Log in

View Full Version : The Anarchist Professor: Interview with Denis Rancourt



ZeroNowhere
21st April 2009, 11:11
So, I wasn't sure if this would be the correct board, but here we go.

From here (http://chrisguillebeau.com/3x5/the-anarchist-professor-interview-with-denis-rancourt/):

How does a tenured, full professor lose his job? First, he throws out the grading system by deciding that every student gets an A+.

Next, he tells students to rebel by showing how they, collectively, have more power and authority than any of the administration. Then, he gets arrested and taken away in handcuffs by the police just for showing up for a film club on campus.

Denis Rancourt is the professor, and I first read about him from the Globe and Mail, Toronto’s largest newspaper. I tracked him down in Ontario and he agreed to answer my questions – but he responded with the qualifier, “Hope this does not overly frighten your readers.”

Hmmm, what do you think… are you frightened? I didn’t think so – but be sure and read the notes at the end for a reminder about unconventional thinkers.

OK, here is the interview.

How is it possible to give every student an A+? Don’t we need some kind of evaluation system?

You put “A+” in the box where it says “student grade.” It’s quite easy. And with that simple move, you remove the instrument of power and oppression in the classroom. My job description says nothing about rank ordering students for employers or graduate school. It says “optimize education.”

You talk about students accepting an inferior system out of the desire (or need) for a degree. What can they do to change the system?

Students have as much power as they want in the classroom. They can impose whatever syllabus or grading system they want. Try it and see. If you are the only one in the class to openly challenge the professor’s absolute control then you will also be the only one to get an education. Better to learn freedom than to degrade yourself by obedience to an absurd order.

When you returned for the film session, were you expecting to be escorted off the campus in handcuffs? What was that experience like?

No, I did not expect it. I did not expect the administration to be so bold as to have dissidents arrested in an auditorium full of students and community members. I did not expect the police state mentality to extend to white male professors.

My main reaction to being cuffed was noting how gentle and polite the police were compared to how I have seen them cuff and arrest students and community members on campus, always under direct orders from the upper administration. I actually think they have special “prof cuffs” that don’t cut and hurt your wrists. I have seen what the regular cuffs do.

What is your vision of higher education?

Liberation. Independent thinking. The present prison system of education is a concentration camp that first teaches obedience, followed by indoctrination at the graduate and professional levels. Farber’s essay from the 60s The Student as Nigger is dead on in my book, only it has gotten much worse since the 60s, as explained in Churchill’s essay Pacifism as Pathology.

If you are really an anarchist, what would you say to someone who argues that rules and social order are necessary in an institution like the academy?

I agree. Anarchists are not against order and organization, but they fight impositions of undemocratic structures. Anarchy is not chaos. Anarchists are against illegitimate and self-preserving power structures (hierarchies).

What do you expect will happen next in your case?

The present media debate will be stifled as soon as the other side senses that some people risk catching on, as soon as the Lie begins to be exposed.
While I don't really agree with all of this guy's views (ones that aren't expressed in this interview), his actions were still awesome.

Global_Justice
21st April 2009, 17:32
that is very interesting. iv never even heard of 'the student as nigger' before but i found it here http://www.soilandhealth.org/03sov/0303critic/030301studentasnigger.html
and have been reading it this afternoon. some very good points about school being used to teach submisiveness.

"In fact, for most of your school life, it doesn't make that much difference what subject you're taught. The real lesson is the method. The medium in school truly is the message. And the medium is, above all, coercive. You're forced to attend. The subjects are required. You have to do homework. You must observe school rules. And throughout, you're bullied into docility and submissiveness. Even modern liberal refinements don't really help. So you're called an underachiever instead of a dummy. So they send you to a counselor instead of beating you. It's still not your choice to be there. They may pad the handcuffs--but the handcuffs stay on.

Which particular subject they happen to teach is far less important than the fact that it is required. We don't learn that much subject matter in school anyway in proportion to the huge part of our lives that we spend there. But what we do learn very well, thanks to the method, is to accept choices that have been made for us. Which rule they make you follow is less important than the fact that there are rules. I hear about English teachers who won't allow their students to begin a sentence with "and." Or about high schools where the male students are not permitted to wear a T- shirt unless it has a pocket. I no longer dismiss such rules as merely pointless. The very point to such rules is their pointlessness.

The true and enduring content of education is its method. The method that currently prevails in schools is standardized, impersonal and coercive. What it teaches best is--itself. If, on the other hand, the method were individual, human and free, it would teach that. It would not, however, mesh smoothly into the machine we seem to have chosen as a model for our society.

It's how you're taught that does the harm. You may only study geometry for a semester--or French for two years. But doing what you're told, whether or not it makes sense, is a lesson you get every blessed school day for twelve years or more. You know how malleable we humans are. And you know what good learners we are--how little time it takes us to learn to drive a car or a plane or to play passable guitar. So imagine
what the effect must be upon our apt and impressionable minds of a twelve-year course in servility."