Go Easy

Over the last few days (and particularly since my post of a few days ago) I’ve been thinking a lot about socialization as it pertains to Fin and Rye. And by extension, to children in general.

And this is what I’ve been thinking: When people ask me if I’m worried about Fin’s and Rye’s socialization, they are not asking if I’m worried about their ability to socialize; they are asking me if I’m worried whether or not they will be socialized. In fact, the actual definition of socialization when it pertains to a particular object (i.e., the child) is make (someone) behave in a way that is acceptable to their society. Therefore, I think it’s fair to say that what people are really asking is will my children learn to behave in a way that is acceptable to the society in which they live?

I understand that concern, but I have one of my own: What if the behavior our society deems acceptable is actually detrimental to my children, to my family, to our community, and to the world as a whole?

I do not mean to suggest that every aspect of societally condoned behavior is harmful. Quite clearly, this is not the case. But just as clearly, the so-called socialization of our children occurs in the context of social-cultural mores that have  in large part defined our perceptions of the people and world around us in ways that have proven to be extraordinarily destructive. These are the mores that somehow allow us to accept the extinction of 27,000 species annually, a rate that is as much as 10,000 times the natural extinction rate. These are the mores that somehow allow us to accept that practices like hydraulic fracturing, which poisons the groundwater essential to not only fellow citizens, but also any wildlife that has the temerity to live in proximity to these wells. These are the mores that somehow allow us to accept that that wealthiest 1% of our nation’s population should own 40% of the total wealth, while the bottom 80% should own only 7% of this wealth. These are the mores that somehow allow us to accept that a corporation should be granted personhood.

You might argue that not every school promulgates these mores, and technically speaking, you might be right. I am not suggesting that educational institutions are overtly teaching the methodology of species extinction, or groundwater contamination, or socioeconomic injustice. But in a way, what they’re doing is worse: They are disseminating these ideas and the acceptance of these conditions without overtly teaching them, as they add their voices to chorus of the dominant cultural narrative. Indeed, these tragedies are inherent to the curriculum of practically every educational institution. If they weren’t, these institutions would not be doing the job we ask of them, which is to prepare our children for the status quo economy that has given rise to such travesties.

If school can be considered to be a constituent part of an economy that exploits the environment and the majority of the world’s working population – and surely, school’s role in this economy is indisputable – then why, for heaven’s sake, would I want my children to adopt these mores? Why would I want them to become members of the chorus that comprises the dominant cultural-societal narrative of our time? Why would I want them to be made to behave in a way that is acceptable to the very structural arrangements that are destroying the earth and her people?

I understand that my views might be considered radical by some. And my thinking on this matter is still evolving.

Which is to say: Go easy on me, ok?