Using Malcolm X to Anaylze the Role Schools Play in Society

The degradation and dehumanization Malcolm X, or Malcolm Little as he was known then, was forced to endure throughout his schooling experience is a testament both to the dominant ideology’s derogatory, overt racism and the interrelated political and economic subjugation which was a reality for blacks during the 1930’s. The barriers Malcolm faced, such as being denied the opportunity to pursue a career of his choice despite his outstanding grades, were the result of an oppressive hierarchy of racial oppression, determined in large part by a nearly impenetrable class structure. This class society, which inevitably fueled racism, was essential in perpetuating the dominant ideology and political economy which so prodigiously influenced Malcolm’s schooling experience. One will find that racism and other forms of prejudice are not only direct results, but integral functions of a capitalist society. As such, the element of racism within the dominant ideology, as well as its material manifestation in the political economy, cannot be removed without the dismantling of a class-based society; the abolition of class society, however, is not a guarantee for the abolition of racism, but rather a prerequisite. Viewed within a dialectical framework, it becomes obvious that Malcolm’s experience was not simply the result of prejudiced or misguided authority figures. Instead, it was heavily dependant upon how various social, political, and economic factors interacted in a specific historical and material period. His experience provides illuminating details that are applicable today.

The most brazen ideological component stemming from the dominant culture is the overt racism, both personal and institutionalized, so common during the 1930’s. This consisted of the belief in the natural superiority of the white race and, conversely, the natural inferiority of the black race. This racism of the dominant culture manifested itself in the action taken upon this belief; blacks were less human than whites and, accordingly, were less capable of performing at the level of whites. This was true in most areas such as intelligence, professions and occupations, sports, and a variety of other social categories. Tied into this idea was the concept that blacks were naturally lazy, more prone to crime, and less likely to be able to function in society than their white counterpart. Despite the skill shown or intelligence displayed, blacks were largely unable to achieve any social status and economic position in society that challenged this idea of racial supremacy. In other words, while blacks may compete amongst themselves and other poor whites for vocations deemed lowly by middle and upper class whites, they were generally denied the already extremely limited chance to move up the social ladder.
 

What one may label the white power structure held immense sway over the daily lives of ordinary people and societal institutions in which they worked and lived. Indeed, nearly all societal institutions were in some way affected by the ideological hegemony stemming from the predominately white, capitalist power structure. In the South, legal segregation remained an important aspect of society. In the North, discrimination was usually more discreet. Instead of legislation promoting segregation in housing, banks and government agencies simply redlined districts or selectively gave loans along racial lines. Confined to poor, urban neighborhoods, this translated into the schools where blacks were generally confined to low quality schools with fewer resources. The ingenious scheme to unequally fund schools through property taxes is an important continuation of this trend today. By under funding certain schools, rulings whites could easily push propaganda about the inferiority of the black child’s mind when they scored worse on tests or dropped out to pursue a life of hustling, robbing, drug dealing, or other self destructive behaviors as Malcolm outlines in his autobiography. Indeed, Northern racism, hidden behind a cloak of modern liberalism, was as prevalent as in the South.
 

One cannot question the link between the dominant ideology of the 1930’s and Malcolm’s experience in school. The inferiority of blacks was a built in component of society, reinforced by legislative and corporate maneuvers which further marginalized the black community. Despite the fact that Malcolm’s teacher was friendly and even liked Malcolm, he still doubted his potential because of his skin color and covered his racist ideas with a façade of pragmatism. His comment, that Malcolm should consider some sort of manual labor such as construction instead of pursuing law, was not meant to malign Malcolm as an individual, but instead reflected how profoundly racism impinged upon all aspects of society. However, Mr. O, with his personal prejudice betrayed by this display of benevolent racism, should not be analyzed separately from the society in which he lives; the institutions and establishment he was part of were prodigious factors in transmuting the dominant ideology onto him and, from him, onto Malcolm.
 

Malcolm’s understanding of the limits society would impose on him became much more lucid after this incident. As he reflects, “It was then that I began to change – inside… Where nigger had slipped off my back before, wherever I heard it now, I stopped and looked at whoever said it” (Haley, 1964, p.37). It is important to note that Malcolm was conscious of the effect these artificially imposed limitations were having upon him. He began to see that society was not based upon individual merit but instead upon a set of societal norms enforced by the dominant ideology. This sort of ideological hegemony would undoubtedly shape his lens through which he analyzed society in various phases of his life. It must have played an immense role when, during his involvement with the Nation of Islam, when he viewed racism and racist ideology as an integral and natural aspect of white society and an inherit quality in white people more broadly. It must also have played a decisive and much more profound role when he dismissed his earlier notions of white supremacy as a natural instinct of white people and instead embraced the idea that racism was a historic phenomenon arising from a particular form of society. Because of this recognition, which he developed after traveling to Mecca and splitting with Elijah Muhammad, he also understand that racism was perpetuated by the current economic system and, born from and galvanized by certain material roots, it could also be dismantled with the abolition of the dominant economic system. Thus, at each period in Malcolm’s life, Mr. O’s comment appears to take significance in a different and unique way, dependant upon the framework Malcolm employs.
 

Another aspect of the dominant ideology apparent in this scenario is the implicit acceptance of an extremely hierarchal, class-based society. Malcolm’s teacher, whether or not he meant to, sent a dualistically degrading message to Malcolm. On one hand, he implied that because blacks were inferior, they should be confined to jobs consisting of manual labor. By this implication, he not only degraded Malcolm and blacks in general, but also anyone, white or black, involved in jobs where you must be “good with your hands” (Haley, p. 36). Not only was Mr. O’s comment an invective towards the very conception of black humanity, it was also an insult to a significant portion of the working class; being a manual laborer, according to Mr. O, was something that inferior humans pursued because they were mentality less capable. More importantly, the dominant ideology once again plays an immense role in this situation. Without this passive acceptance of the wage system and a capitalist economy, the ruling class could not maintain its power and privilege; this was a system Malcolm would eventually come to reject. In fact, Mr. O’s comment towards Malcolm provides an extremely important look into the political economy of the time period.
 

The 1930’s were a tumultuous time in American society; a depression was sweeping the nation, unemployment figures were staggering, unionization rates were surging and labor battles were being waged fiercely between exploited workers and bosses. The ruling class was shook by immense strike waves and increasing worker militancy. At times such as these it is essential that those who run society are able to use creative means to divide the working class. Racism is a vital weapon in the ruling class arsenal. In fact, it was extremely beneficial that up until this point labor unions had more or less remained segregated or at best ambivalent on the race question. By utilizing black workers (or any marginalized group) as scabs during strikes carried out by a mostly white working class, workers were able to skillfully manipulate each group so that instead of viewing their natural interests as workers in alignment they would view their own fellow workers as competition. Hostility and animosity would replace solidarity. This rancor would be further fueled by elite propaganda and the pseudo-scientific theories postulated claiming the inferiority of blacks and other marginalized groups.
 

This divide and conquer tactic has been, and continues to be, utilized regularly to defend corporate interests. Many white labor organizers failed to realize that racism or ambiguity concerning the rights of blacks was extremely detrimental to the working class cause. The only benefit whites gained, as W.E.B. DuBois so brilliantly explained in his work concerning Black Reconstruction, was a “psychological wage” (Taylor, 2008, 64). By maintaining a permanent underclass, bosses are able to keep wages and benefits low for all workers. Unorganized, divided workers are much less of a threat than an organized, collective force. The function of racism in a capitalist framework, then, is to destabilize the workers’ movement and paralyze it through with virulent ideological poison. So when Communist Party members, despite their many flaws, began organizing black and white sharecroppers together in the South, this provided a radical challenge to both the ruling class (North and South) and the conservative labor organizations (Pope, 2001, p. 232-266). Critically literate, radical blacks who began organizing the unorganized were threats to the economic and social stability of the capitalist political economy and the dominant ideology stemming from it.
 

Thus, one can begin to understand why Malcolm’s teacher pushed him to pursue something which engaged his hands and not his mind. The hegemony of the dominant ideology demanded that blacks maintain positions of inferiority in order to avoid the threat of militant black radicals and to undermine white laborers struggling for economic gains. Keeping blacks and white separated, based upon what today seems arbitrary, was a logical and rational maneuver for those who ran society. Had Malcolm followed the advice given him, he could have become an obedient black worker, marginalized and underpaid for his labor. Likewise, he may have even been used as a scab worker to help foster artificial hostility between blacks and whites, provide ideological ammunition to racist labor leaders, and undermine working class unity. It is quite interesting to consider that the radical, militant Malcolm X could have simply remained a passive, submissive construction worker named Malcolm Little. Mr. O’s gentle reminder to Malcolm of his place in society should not be viewed as an isolated instance of personal prejudice but instead an integral aspect of the dominant ideology being transmitted through an institution where the primary goal was the maintenance of the capitalist political economy. While Mr. O may not have been consciously plotting to subdue the black community, he was unconsciously helping to fulfill the desires of the dominant class, of which he was not even a part.
 

One cannot question the fact that societal institutions are reflections of the economic system under which they are created. Schools and the ideas transmitted by these institutions are designed to perpetuate the existing society. As reflections of the dominant class, these ideas are necessarily reflections of the interests of that class. The example Malcolm explicates upon provides a paragon for analyzing both racial and class relations in the 1930’s and how they affected schooling. The threat of militant, black radicals (especially when involved in labor organizing) to the political and economic establishment was a fear many ruling elites dared not take lightly. Similarly, marginalizing blacks and maintaining an obvious disparity allowed elites to maintain low wages for all workers and utilize them as scab workers. This helped to suppress the disruptions caused by the laboring masses who were challenging the profit-driven, free market system. These two important aspects of the political economy were backed up by an ideological hegemony which promoted the ideas that blacks were intellectually inferior and that a class society was fundamental to human existence. The artificial wedges used to divide black and white workers would be impossible to preserve without the dominant ideological components which accompanied them. Malcolm’s experience at school in Mason, Michigan was intricately bound upon in the existing order and the class structure of society. Without educational institutions which inculcated youth with the dominant ideology, the political economy would be hard pressed to maintain itself. Thus, Mr. O’s personal, singular instance of racial prejudice cannot be understood outside the context of American capitalism in the 1930’s.

Works Cited

Haley, A. (1964) The Autobiography of Malcolm X. New York, NY: The Random House Publishing Group.
Pope, D., (2001) American Radicalism. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc.
Taylor, K. (2008) Black Reconstruction in America 1860-1880. International Socialist Review, 57, January-February. Also available from http://www.isreview.org/issues/57/feat-reconstruction.shtml.
 

Education Part Eight: Middle Class Elitism and the Myth of the Super Teacher

Sorry guys, I know it has been awhile. Life, school, work, and a small flare up of my old obsession with Diablo II has kept me from updating as frequently as I had hoped. However, on a side note, I've been reading Lukács and aside from the tremendously important contribution he has given us to understanding class consciousness, I think he has also, rather strangely, explained to me my fascination with games like Diablo II and why people are so deeply interested in "rationalized" games such as MafiaWars on Facebook. Maybe I'm pulling at something that isn't there, but all the talk of being "trapped in bourgeois consciousness" and a super-rational mode of thought has convinced me that there may be a correlation between that and games based almost purely on the most rational choice to augment your strength/power/wealth, etc... Not a very important revelation, no doubt, but interesting; to me, at least. Anyways, on to today's post!

This mini-series "On Education" is a compiled list of short essays concerning theoretical approaches to classroom pedagogy and their broader implications upon us as educators and our students.

Read Past Contributions:

Part One: Banking or Problem Posting Education?

Part Two: Selective Omission and What We Learn from Malcolm X's Schooling Experience

Part Three: Education, for Liberation or Domination?

Part Four: "Revolutionary Radicals," Consciousness, and the Privatization of Education

Part Five: Humanization through Liberal or Vocational Education? 
Part Six:  Articulating the World and the Implications of Literacy on Overcoming Limit-Situations 
Part Seven: Slum Schools and Marginalizing the Marginalized

----------------------------------------------------

In Malcolm X’s autobiography the fifteenth chapter, entitled Icarus, begins with a scathing critique of “educated Negroes” who, in his words, “never had understood the true intent, or purpose, or application of education” (Haley, p. 307). Malcolm’s indictment of the “brainwashed, integration-mad black puppets” (Haley, p. 284) comes from his experience of personal, organizational, and ideological confrontations with many of the professional and intellectual Blacks who had entered into America’s middle class. His postulation regarding this group, however, is extremely relevant to the contemporary educational sphere. For instance, Malcolm outlines a specific example where a Black social worker had wrote a report detailing the burgeoning Black Muslim movement and stumbled upon a conclusion proclaiming that “The dynamic interstices of the Harlem sub-culture have been oversimplified and distorted by Malcolm X to meet his own needs.” (Haley, p. 307). Malcolm sardonically responds:

Every paragraph [of the social worker’s report] sent me back to the dictionary…Which of us, I wonder, knew more about that Harlem ghetto “sub-culture”? I, who had hustled for years in those streets, or that black snob status-symbol-educated social worker (Haley, p. 307)?

His refutation, at a glance, may appear as nothing more than a clever remark. Analyzed a bit rigorously, however, and the response to the social worker’s slanderous comment can be interpreted as an articulate postulation laced with social commentary and theoretical implications for educational pedagogy.

First, Malcolm’s comment should be understood not as an insult to intellectual development or the pursuit of knowledge, which Malcolm wholeheartedly supported. Throughout his career his constantly reaffirmed his view that education was a vital element to the development of all people, Blacks especially. It should be seen, rather, as an indictment of those who would use the educational skills they garnered to promote and perpetuate the existing structures of society and their narrow self-interests. Secondly, it provides an illuminating look into the intricacies of the mental framework in which educators, organizers, and activists (not mutually exclusive terms by any means!) should operate. Real education, in which students are able to fulfill their own personal and intellectual development and simultaneously achieve a mentality where emancipation from oppression, for themselves and for their larger group, is viewed not only as a pleasant ideal but a feasible goal, requires that students are engaged and actively participate in that education. In the same way that the educated, Middle-class, Black professional cannot come down from the heavens and lead Blacks from the pits of poverty with fancy verbiage and Harvard talk, neither can middle-class educators simply waltz into a struggling, urban high school and save the children which societal institutions have so direly oppressed.

In fact, this sort of “super teacher” myth is promoted vigorously in the media and, an even more pressing issue, in the development of recent educational approaches such as merit pay, which shift the focus from how schools are organized, funded, and resourced, as well as the material conditions children experience in their day to day life, to the performance of teachers, usually measured in terms of standardized test scores. In many cases, the media reports on schools where students succeed because of extra resources and teachers who put in extra hours (sometimes 14 hour days or 60 hours in a week, as in the case of the Urban Assembly School for Law and Justice in Brooklyn, where the graduation rate was 93% in comparison with the rest of New York which averaged somewhere around 50%) (Jones). A plethora of movies have hit the theatres with similar themes; teachers (generally white, Middle-class ones at that) who commit themselves, working day in and day out, to help struggling children in the heart of America’s slums eventually overcome the prodigious obstacles and, against-all-odds, get the students to pass their next state-mandated test or graduate from high-school. Often, these are emotionally-appealing, heart-wrenching tales with very human aspirations and desires. Unfortunately, they are all too unrealistic.

Handling the problems schools currently face by simply hoping a good teacher comes along and fixes things presumes that an individualized, rather random reaction to a major problem will provide a sufficient solution. Instead of a collective change in the structure and functions of schools, where all teachers could provide individualized attention to students, all schools were equally well-resources, and standardized tests were not the primary measure of success, myths of individual responsibility and teacher performance are the crux on which the current reform movement plans to base their educational approach. As Brian Jones points out, this “fable of the super-teacher” is not sustainable. Teachers easily become burnt out and seek different positions or regress from the extra pressure of such strenuous, grueling days. Usually, they have to raise their own resources as well.

Jones explains that at UASLJ teachers “still had to work hundreds of hours for free and raise millions of extra dollars.” If schools were not set up to fail while billions were pumped into banking institutions, military contractors, and the Pentagon’s budget, maybe it would be possible  for “Real-life teachers (not the silver screen variety)…to be able to get the job done in working conditions suited to mere mortals” (Jones). Just as some intellectual “parading a lot of big words” (Haley, p. 307) about Harlem’s sub-culture cannot pull Blacks up from the depths of the ghetto, having a few teachers work ridiculously long hours with too large class sizes, too little resources, and a political economy which perpetuates poverty, racism, and inequitable conditions, cannot fix the collective problem of a failing educational establishment. Fighting for the conditions in which all educators can achieve success with students will involve an immense struggle against a ruling class, with the backing of corporate and political institutions, that holds no interest in all students receiving a decent education. The struggle for resources, smaller classes, intellectual autonomy, student participation, democratic engagement, and better working conditions is one that extends far beyond the classroom walls. For every student that a decent teacher may save, how many more will be left behind? Until teachers, students, and parents force the kind of collective change needed to the educational system, students will continue to fall through the cracks. The profession of teaching is political, and educators cannot avoid that.

Works Cited

Haley, A. (1964) The Autobiography of Malcolm X. New York, NY: The Random House Publishing Group.
Jones, B. (2008) The Fable of the Super-Teacher. Socialist Worker, July. Accessed March 28, 2009. Available: http://socialistworker.org/2008/07/09/fable-of-the-super-teacher

On Education Part Two: Selective Omission and What We Learn From Malcolm X's Schooling Experience

This mini-series "On Education" is a compiled list of short essays concerning theoretical approaches to classroom pedagogy and their broader implications upon us as educators and our students. I hope to continue it for a while, and, of course, any critical dialogue upon what is presented is more than welcome. I will try to space these out weekly.

Read Past Contributions:
Part One: Banking or Problem Posting Education?
Part Three: Education, for Liberation or Domination?

----------------------------------------------------

The chapter entitled “Mascot” in The Autobiography of Malcolm X is an illuminating, yet disheartening look at the state of education in the 1930’s. Malcolm reflects upon his schooling experience and the attitudes of peers and authority figures accompanying it. At a time where racial segregation was rampant in the South, and the North simply disguised their racism in a paternalistic manner, Malcolm’s account is a fantastic primary source with the potential to enlighten the reader in regards to the honest condition of American schools during that time. The dominant ideology shines through repeatedly throughout the chapter. Malcolm recalls how he enjoyed history, except for the fact that his history teacher “was a great one for ‘nigger’ jokes” (Haley, 35). He speaks of his quality schoolwork, his excellent grades, his involvement in extracurricular activities, and his relative intellectual capabilities in comparison with his peers; still, his very humanity is denigrated by his English teacher when he professes his desire to become a lawyer and Mr. Ostrowski explains “that’s no realistic goal for a nigger,” suggesting carpentry instead (Haley, 43). Thus, he implies that this young black child, with one of the best grades in the class, is still somehow inferior and unable to perform at the level of his white counterpart. This obvious insult, one meant not as an invective solely towards Malcolm whom Mr. Ostrowski was actually fond of, provides a paragon exemplifying how racism and conceptions of racial inferiority, reflections of the dominant ideology, so deeply penetrated society.

The examples above of overt, personal prejudices are no longer commonly accepted in mainstream society. Struggle throughout American history but erupting in the 1960’s against the prodigious racial inequality in the United States helped shape and transform many Americans' views on racial inferiority. Today, personal ideas of race and race relations have liberalized considerably; this is undoubtedly evidenced by the fact that Americans elected the first black president, who won more white votes than any democratic nominee since Jimmy Carter. At the same time, material conditions for historically marginalized groups, such as blacks, have been on the decline for the past thirty years. Thus, the liberal conception of racism, which they postulate exists because of personal prejudice by backward whites, proves unable to explain this phenomenon. One must instead look critically at the societal institutions, and the dominant ideology which supports them; these institutions have the ability to simultaneously liberalize personal conceptions of race and, conversely, increase the hardship, oppression, and segregation which many black communities face on a day to day basis.

One small component of this dominant ideology, which Malcolm so thoroughly depicts but does not label, is selective omission. This tool, omnipresent throughout the educational system, is used vigorously by academia, textbooks publishers, and public officials to sterilize the resistance of the oppressed against the system which oppresses them. Indeed, it is a paralyzing technique intended to pacify and placate students. Selective omission is a percussive blow to the truth that continues to exert immense force, even today, in hopes of subjugating the masses and excluding them from any sort of participatory democracy. This process, by which those who wish to maintain the status quo and prevent any fundamental change, carefully allows for the absence of regular people in the decision making process. It appears that this aspect of the dominant ideology acts to help ease tension which could potentially arise from the contradictions of a society which prepares students for a “nonparticipatory experience in the workplace” while simultaneously inculcating them “with the prevailing political rhetoric that U.S. society is democratic” (Tozer, 276).

In Malcolm’s case, the selective omission he cites is in regards to black history in his textbook. He explains:

It was exactly one paragraph long. Mr. Williams laughed through it practically in a single breath, reading aloud how the Negroes had been slaves and then were freed, and how they were usually lazy and dumb and shiftless. He added, I remember, an anthropological footnote of his own, telling us between laughs how Negroes’ feet were “so big that when they walk, they don’t leave tracks, they leave a hole in the ground” (Haley, 35).

Due to the gains made through collective struggle and organized resistance on the parts of historically marginalized groups, this blatant example would not stand today. However, it is quite easy to draw parallels between Malcolm’s textbook and modern textbooks; both make vigorous use of tactical selective omission. In Malcolm’s case, the omissions are obvious; the brutality and dehumanization of the institution of slavery, the history of abolitionism, the organizational and independent forms of resistance, the struggle for racial equality, or, in other words, the self-activity of regular people, are all ignored. Most important, however, is the fact that his textbook presents the issue as if it simply resolved itself, mentioning that “slaves were freed.” The implication, of course, is that this was due to the benevolence of those who control society and not because of the prolific struggle against the pernicious institution. Indeed, it removed the role of common people as an agency for change. Selective omission, used in this manner, hopes to conceal the fact that often times working within the framework of the established system is futile; it hopes to derail the idea that the oppressed must organize and fight back in the process of human liberation.

Examples in modern textbooks are innumerable. One study of social studies texts “reveals that positive social changes in civil rights, the resolution of the Vietnam war, labor unions, and the women’s movement are presented as triumphs of the legal system” (Tozer, 276). This sort of selective omission is vital to the functioning of the social system as it is currently structured; educational institutions, as they now stand, are meant to perpetuate that stability. The reason for this is simple; those who wish to maintain their wealth and power surely want the masses who labor below them to remain in their place. Serious challenges to the system are excluded or, as is the case of the rather popular Socialist Party, “most often portrayed negatively, as an insignificant movement on the part of an irresponsible few” (Tozer, 276). This pays no regard to the fact that Eugene Debs, presidential candidate for the Socialist Party, at one point won 6% of the popular vote while imprisoned for speaking out against World War I. Selective omission is a vital tool in the ruling class’s arsenal and they are more than willing to use it in order to secure the dominant ideology.

This tool is just one of their weapons. Historically, the ruling class has shown that it will stop at nothing to preserve it’s stranglehold on power. As educators, it is our job to do our part in the struggle for human liberation. Taking back history from the rich and powerful and emphasizing the role that regular people play in the making of history are fundamental in that quest for liberation. Explaining how, instead of working within the system, the largest gains have been made when struggling against the system, is one step to empowering not only the students we teach and the communities they live in, but ourselves as well. It is our job, in dialogue with our students and the community, to smash through purported truths and reclaim the educational system which we, and the students, sustain with our labor and creativity.

This can be difficult when functioning within the confines of a hierarchical, non-democratic school structure. At the moment progressive teachers and students are on the defensive against a myriad of attacks; privatization, lack of resources, budget cuts, No Child Left Behind, etc. all represent conservative aggression intended to consolidate and centralize power in the hands of the few and leave the rest of us begging for crumbs. However, we have a wide range of tools available to help combat misinformation, selective omission, and the dominant ideology. We must make use, both inside and outside of the classroom, of educational resources such as Howard Zinn’s A People's History of the United States to challenge the whitewashing of history, periodicals such as Rethinking Schools to help articulate our arguments for a critical pedagogy, Jonathon Kozol’s The Shame of the Nation to combat American-style educational apartheid, and various other materials which can help in the struggle. Indeed, when Huey P. Newton said that people learn best by observation and participation, his words could not ring any more true for educators today; it is our role to be models of the struggle for our students. The fight for quality educational standards, equal funding for all children, and the removal of reactionary policies and programs for our schools will have many similarities to the struggle for racial equality, better wages and unionization, and the GLBT movements of both past and present. It is time that teachers stand up and fight back.

Works Cited

Haley, A. (1964) The Autobiography of Malcolm X. New York, NY: The Random House Publishing Group.

Tozer, S., Violas, P., & Senese, G. (2009) School and Society: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives. 6th ed. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.