Leftist leaders in Chile has been gaining worldwide recognition. While many anti-Communist and Pinochet apologists declare that Chile’s neoliberal stance has saved the country from socialist stagnation the Educational Question continues to assert itself. Forefront at this struggle is(charismatic) Camila Vallejo. Student and mass leader who has successfully launched crippling strikes in the capital.
In her blog Camila Vallejo Dowling, she writes a provocative article for the cause of socialized education. In the Philippines where the debate is education as a right or as a privilege is hotly debated over the internet Camila offers her two cents worth.
If there is something we recognize in politics is that you can not expect homogeneous nor static positions within the group of people who make up less to stay in the merely superficial and not be driven to question the source of the problems is committed to addressing.
Trying to demonize the social movements when they acquire more radical policy approaches or is in addition to not understanding anything about social movements, seeking to impose an ideological stance, the unions, a most thoughtful and active. It is ultimately a waste of time Mr. Eichholz.
People are not dumb enough units. tend to think, or very easy to handle in the media, people see the series of desperate actions and statements of some government officials and intellectuals of the government, there is great fear to confront this conflict in a transparent manner. He sees how scared they are because the issues that managed to “taboo” today are replanted in the national debate, because this movement has overcome the limitations of unionism and has become a real spirit and consciousness transformation, because today have no way continue to support arguments or evidence based on a model neoliberal experiment for 30 years has demonstrated its utter failure in the educational field, to say the least, and I say that the “massification” of higher education is faithful demonstration that went down the right path, it would be shortsighted on their part absloutamente.
Let me tell Mr. Eichholz also to be informed a little better, this movement has not only been willing to talk, but has applied for a real dialogue with the ministry. The problem is that no real dialogue where the speaker railed position where there are issues that do not want to address, where intentions are transparent conditions or where the dialogue to the unilateral stance of those who refuse to give up their interests to meet the needs and demands of the majority. A while ago that the dialogue for the dialogue permeates who we are no longer naive.
You now question who is right or what is the position of the majority. Well, that phrase seems to have bristly hairs “move towards a model of public education, free and quality” is not only possible because our country has been possible to have a significantly less rich than the current, or because we now have sufficient wealth (only poorly distributed or given away to foreign multinationals), or because other countries have shown that it is possible, having equal or higher percentage of enrollment that exists in Chile. This basic objective is consistent because it is the only one who understands education as a right and not as a commodity (knowledge as exchange value), it is the only one who understands that – in terms Economists – the “educational income” does not arise from educational system but outside it and therefore attempt to capture with tuition fees or credit is to a tax on a tax base that does not exist.
The “educational income” that are based both neoliberal economists to defend the tuition fees in education, is not expressed in the training period but is embodied in various forms, of which the main beneficiary is not the skilled worker by half of their wages, but society as a whole, expressed in increased production of goods and services businesses where the skilled labor, technical and scientific progress as a result of these transfers of technology and specialized services performed by universities (that is paid or paid well below its actual value), the increase in material productivity, social and cultural level higher into the system as a whole, among other things, because it generates positive externalities education are immeasurable.
In short, the educational income is generated “outside” the education system, which is not right to ask the student to the capture. However, it is logical that education can not be free, because someone has to pay, but under the name ought to be exposed through general and specific taxes to be levied, the state must grasp through productivity increases and of income earned primarily large companies, ie, through progressive taxes that are transferred to public institutions through the national budget. Only in this way contribute to the education system who benefit from it.
And finally, there is no better evidence to determine the position of the majority that the steady support of the citizens and the return back to the Minister, if you do doubt that a plebiscite.