A New World of Care and Kindness: Education at Its Best

Background

This invitation—“Not preparation for the world as it is, but participation in the work of making the world anew”—is the central theme of this paper. In response, I agree and posit that by making grassroots efforts of social education and civil diplomacy toward a caring world, a Pedagogy of Care, calling back to Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed, it is possible to influence and win those who want these things. The reality is that not all will want these things, or we wouldn’t have the world we have now. We must offer this opportunity and message to as many as possible, by all means possible, yet aware that some condone violence to achieve their goals, forcing others to defend with violence in order to preserve their lives.

In reimagining a new world with an education to match and facilitate our path to it, we must focus on what we want that new world to be like: caring, giving, equitable, inclusive, free from strife, envy, selfish ambition, and the conflicts produced by these. We also imagine a world free from poverty, sickness, and ignorance. The list could go on to cover all of the SDGs promoted by the UN and agreed upon by all members. What is stopping us from reaching these goals as a united body?

Problem

The world is not a united body, although humans have basic commonalities which could form a bridge of understanding and in many cases, this happens in beautiful ways. However, we cannot ignore that when it comes to governments, political views, religions, and economies, there are irreconcilable differences. We could say that all things are reconcilable, yet if some entities’ avowed goal, openly or covertly, is to put into subjugation all the rest and then enforce a “social order” and “harmony” ruled by them, it could be argued that forced unity under authoritarian rule is not unity. It would be better to exist as separate sovereign entities, than to oblige all to an internationalism which violates each others’ cultures, freedoms and rights, which at least some consider to be God-given and inalienable.

In the case of refugees fleeing from injustice and oppression in their native land, they would need to respectfully and humbly embrace the culture of their new home rather than demand to change it, or they would transform into perpetrators of the very oppression they fled from and become, understandably unwelcome. If the religion or political affiliation an immigrant brings with them commands them to undermine the culture, religion, and traditions of their new home in an effort for world domination, it would be similar to an invited guest insisting on bringing his or her pet black widow spider or venomous cobra snake with them. The “owners of the house” would be considered well within their rights to insist that the pet stay where it came from—outside, and in fact, would be deemed irresponsible and negligent toward their children if they allowed those creatures into their home. At the same time, those fleeing oppression and violence need compassion and understanding if we are to become one family.

Definition of Terms and Consensus of Values

“Internationalism” can be understood in more than one way. One could be the natural, “organic” mixing of races and cultures through interchange and intermarriage, forming a fusion of cultures. Another would be appreciation and respect between different cultures, while recognizing the value of preserving their distinct identities. The problem arises when one is imposing harmful, violent, or oppressive behavior upon another; of course, there would have to be a consensus on what those terms mean. There would have to be an agreement on what is good and what is bad, what is kind and what is hateful, what is allowed and what is not. How can this be done in an international context with a variety of “isms” often opposing each other? Worldwide, love and care are recognized by most as good and necessary for humans to flourish. Here we might find the most agreed-upon standard of measure.

Case Study

We report on a chain of school-based clubs which involve arts, sports, vocational training, and social work. These clubs address the problem of ethnic and cultural differences between tribes which have been at odds, traditionally, debilitating their ability to work together to accomplish more and creating an atmosphere of uneasiness in the region, in a way, a microcosm of the world. Our framework and lens is Affective Social Education, meaning to educate the whole person, by inference, the whole society by moving and affecting their inner selves, emotions, intellects, and social habits. The goal is to see if new habits of care and unity can be formed.

The methodology to measure impact is mixed, in that interviews and forums are widely used, yet also quantitative, as we see the movement snowball to nearly 20,000 participants and rapidly spreading. As we add new elements to the intervention, such as an art festival, the youth football league, working for ecology together, and an upcoming Club Music Channel showcasing club theme songs and works created by the youth, themselves, we are creating tools to measure the effectiveness of each toward the desired goal of camaraderie.

Comparative and International Education: The Ideal Platform

CIE is definitely the branch of academics where such work can shine and also be analyzed to find further and better applications. To work for world peace, we need to bring the world together with our minds on finding these solutions. CIES can be a wonderful incubator, facilitating solidarity, a time and place to imagine together; a refuge to plan together, find working partners, and be re-energized for the battle.

Conclusion

What forms of learning repair and regenerate relationships? Learning of the heart and spirit. The “more-than-human-world” requires more-than-human-solutions, and so, my conclusion is to look up and then look around. We need super-human love to repair our human hurts.