Gregory Geboski:
> Huh? I guess the Left has always been all wrong for wanting free universal
> education, seeing how we're doing nothing but helping the bosses.
>
> Sure, the educational system in a class society will reproduce those
> classes, all in all. As will, all in all, every institution in a class
> society. That's pretty much true by definition. But does that mean we settle
> for no or reduced education for the working class under the existing
> system--until the Revolution, I guess?
>
> The post-war expansion of higher education in the US, especially the
> expansion of state university systems, was, despite its flaws, a move for
> democratization, and a potential threat to the ruling class. This was
> recognized by the Right, at least, who have been steadily moving to make
> higher education available only to those who "deserve" (i.e., can pay) for
> it.
I can't bring myself to be ardently concerned about quarrels between segments of the ruling class, between the hard cop and the soft cop, which is what the post-war expansion of higher education and the opposition to it are all about. The fundamental idea of education, insofar as the word has any concrete meaning about contemporary life, is to entrain the intellects of people, especially young people, into some pre-existing system of authorized knowledge which suits ruling-class interests. It's not equivalent to learning, although people with an interest in Education, the institutionalized social project, often use it that way.
I speak not only theoretically but empirically. When I began working in the craft of computer programming in the mid-60s, no one knew what a computer programmer was or how to create one. People learned on the job, and those who succeeded in learning were variegated: where I was working, almost half were women, and many were of other non-privileged classes and castes. As the academic system and its clients, noticing the money and power involved, gradually got control of the situation, that is, convinced employers that only "computer scientists" and "software engineers" with credentials could possibly be competent, the population became increasingly White, male, and at least semi-privileged, just like engineering school. Of course this now became a Problem and the very people who had created it now created more work for themselves by generating committees, jobs and institutions to solve it or rather pretend to solve it.
Insofar as I can envision a post-revolutionary society, education would be abolished. If people can't learn what they need to know without being subjected to coercion, then there is no hope for them, and they will need popes and emperors forever. As for waiting for the revolution, I don't see the point of non-revolutionary politics because, as exemplified in my little story, class war infects and pollutes everything it touches. I fear I catch a tinge of derision in the question, and I hope we haven't reached the point on the Left where revolution is merely the butt of humor. Have we?