Risky Business: The Politics of Education

"Taking Action Against Disney" -Steven Friedman

As a class, we concluded that one of Linda Christensen's main arguments in "Unlearning the Myths that Bind Us" is the importance of moving beyond developing critical consciousness, and moving students to action. "But what am I teaching them if the lesson ends there? That it's enough to be critical without taking action? That we can quietly rebel in the privacy of the classroom while we practice our writing skills, but we don't really have to do anything about the problems we uncover, nor do we need to create anything to take the place of what we've expelled?" (197) Part Five of the Rethinking Popular Culture and Media book focuses on just that: Taking Action For A Just Society.

One of the pieces that caught my eye, for several reasons, was Steven Friedman's "Taking Action Against Disney" (253). What first drew me in was seeing the words right beneath the title...."A teacher struggles with encouraging direct student action." Instantly, I was reminded of our conversation earlier today about the political-ness of teaching and the dangers that are sometimes associated with that. Friedman describes his dilemma in encouraging activism after discussing the exploitation of workers in factories contracted to Disney with his 7th and 8th graders. 

Why was he so hesitant to encourage students to take direct action, especially knowing he was "on solid ground with respect to the extent of injustices in Disney's sweatshops?" Truthfully, he had already been reprimanded once before and told that he had crossed a line. He was told by his school director that "by becoming a political activist, [he] was perilously close to muddying [his] role as a neutral educator" (254). Teaching is, and always has been, a political act. The decisions a teacher makes in his or her classroom impact so many more people than just those sitting in that classroom. There is no way to remain "neutral"...but why would we want to? Why are we here? We are all here because we want to make a difference - we are all here because we are "sensitive to the importance of letting students discuss, analyze, and make up their own minds about social issues - rather than merely allowing them to regurgitate what they perceive to be the teachers' views" (255). We are here to encourage critical thinking and inquiry, but we are also here to encourage students to DO - to act upon those critical inquiries. Our "why" should always be at the center of our teaching and the center of our classrooms. 

Friedman didn't have to encourage the students to act on his own: the National Labor Committee was organizing an international week of action against Disney. This information was quickly passed on to the students and their families, from whom he got mostly positive feedback. There were some parents, however, that felt he'd "abandoned [his] role as a neutral educator by leading students to protest. They were worried [he] hadn't presented both sides of the story." Friedman argues that sometimes, there are issues (political and social and moral) that do not have two equally valid sides, and it is everyone's responsibility to expose injustices and oppressions within these issues, and, more importantly, to take action against them. For our students to be a part of a movement, to form an opinion on an issue that exists that other people also have opinions about - this is teaching them to stand up for what they believe in, what is right, and what is socially just. That's the center of Friedman's "why"...and I know it's at the center of mine.