By Kelli Kenealy
In the article, “From Discipline to Flexibilization? Rereading Foucault in the Shadow of Globalization,” Nancy Fraser discusses Michel Foucault’s idea of power. Foucault believed that in a postfordist world globalization will allow power to shift from the state to the individual who would ultimately create an era of personal responsibility in that people have to take ownership of their lives and have more choices and decisions to make. Nancy Fraser agreed with Foucault by stating that, “ Vouchers replace public services and privatized risk management replaces social insurance, individuals are made to assume new levels of responsibility for their lives,” ( Fraser, 168).
What both Foucault and Fraser could have not predicted was the human like form the role of “the corporation” would take on over the individual. Instead of the power shift moving from the state to the individual, the shift that occurred was the state to the corporation. This power shift can be viewed in the 2003 documentary The Corporation written by Joel Baken. The documentary highlights the psychopathic role the corporation plays in an individuals life in aspects including but not limited to: government, healthcare, industry, and finally education.
“ The corporation is an externalizing machine (moving its operating costs to external organizations and people), in the same way that a shark is a killing machine. ”
— Robert Monks, corporate governance advisor and former Republican candidate for Senate from Maine
In the article “Education and Corporation: The Free Market Goes to School” author Deron Boyles (2002) discusses the threefold problem the power the corporation has over the educational field:
1. The corporation limits and reduces the capacity of students and teachers to be critical citizens. The corporate influence forces them to accept product connection between programs curriculum and specific text.
2. The corporation restricts teachers to programs only funded by corporate support with a corporate motive. This support highlights corporate needs for certain kinds of workers who possess specific kinds of skill-all codified by corporate and reflected in state curriculum objectives.
3. Reinforces the assumption that school primarily exists for the workforce.
I do not believe that corporate funding in schools is a bad thing. Where I find holes in this system is the amount of power the corporation has been able to acquire. There needs to be a checks and balance system that is created with government regulation on transparency and allocations of funds. After all does it really matter if Campbell’s soup is sponsoring science fair as long as every student gets the opportunity to participate?
Source links:
Education and Corporation by Deron Boyles
Nancy Fraser
Michel Foucault
About The Corporation
Tifanie Gleason Response to Kelli’s Power in Education
I absolutely agree with your statement “After all, does it really matter if Campbell’s soup is sponsoring a science fair as long as every student gets the opportunity to participate? “ Where is the harm? Today, with all the school closings and teacher layoffs, additional funding from a corporation would be extremely helpful. This corporate mentality of marketing and advertising and seeing every person as a dollar sign is allowing corporate sponsors to buy space in a school to advertise a product or ideal. Where is the harm? Most people oppose this rational on the basis that they see enough advertising in the world that school should be a safe haven from marketing influence. I believe that this is an opportunity for students, who will one day be consumers, to become a more aware buyer, rather than succumb to the “got to have it” mentality. In instances where advertising is show in a school, educators should take the 10 seconds to explain to students that said advertisement is just what it is, an advertisement. We, as educators, should teach students to become a better consumer, which is learning that can be applied to every situation, not just on a standardized scantron test. In these instances, both Fraser and Foucault would agree with this realm of thought because people then would be taking more power over his/her own life by showing a higher thought process for purchasing items. This example would correspond with Foucault’s thought process where the power shifted from “state” (advertising) to “individual” (the consumer).
