to face strong pressure to forgo basic education in order to answer immediate question surrounding matter of survival. Without coercion by the state in form of compulsory basic education as well as other aids, it would be highly probable for these children to stay away from any kind of formal education. As they grow up, they would become susceptible to manipulation of the elites whom might have insidious plan to promote themselves in a society. Through this manipulation which usually comes in form of populism, a mob could easily overrun individuals, transgressing individual liberty with impunity.
Only a strong liberal culture could fight such tendency fearsomely. It is worth repeating that the birth of a liberal society is only possible through self-empowerment usually brought upon by education. By education, I do not mean simply the ability to read and write. I am referring to the development of the critical minds which take more than merely learning about humanities and sciences. I speak of liberal education which students are able to explore their potential freely.
Leaving education to the workings of market of a poor society may not encourage the creation of a liberal society. There is always competing demand between immediate demand and the future prospect. Not too many people have the luxury of looking beyond a hill when no food is guaranteed on a table everyday, assuming there is a table in the first place.
The misalignment of temporal requirement for education could perhaps be tweaked to impress on individuals the importance of education through market means without the use of force. For instance, a philanthropist or foundation could fund schools or offer need-based scholarships, making the cost of education of a child more bearable to poor families. To bring the idea farther down the road, a corporation in need of talents could adopt a child by financing the child’s education. Graduated individuals under such program could repay their sponsors when they start their professional career.
Then again, this only repeats the problem of citizenship for liberals and mismatched timelines: the ones most likely to make such bond for the children would be the parents while the children really had no say in the matter. As they matured, they found themselves in bond they did not choose to be in.
How well private institutions tailored for basic education fares against the idea of universal basic education has yet to be explored however. Even on the surfaces, private institutions may disfranchise the poor for reason made clear earlier. And I am uncertain how a system dominated by private institution for basic level encourages a society’s progress towards liberal ideals.
All that considered, it seems that the institution of universal education on the basic level supported by the state looks promising in creating a liberal society, especially for poor societies. As for affluent societies, the problem of endowment is less of an issue. It is probable that members of an affluent society are well-educated and liberal enough in their outlook to fight tyranny.
The progression towards an affluent society however requires education and this creates a conflict in my thinking. Ignorance is a barrier to self-empowerment and liberty.
Perhaps, universal basic and general education with involvement of the state for poor society is the spark plug for liberalism. Perhaps, I am trying to be too rigid, ignoring a virtue of pragmatism.
p/s — Milton Friedman’s The Role of Government in Education is an essential read. Friedman’s Free to Choose is for further reading. For wider scope, the Friedman Foundation has more.