Page 156 - Šolsko polje, XXXI, 2020, 3-4: Convention on the Rights of the Child: Educational Opportunities and Social Justice, eds. Zdenko Kodelja and Urška Štremfel
P. 156
šolsko polje, letnik xxxi, številka 3–4
that happened here in the 1980s. I know that, I was living at that time.
Whether I was a student, whether I was doing a master’s, a PhD, or
whether I was in the age scene, I wrote for the youth. I know that was not
good then. It came with so-called independence, it was closely related to
the processes of capitalisation, the processes of the ‘managerial revolu-
tion’, and two books have been written about it that you can read, and I
will not go into them further here. The question of who resigned must be
answered: the humanist and social science intelligentsia. The humanist
and socialist intelligentsia are the ones, they are the ones, we are the ones
and they are the ones who have resigned. It is not two million and sever-
al thousand Slovenians, it is a dozen, a few, hundreds of people in whom
the next game was played. Some, namely the circles of the New Magazine,
went the way they have just gone. And they are not problematic from
the point of view of an argumentation that interests me and that I want
to serve. Others, however, split into two parts, one of which advocated
something like the managerial revolution, liberalism and so on, mostly
economists and so on. The humanities, on the other hand, mostly start-
ed barking at the moon. You will not like what I am going to say now be-
cause I assume that you are predominantly left-wing. This moon is called
Capital. And then we have this situation. The left – humanities and social
sciences, barking at capitalists and capital, economists and managers pri-
vatise and rob everything that can be robbed. The more managers robbed,
the more the left barked at capital. Nothing has changed, not even to-
day. That is the main responsibility. Not the main responsibility of the
right. Of course, you normally had to expect the right to make the moves
it made. You cannot expect anything else from economists and manag-
ers than to tweet neo-liberal, neo-conservative arguments. From the left,
I am now talking about the Faculty of Social Studies and the Faculty
of Philosophy and some of the institutes that deal with it, it was neces-
sary and necessary to expect them to choose and correctly understand the
problem, the state of affairs. I remember the Peace Institute working at
the Faculty of Social Sciences for a while. I am also one of the founders
of the Institute. We held out until the NATO referendum, until the very
end. At that NATO point, we had used up all the energy we had invested
and were defeated, of course. We got 34% in the referendum, and that was
the end. The Peace Institute was the ‘last Mohican’ that tried to defend
the little things. Then came the wave of the Faculty of Social Sciences and
the wave of the dumping Faculty of Philosophy – of capital.
154
that happened here in the 1980s. I know that, I was living at that time.
Whether I was a student, whether I was doing a master’s, a PhD, or
whether I was in the age scene, I wrote for the youth. I know that was not
good then. It came with so-called independence, it was closely related to
the processes of capitalisation, the processes of the ‘managerial revolu-
tion’, and two books have been written about it that you can read, and I
will not go into them further here. The question of who resigned must be
answered: the humanist and social science intelligentsia. The humanist
and socialist intelligentsia are the ones, they are the ones, we are the ones
and they are the ones who have resigned. It is not two million and sever-
al thousand Slovenians, it is a dozen, a few, hundreds of people in whom
the next game was played. Some, namely the circles of the New Magazine,
went the way they have just gone. And they are not problematic from
the point of view of an argumentation that interests me and that I want
to serve. Others, however, split into two parts, one of which advocated
something like the managerial revolution, liberalism and so on, mostly
economists and so on. The humanities, on the other hand, mostly start-
ed barking at the moon. You will not like what I am going to say now be-
cause I assume that you are predominantly left-wing. This moon is called
Capital. And then we have this situation. The left – humanities and social
sciences, barking at capitalists and capital, economists and managers pri-
vatise and rob everything that can be robbed. The more managers robbed,
the more the left barked at capital. Nothing has changed, not even to-
day. That is the main responsibility. Not the main responsibility of the
right. Of course, you normally had to expect the right to make the moves
it made. You cannot expect anything else from economists and manag-
ers than to tweet neo-liberal, neo-conservative arguments. From the left,
I am now talking about the Faculty of Social Studies and the Faculty
of Philosophy and some of the institutes that deal with it, it was neces-
sary and necessary to expect them to choose and correctly understand the
problem, the state of affairs. I remember the Peace Institute working at
the Faculty of Social Sciences for a while. I am also one of the founders
of the Institute. We held out until the NATO referendum, until the very
end. At that NATO point, we had used up all the energy we had invested
and were defeated, of course. We got 34% in the referendum, and that was
the end. The Peace Institute was the ‘last Mohican’ that tried to defend
the little things. Then came the wave of the Faculty of Social Sciences and
the wave of the dumping Faculty of Philosophy – of capital.
154
