What does ‘Education For Freedom’ mean to You?

Usually, it seems to mean: to become free from want. In the sense of being able to stand on one’s own feet, by being able to earn a livelihood or having a job (much more the last, in our case). But what education seems to be doing, in our context at least, is to create wants.

Just because a person has crossed, say, secondary education, ‘traditional’ work no longer seems to be enough for him, whether he has been prepared for any other career or not. And of course if a person does get a job, the desire to be more and more like the ‘educated’ and upwardly mobile – leads to more and more and more wants…

At the other end of the spectrum of views on this, freedom from want is seen as getting rid of the wants! When education is more religious and ‘environmental’, it helps a person realize that his wants are really few and that he is at his most free when helping others, and reducing from the earth the burden of bearing him. A nation of ascetics is an interesting idea but probably not a very desirable one!

So that leaves us the vast space in between the two extreme views (of ‘want more’ and ‘want nothing) on ‘education for freedom’. Where do you find yourself on this? Is this the lens from which to look at ‘education for freedom’? Is this even a worthwhile question in our times? What do you think?

Why Corruption Is An Easy Issue To Raise

It's interesting to observe why the issue of 'corruption' seems to attract attention. Right now, across the country (and the world), a huge majority of people are oppressed by the accepted notion that it is OK for some to be considered 'above' others. That is why it is OK for some of 'us' 

• to go to high fee private schools (we have 'earned' it), 
• to sit in AC coaches in the train (we paid for it after all, never mind that the others' capacity to pay for the same is hampered by systemic and systematic obstacles), 
• to feel that we belong to 'big' or 'important' families... 

Such societal hierarchies have a far greater impact and preserve disadvantage.

Isn't it corruption too to believe that one belongs to a 'better' or 'purer' religion / caste / class / background / family than others. Yet Anna and co don't raise issues of social fracture (conveniently forgetting that Gandhi spent far more of his life on these issues, and regarded true independence as one from social oppression too). It's worth thinking on why the issue of corruption really suits the middle class - it's so neutral and harmless, and avoids the really frightening ones. It's also something where you can blame 'others' without feeling that you are part of the problem...

As an educator, therefore, if I had to teach children any value, it would not be an ordinary thing like 'do not be corrupt' but the more difficult concept of 'though you are unique and deserve the best, do not think you are more important than others or have a birthright to more than they do'.