Page 180 - Šolsko polje, XXX, 2019, št. 5-6: Civic, citizenship and rhetorical education in a rapidly changing world, eds. Janja Žmavc and Plamen Mirazchiyski
P. 180
šolsko polje, letnik xxx, številka 5–6
This naturalized separation of good (European) and bad, volatile, chau-
vinist (foreign) has some unforeseen consequences:
If standard European political thinking (including its thinking on nor-
mative education) mainly conveys the upside of divergent European ide-
ational and normative legacies, this will cause much of Europe and a sig-
nificant part of all Europeans to be symbolically placed outside of the
European construct. (2017, p. 75).
The elitist notion of civic competence. Strandbrink also briefly consid-
ers inequality deeply-seated in the idea of civic and citizenship competen-
cies. Schumpeter (1992, in Strandbrink, 2017) is very explicit when fight-
ing against headless rambling and the infantile reasoning of plebs. This
overlook is widely (even if not as abruptly) present in civics and citizenship
education. Which is connected to the question of …
… Deviance and oddness as the backside of normality: Institutional-
ized normative education is designated to support patterns of normali-
ty and deviance, averageness and weirdness. Conditions for reaching nor-
mality (even in narrow frames of citizenship education) are different
for: a white, middle class, working, educated, democratically-minded,
well-articulated Jaka and for a coloured, uneducated, unemployed, nar-
row-minded and shy Ahmad. Conditions under which different groups
live and practice their citizenship are diverse:
Depending on your cultural, ethical, confessional, social, economic, and
educational position, you will be responded to and accommodated dif-
ferently even by such common core principles like liberty and human
dignity. (2017, p. 87).
Elaboration of distinction between maximalist and minimalist concep-
tualizations of civic and citizenship education. These conceptualizations, ri-
valling in Europe, entail either a more factual and thin citizenship pack-
age (knowledge of institutions, rights and obligations) and a thicker one
(involving in democratic deliberation, the idea of active citizenship). Even
though this duality is not in itself very conceptually promising, Strand-
brink manages to elaborate gracefully. “Thickly” nurtured pupils have to
become civically active and are supposed to participate in communal life
to be a proper citizen. How do they do that? How much activism is just
enough – overboard activism entails radicalism and minimal activism en-
tails passive, undecided (non)citizen. There is a narrow “activity arena” that
is appropriate and designated to civic-deliberation – the area is designed for
the reproduction of liberal democratic dispositions, but is fenced at prox-
178
This naturalized separation of good (European) and bad, volatile, chau-
vinist (foreign) has some unforeseen consequences:
If standard European political thinking (including its thinking on nor-
mative education) mainly conveys the upside of divergent European ide-
ational and normative legacies, this will cause much of Europe and a sig-
nificant part of all Europeans to be symbolically placed outside of the
European construct. (2017, p. 75).
The elitist notion of civic competence. Strandbrink also briefly consid-
ers inequality deeply-seated in the idea of civic and citizenship competen-
cies. Schumpeter (1992, in Strandbrink, 2017) is very explicit when fight-
ing against headless rambling and the infantile reasoning of plebs. This
overlook is widely (even if not as abruptly) present in civics and citizenship
education. Which is connected to the question of …
… Deviance and oddness as the backside of normality: Institutional-
ized normative education is designated to support patterns of normali-
ty and deviance, averageness and weirdness. Conditions for reaching nor-
mality (even in narrow frames of citizenship education) are different
for: a white, middle class, working, educated, democratically-minded,
well-articulated Jaka and for a coloured, uneducated, unemployed, nar-
row-minded and shy Ahmad. Conditions under which different groups
live and practice their citizenship are diverse:
Depending on your cultural, ethical, confessional, social, economic, and
educational position, you will be responded to and accommodated dif-
ferently even by such common core principles like liberty and human
dignity. (2017, p. 87).
Elaboration of distinction between maximalist and minimalist concep-
tualizations of civic and citizenship education. These conceptualizations, ri-
valling in Europe, entail either a more factual and thin citizenship pack-
age (knowledge of institutions, rights and obligations) and a thicker one
(involving in democratic deliberation, the idea of active citizenship). Even
though this duality is not in itself very conceptually promising, Strand-
brink manages to elaborate gracefully. “Thickly” nurtured pupils have to
become civically active and are supposed to participate in communal life
to be a proper citizen. How do they do that? How much activism is just
enough – overboard activism entails radicalism and minimal activism en-
tails passive, undecided (non)citizen. There is a narrow “activity arena” that
is appropriate and designated to civic-deliberation – the area is designed for
the reproduction of liberal democratic dispositions, but is fenced at prox-
178
