Microsoft Word - v11n7.doc Volume 11 Number 7 October 8, 2008 Savage Neoliberalism and Subaltern Responses: An Essay Review Ricardo D. Rosa University of Wisconsin, Madison Borġ, Carmel & Mayo, Peter. (2007). Public Intellectuals, Radical Democracy and Social Movements: A Book of Interviews. (Counterpoints: Studies in the Postmodern Theory of Education) NY: Peter Lang. Pp. 214 ISBN 978-0820470764 Citation: Rosa, Ricardo D. (2008, October 8).Savage neoliberalism and subaltern responses: An essay review. Education Review, 11(7). Retrieved [date] from http://edrev.asu.edu/essays/v11n7index.html Although the hegemonic discourse of neoliberalism attempts to blur the boundaries between public and private, Borġ and Mayo’s Public Intellectuals, Radical Democracy and Social Movements and the various movements it traces attempts to make porous the boundaries between public institutions, namely schools, and social movements. It is a text that contributes to the production of a counter-hegemonic theory by viewing education as a social movement and social movements as pedagogical projects capable of creating a deeper substantive democracy. It invokes the ongoing development of critical human beings who not only read the word and the world in oppositional ways, but who become actively engaged in the transformation of negative relations of power. The text blurs the false distinction between theory and practice by invoking the need to combine rigorous academics with activism. It begins and ends on Education Review Vol. 11 No. 7 2 the fundamental point that neoliberalism has contributed to instability in all parts of the world and yet refuses to accept Fukuyama’s “end of history” thesis by centralizing various counter projects that are sensitive to the local context and while envisioning global connections. Shirley Steinberg makes an important sociolinguistic point in the Preface: “An essential earmark of any insurrection involves naming that which is hegemonic" (p. vii). Hegemony functions through language and rewards tied to certain discursive regimes. It is through language that dominant institutions are (re)established and legal frameworks laid out so as to protect these institutions. Paul Cooper captures this in his discussion of “cultural capital” and forms of exclusion through inclusion. Beyond naming the hegemonic, this is a text whose political project involves a contribution to the articulation of a different language that speaks to a convergence between education and social movements and a calling into dialogue of various positive political projects originating from various political, social, and economic contexts in our current historical juncture. In short, it speaks to a “contrapuntal” (Said, 1993) reading of the socio-political and economic narrative and the building of globalization from below. Literature in the field of education that attempts this task is scarce. It is a text full of hope, emanating from the language of the very people who are willing to put their bodies on the line and function as agents of historical transformation. Furthermore, it is a text particularly valuable for those of us living in the economic North. It allows so- called “democratic nations” who parade the world making it safer for “democracy” to engage lessons from the economic South that substantially teach us about what deeper forms of democratic engagement may look like. I will begin with an initial comment advocating this text. Because it is a text of interviews, I will proceed by highlighting the significant themes that re-surface in the interviews and then follow with some critiques of the text. This text is well worth reading. A number of critical theorists in education have written eloquently that if schools are to be transformed into “laboratories of freedom” (Dewey, 1966; although Dewey’s conception was certainly under- developed), it is necessary to look both inside the walls of schools and to analyze critically and work towards the transformation of the social, political, and economic context within which schools exist (Apple, 1990; Anyon, 1997, 2005). A number of critical scholars have also pointed to the important role that teachers perform in this process (Freire, 1970, Giroux, 1988). There are many reasons why it Rosa: Savage neoliberalism and subaltern responses 3 is difficult to inspire teachers to become active in political projects that work towards the subversion of socialization to domination and the building of a more humane society beyond the confines of schools. One reason, central in this text and alluded to by Nita Freire’s points on accessing Paulo Freire’s thoughts (pp. 4-7), is that for new structures to come into being and new political engagements to be nurtured, it is necessary that we have a language to bring it into existence – a lexicon of change, so to speak. How does this text contribute to that language? There is an overriding narrative that emanates from the various interviews. All of the interviews, in one way or another, attempt to reconstruct a notion of teacher (whether in the classroom or not) as public intellectual, organic intellectual, or in the words of Edward Said “exilic intellectual" (quoted in Nahla Abdo’s interview). These are certainly not common terms of reference in schools of education. Yet, when we speak of the de-skilling of teachers, the rampant assault on the profession by the corporate media, the anti-intellectualism so pervasive in social interactions (especially in the North American context), and the stampede to erase the “public” in public schools through neoliberal impositions and negotiations, there is something that “public intellectual” encodes that “teacher” no longer signifies due to the weight of dominant educational narratives at our current juncture in history. The “public” in public intellectual functions to beat back the tides of an invasive neoliberal hegemony into all areas of social life. It reminds us, at a time when brutal regimes of privatization attempt to colonize the space of education and apprentice us all to a “democracy” defined by individual choice to consume, to revive (in a re-articulated way) the historic countervailing progressive ideas in education and social movements in the effort to rupture the dominant investment in soft style democracy. Overall, the book does not romanticize these terms. Instead, it seeks to highlight certain signposts to sustain these markers along progressive lines. Some of the more important themes are highlighted below in this review. There are other significant terms and ways in which the authors reframe educational engagement along progressive terrain: “Popular education” – signifies a commitment to political engagement beyond the confines of the walls of the institution. If schools, as institutions, are to change, teachers and students need to apply their resources and participate in wider efforts at building a just society. The literature and examples of popular education help us understand how we may be able to step in institutions and remain connected to social movements outside and build new and more effective movements (particularly in the North). Exposure to this literature and language is sorely lacking in schools of education. Instead, too great a focus is placed on reductionistic curriculum theory and practice, managerial discourses, and on the like. Political projects that are housed only inside schools too often translate to forms of “furniture moving” and “window dressing” capable of winning small battles, but unable to sustain long term liberatory structures. Of course, there are plenty of educators and Education Review Vol. 11 No. 7 4 academics who relate this type of engagement to a form of “student indoctrination.” I am not suggesting undemocratic structures in classrooms, shutting students down, or placing anyone in positions where their safety is in question. I am saying that in the wake of hundreds of thousands of civilians and over 4,000 soldiers killed in Iraq (an illegal war that is contributing to the further destabilization of the world), severe food riots all over the world, astronomical rates of violence in urban areas, the assault on availability of basic social goods and a “free market” that enslaves the majority, it is irresponsible to linger on debates about whether conditions of objectivity (already a myth) are created in classrooms. Furthermore, the stakes are simply too high to comfortably shut our doors and pretend we are changing the world through our teaching. As Henry Giroux has eloquently observed, “the time has come for such theorists (including teachers) to distinguish professional caution from political cowardice and recognize that their obligations extend beyond deconstructing texts or promoting a culture of questioning (p. 123).” The term “democratization,” which is raised throughout the book, serves to interrogate hollow definitions and practices of democracy. Encoded in this term are notions of ongoing processes that must be struggled for rather than end points that need to be protected and policed. Radical democracy is not just born out of our option to participate in the ordinary political infrastructure. It is a process involving the ongoing democratization of civil society, the constant interrogation of how exclusion on the grounds of multiple markers occurs even when progressive projects are unfolding, and the problematizing of conditions that fail to call into question the various ways in which economic systems Carmel Borġ undermine political cultures. The term encodes democracy as unfinished. Educators need more exposure to such language given the reality of schools as highly undemocratic spheres where various oppressive ideologies converge in front of a captive audience. A democratic political system cannot come to fruition if the institutions of that society are undemocratic, anti-democratic, or fail to (re)create the structures and conditions that lead to further democratization. Democracy flourishes when democratic cultures are the norm. This text is full of progressive terms of reference. Beyond lexicon, several important themes re-surface. We cannot romanticize any social movement, any non-governmental organization, or progressive international alliances, or any progressive project going on (especially those in alignment with the state). As these movements are Rosa: Savage neoliberalism and subaltern responses 5 formed, dominant forces also wage continual campaigns towards their destruction and co-option. The public intellectual’s role is therefore one that constantly problematizes the transformative force of any project by teasing out its more progressive elements in avoidance of the project's decay and demise. Central to this ongoing action is the abandonment of the nostalgic fiction of a unitary movement. Nahla Abdo re-focuses our attention on the plight and resistance of women on whose backs the occupation of Palestine more squarely rests. In an international environment where the work of the Palestinian National Authority is what is most often phallocentrically displayed, Abdo asks us to consider the work of the Palestinian Ministry of Women’s Affairs. Maria Hamlyn Zuniga makes clear, in the case of Nicaragua, that the official Sandinista Party has largely abandoned struggles for justice. Certainly, this abandonment must be theorized not only in light of internal transitions within the party, but also as a consequence of the perversions created as a result of the Reagan administration’s embargo, support of the gross human rights violations of the Contras – a terrorist cell by any international legal organization’s definition – and the imperative towards manipulation of civil society (Robinson, 1996). For Zuniga, the current answers lie in a coalition between NGOs, community organizations, religious and human rights organizations, groups and people active in the World Social Forum, and the various social movements seeking to secure basic social goods. Furthermore, these coalitions must be formed in ways that militate against the formation of vertical power structures, which may function to re-colonize civil society by abstracting local articulations of power and spaces for progressive politics. At the same time, this coalition must keep its head tilted towards convergences with other movements on the global scale so as not be restricted by national boundaries – already made porous by globalization from above. We must consistently situate our own biographical odysseys within our political projects in ways that move beyond reductive notions of self-reflection. The development of presence of mind is one that requires us to interrogate ourselves constantly so as to situate and counter our own hostility towards difference and illuminate the complex ways in which we (re-)produce different forms of domination. We do this, not just by excavating our ideas and biographies in “safe” contexts, but also by opening our auto-biographies to public engagement and critique given our own relative privilege. Akira Kurosawa, in articulating the theme driving the production of his now classic work Rashomon, states “human beings are not capable of being honest with themselves about themselves.” Applying this principle to our lives does not mean that we should depart from our political convictions with ease given any countervailing ideas we confront or that may position us in tension with our respective projects. It also does not mean that we engage in forms of story-telling while abstracting ourselves from institutional relations and respective social, political, and economic contexts. Rather, we must adopt a spirit of critical autobiographical transparency which is more likely to keep us humble Education Review Vol. 11 No. 7 6 (realizing that organizing and political activism should not be reduced to self serving processes of heroification) and progressively critical in conservative environments poised to dull our senses. Antonia Darder eloquently concludes that, “this demands not only critically comprehending emancipatory theories and revolutionary practices but also contending forthrightly with my [our] own internal contradictions in clear and open ways" (p.197). The best example of this process, a process that is certainly never complete, is highlighted by her life history, political sensibilities originating from her life narratives, and her earlier pedagogical convictions. She shares with the reader that her own political urgency and narratives of victimization collided with some students’ conservative sensibilities, perhaps pushing them further to the right. She opens up a space inviting us to think about our politics, its relationship to our contexts, and the possibility of becoming irrevelant or worse colluding with repressive forces by not thinking Peter Mayo through how our discourses may be received. Of course, Darder’s own work is testimony that one’s project must not simply be about personal transparency or what Betto (in this volume) calls “interiorization” but also about willingness to put one’s body on the line, so to speak. Throughout all of the interviews, one senses that critical work necessarily signifies a life of discomfort and pain. It is marked by what Amilcar Cabral once called “class suicide” or what Betto calls “vital suicide" (p.40). The resistance to neoliberal policy and culture must be waged on multiple terrains. Certainly, we cannot proceed from social movements of the recent past that placed almost exclusive emphasis on the State. Not at a time when some major economies in the world are embodied in corporations. At the same time, public intellectuals must take account of the complex ways in which the State is structured, re- structured, and in constant formation so as to exploit the cracks of agency within “normative” institutions. To engage only the “grass roots” and construct theories of the State as unitary and always problematic leads to a myopic view that situates the circulation of power as always negative and fails to examine the tensions existent within formations of power – tensions that may provide for the leveraging of more progressive alternatives (Apple, 2001). Maria Hamlyn Zuniga, in tracing the political situation in Nicaragua, speaks to the importance of seizing the process of decentralization by further democratizing municipalities and intervening in local expression of power. In the U.S. context, Howard Zinn (1995, 2008) has amply written about the importance of resurrecting the spirit of New Deal reforms. Although their Rosa: Savage neoliberalism and subaltern responses 7 limitations and exclusions of African Americans, tenant farmers, many poor people, and migrant laborers were evident; the reality is that the New Deal did attain some success in regulating the severity of runaway capitalism. Apart from putting many to work, the movements from below both inspired change in the State and were inspired by changes within it as it manufactured desire towards more change. Likewise, the Great Society―not truly a Lyndon Johnson program as is so much touted by “mainstream” historians but rather one demanded by movements from below―did some good. The education achievement gap between whites and blacks enters political discourse in the U.S. more forcefully in the 1990s1, after the Regan administration's efforts to dismantle many of the Great Society programs. It makes one wonder about the achievement gap prior and whether or not those anti-poverty programs substantially closed that gap2. I agree with Zinn that the spirit of these Statist reforms must not be taken for granted. Furthermore, as Paul Street (2007) has eloquently argued, the “Right” is absolutely interested in the State to push through deadly imperialist objectives and shut down democratic rights at home, despite their anti-Statist rhetoric. Intervention is therefore necessary at this location as well. In the case of the economic South, as this text demonstrates, certainly there are limitations to the current structure of governance in Venezuela under Chavez and Brazil under “Lula.” Frei Betto correctly points out, however, that “In spite of difficulties, Brazil is better off with Lula than without him" (p.36). I would certainly argue the same in the case of Chavez. The State must also be struggled for. There will be some victories and more often many defeats in this struggle. Yet, even in the face of losing, the very widening of political discursive boundaries serves to problematize the way in which rightist and neoliberal political parties do business and hopefully intervene in the process of socialization to dominant interests. Magda Adly’s entering into Parliamentary politics prior to her work in the El Nadim Centre for the Management and Rehabilitation of Victims of Violence serves as an example. Paul Cooper offers yet another example in his discussion of school exclusion/inclusion. He makes clear that in the case of England, there are governing policies over education that function less as mandates and more as guides and yet few take the opportunity inherent in such policy to subvert standardization practices. Clearly, what is needed are projects that are creative in that they are equipped to enter both the “normative” sphere of political discourse and institutional relations (and push the boundaries) and simultaneously be grounded in social movements. 1 Of course, I am not suggesting that this discourse was brought about through altruistic intentions. In fact, it was brought about to further consolidate elite power by putting corporations at the helm of government policy on education. 2 I credit Dr. James Gee for opening up this line of inquiry in a class discussion at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Education Review Vol. 11 No. 7 8 Edoardo Martinelli reminds us of the power of mining liberation theology particularly at a time when we have a resurgence of the religious right. This site cannot be skirted by critical intellectuals since billions of people make sense of the world through their religious affiliations. Furthermore, we cannot deny the powerful role that progressive religious narratives have played in historically awakening a sense of possibility and transforming society for the better. Numerous interventions can be cited: the deconstruction of church hierarchies, the abolitionist movement, women’s suffrage, and the civil rights movement in the U.S. (West, 2004). Certainly there were limitations in all of these movements, yet we cannot deny that they furthered the democratic cause. Liberation theology has certainly lost its fire given the re-organization of the center, but we should not discount current manifestations and the possibility of a resurgence of these narratives. Roberto Mazzini invokes the importance of engaging political aesthetics, particularly the work of Augusto Boal, as one site of thinking through political action. Although Mazzini states that he is not aware if Freire valorized aesthetics as a site of political engagement, Freire did in fact write about theatre’s revolutionary potential. In Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970),Freire discusses the possibilities of drama in serving as a problem-posing site (p.103). I have argued elsewhere that the most important lesson to be learned does not exist in Boal’s Theatre of the Oppressed (TO) techniques themselves but in his process (and others) of charting different cartographies of political praxis while moving through and beyond dominant culture (Rosa, 2008). Furthermore, his work exemplifies a pliable pursuit with significant potential for cross- contextual engagement coming out of an inverse type of globalization. Bogad (2006) explains how TO can be used as a modular form of resistance given that there are organizations all over the world that are actively re-articulating the work and the translations of Boal’s books into a number of languages. Bogad explains that modular resistance forms like multiple strikes launched against subsidiary firms worldwide help to keep corporate power in check. Such political poetics should always be anchored to concrete movements such as the rise of local social forums built on the back of the World Social Forum. Borġ and Mayo’s text does not fail in its analysis of transformative forces in various sites ranging from the aesthetic, the religious, popular social movements, and the state. Here, the concept of de-centered unity (Apple, 2000) illuminates possibilities towards flexible alliances on respective progressive projects. In Brazil, for example, the entrenchment of neoliberal policy and the collusion of the Lula administration is evident. However, social movements from below can continue seizing on key developments in the administration such as “Zero Hunger” and the rejection of AFTA, proposed by the U.S (Betto, in this volume). This continued seizure may open up new avenues for the development of new legal structures and political cultures that reduce social misery. Of course, these types of connection do not have to be related Rosa: Savage neoliberalism and subaltern responses 9 only to flexible bonds between the State and civil society. Throughout this text, one senses the power and the transformative force behind de-centered collaborations. Vincent Caruana, in speaking of free trade initiatives in Malta, underlines the positive political inertia that may surface when these initiatives are connected to “properly valuing women’s work and actively encouraging better environmental practices and the application of responsible methods of production" (p.162). William Pinar, in discussing the U.S., invokes the need for a “new coalition of progressive forces… one-obviously- not yet visible in the U.S." (p.83) In thinking through the North American context, I reflected on how public intellectuals need to create new possibilities by orchestrating creative tensions that speak to boundary transgressions. For example, significant work has been produced in the anti-prison industrial complex movements and the anti-capital punishment movements (Rosenblatt, 1996, James, 2002). Although there has been work focusing on the pervasive structures of punishment in U.S. schools and the resemblance of these institutions to criminal justice structures (Leistyna, 2003, Giroux, 2003), more dialogue is needed between critical educators and critical theorists in the orbit of political projects centering on prisons. More connections need to be made that speak to the realities of pipelines and the for-profit invasion of both spheres. By opening these lines of inquiry and reframing key questions, new projects will develop. These projects are significant given that they will necessarily proliferate through trans-institutional engagements allowing those outside of schools to creatively apply pressure on a sphere that has less material control over them and vice versa. This will awaken a new sense of possibilities given that we will rely less on field dependence and open up dialogues with those outside. It will allow critical workers within these institutions to connect with those outside in the effort to counter the coercive politics of managerialism that subjects many to “suffer quietly” policies. Positive political projects, in an era of deep globalization from above, require a transnationalizing of struggles. John Fisher correctly argues that union education and union policy must support the international solidarity between workers. As corporations outsource and offshore and wreak havoc on economies world wide, as they both produce and collude in gross crimes against humanity, they are simultaneously engaging in a cost benefit analysis that weighs the likelihood of local articulations of resistance in destabilizing capital. This is the case not only in the “developing world,” but also in the U.S. given the Bush administration’s rampant use of deferred prosecution agreements that function, in the words of New York Times correspondent Eric Lichtblau, to allow “financial institutions now under investigation for their roles in the subprime mortgage debacle, to test the limits of corporate anti- fraud laws" (New York Times, April 9, 2008). Yet, these types of agreement go beyond the subprime disaster in the U.S. These agreements speak to a seizure of local legal loopholes and wider entanglements between government, contracted monitors, and Education Review Vol. 11 No. 7 10 corporations that can only be characterized as criminal. Such structures allow companies to cross legal boundaries knowing that the fines will be well worth the wealth produced. As Didactus Jules (in this text) points out in his discussion of education in the Caribbean, “the headache of an ant is as massive and as bothersome to him as the headache of an elephant" (p.127). Left out of the equation are the millions of Americans defrauded by these subprime companies, and billions of people victimized by trans-nationals all over the world. Engaging these corporations while they research and find ways to exploit local legal structures worldwide, necessarily involves continued efforts at building transnational interventionist projects. Strikes, boycotts, and demonstrations need to be organized across contexts and need to engage not only parent companies but also subsidiaries and interlocking directorates. Even as these forms of resistance are globalized, they must also not lose sight of local articulations and circulations of power. Jamie Peck and Adam Ticknell (2002) have eloquently pointed out that “local neoliberalisms are embedded within wider networks and structures of neoliberalism" (p.380). For those of us living within the “belly of the beast” the only way to counter the shaping of common sense towards a neoliberal inevitability and stop participating in the destruction of the world is to highlight the various ways in which the plight of those in the economic South is connected to our own historical context. The explosion of racist discourses on immigration and outright abusive practices towards immigrants (both “legal” and not) has not been adequately connected to the fact that the transitioning of those who are “illegal” (as if human beings can even be illegal) from the economic South to the North is the result, in large part, of the policies and structures created by nations like the U.S. and international pawns like the World Bank and the IMF. Grounding counter neoliberal projects in a politics that is both sensitive to the local and yet wise enough to unravel global entanglements is essential to building long- term insurrection. Countering neoliberal’s reign requires that all spheres be engaged, yet the struggle over education is of deep significance since it is the key site for hegemonic (re)production. Not only are schools composed of a captive audience potentially deliverable to corporate interests in open and overt ways, they also have a captive audience to be indoctrinated into a crass capitalist culture lacking all morality. Of course, such attempts at indoctrination never happen on terrains where people are always uncritically disengaged. Both contestation and indoctrination do go on. Students who are nauseated every time a teacher asks them to read a chapter out of a U.S. history textbook produce this response for several reasons. I would not discredit the possibility that students have a certain level of penetration in seeing that certain narratives in these texts are simply, to quote the activist Saul Alinsky (1971), “classic American fairytales.” This penetration in itself is liberating, but certainly not enough. It must be grounded in positive political projects that allow us more control over our communities Rosa: Savage neoliberalism and subaltern responses 11 and more solidarity with people all over the world bearing the brunt of escalating corporate insurrection. Perhaps resonance is more readily established in texts produced in other areas of the world. It would be difficult to find education systems accepting texts into classrooms that produce significant counter narratives to the national imagination or the ruling discourses of that particular society. The anti-colonial theorists had it correct in stating that education is for the most part subordinated to the interests of the elite. The degree to which this happens and the tensions produced as a result of contestation may vary, of course. Furthermore, capitalism as a producer of culture crosses boundaries, therefore we must broaden our definition of curriculum and pedagogical engagement. The role of “popular"3 education here is paramount. Again, this is a refreshing and hopeful text that contributes to the ongoing re- making of Paulo Freire and Lorenzo Milani (although the latter was less invoked throughout). Like any text, it is incomplete. I explain below. The authors lament their omission of “sub-Saharan”4 African movements and critical intellectuals due to lack of contacts. Given the grip of globalization and its effects in this region of the world and the omission of this region from most texts of this quality, it is a non-inclusion of great political consequence. It is clear that Western elites on the “Right” have no problem making such contacts and are in fact in “dialogue” with sub-Saharan Africa. The militarization of Africa by the U.S., particularly after the waning of the Soviet Union, is strong evidence of this “dialogue.” This militarization has occurred to such an extent, that it has led Bruce Dixon (2008), managing editor of the Black Agenda Report, to note that “the price of an AK-47 assault rifle is lower on the African continent than anyplace else on earth.” Coupled with the militarization, “Sub-Saharan” Africa is weighed down by structural adjustment programs, the invasion of infrastructural projects dominated by transnationals and the provision of key social services. This invasion has and will continue to have a severe impact on the ability of African nations to regulate their economies and provide basic social goods to their citizens. Looking beyond the shock and awe discourse of the Friedmanites, we encounter the subtle discourse of those like Bill Clinton who stated in an interview with Ebony magazine that “Africa represents an enormous opportunity for America. If we want to maintain our middle-class lifestyle, and with 4 percent of the 3 I situate the “popular” in popular education not as an add-on or a side item in education, but as a site that must be engaged with the same analytical rigor as what takes place within the four walls of schools. 4 This term has been problematized by historican P. Godfrey Okoth and others as originating from the Eurocentric effort to eclipse Africa’s divere contribution to the world. The term is also problematic politically in that it negates the positive efforts at coalition building between African nations before and after colonial struggles, particularly in the face of the economic North’s strangling of respective economies in Africa and the construction of racist discourses that set up societies against one another. Education Review Vol. 11 No. 7 12 world’s population, and 25 percent of its gross domestic product, we’ve got to sell some things to other people…we need Africa as a partner" (p.140). One need not read between the lines to weigh the types of partnership he might have in mind. A simple assessment of the historical narrative sheds a great deal of light. It was Clinton who made NAFTA a major legislative priority in 1993. It is time that we also engage movements in this part of the world. To the authors credit, they do openly acknowledge their omission. Another area that could have been explored was media literacy movements such as Indymedia that seek to de-center the deep culture of consumerism and individualism embedded in mass marketing. These counter hegemonic projects would have spoken deeply to the themes written in this book, given the media assault on public education and ultimate collusion in manufacturing desires towards alternatives like privatization, the destruction of teacher unions, and or the like. Furthermore, just as social movements are built, mass media’s ongoing project of re-defining what constitutes contestation is also on the move. As Thomas Frank (1995) put it, “the countercultural idea has become Capitalist orthodoxy,” particularly in the U.S. context. He offers just a few recognizable discursive co-options in advertizing: Sometimes you gotta break the rules – Burger King If you don’t like the rules, change them – WXRJ – FM There’s no one way to do it – Levi’s The line has been crossed: The Revolutionary new Supra –Toyota (p.324) Such cultural productions position dissent as individual hyper-consumerism and change as available only through one’s integration into corporate culture. As the managerial class in schools adopts the language of “equity,” “stake holders,” “accountability,” and on the like, the corporate world co-opts radical language and redefines the terms of political engagement. There is also a relative lack of discussion of “new” forms of media and their contribution to the mobilization of people and dissemination of critical information, which is key to democracy. Relationally, the text could have engaged globalization from below encoded in “popular” culture. Of course, this would necessarily involve interviews to tease out the aspects that represent resistance on the ground and the commodification of these movements. This opening would allow us just another glimpse of counter globalization projects on the ground. At the same time that we engage this terrain, we must not romanticize it, but merely see it as another site of pedagogical exploration. Projects such as Ad Busters “culture jamming” and the historic interventions of music such as Public Enemy’s ‘Fight the Power’ and its use in various contexts throughout the world come to mind; or aesthetic forms of engagement that have or are capable of border crossing and situating counter hegemonic political pedagogies capable of inspiring well thought out social action. Boal’s work is important in this respect and has certainly Rosa: Savage neoliberalism and subaltern responses 13 been captured in this text. These new (and perhaps not so new) media speak to progressive politics as long as pedagogical projects are built along side. Surprisingly, with the exception of some passing comments by Jules and Darder, I found issues of linguistic imperialism, language rights, bilingual, and multilingual education movements to be underdeveloped in this work despite the image of a taped mouth on the book's cover. Restrictions on language rights all over the world, also speak to extreme forms of political regulation. World-wide speakers of certain languages and variants are not only positioned outside key institutions, but are policed so that the very counter memories encoded in their linguistic/cultural world are driven to the margins or extinguished. Radical democracy cannot be built or sounds hollow while simultaneously disengaging the very vehicles through which meaning is made and re-made. Yes, we may enter the dominant language and re-make it so that it speaks to our realities. To do this and not struggle for the inclusion of subordinate languages in institutions too often amounts to uncritical entry into dominant codes where the subordinated continue to be second class citizens or at best linguistic tourists who face the possibility of no return. Perhaps the text could have deepened its contribution to a non-standard language by providing a glossary of key terms that resurface. Certainly, key markers such as "public intellectuals," "radical democracy," and "social movements" could have been explicitly defined. Furthermore, a listing of key organizations and contacts worldwide that engage in critical and deep political praxis could have been outlined in a supplementary section so that readers may continue their engagement and the very structure of the text would have spoken to its political inclinations. This would have provided for a stronger closure. Free market fundamentalism is certainly the reigning paradigm responsible for structuring misery worldwide. Yet, Borġ and Mayo effectively capture voices that eloquently speak to the vulnerability of this project. Just as neoliberals are apt to engage Friedman’s point that it is through chaos that neoliberal imperatives should be forcefully sought, counter-projects should seek to take advantage of the same chaotic moment to introduce and push more humanizing arrangements. Clearly, this is no small task since neoliberalism’s transformative capacity in times of crisis, even the crises it produces (Peck and Tickell, 2002), is great. The explicit attention Borġ and Mayo give to education is of great importance since the core of anti-neoliberal projects rest on their effectiveness or not of (re-)structuring a counter-hegemonic theory. As Jamie Peck and Adam Tickell (2002) have asserted, to diffuse the power of this paradigm, its true character must be demonstrated to be not inevitable, but rather a political project. Furthermore, we need to enter into dialogues across boundaries so as to forge progressive alliances that function to intervene articulately in the way this political project is sustained locally and yet remain astute to global re-articulations of power Education Review Vol. 11 No. 7 14 from which it feeds. Borġ and Mayo’s text is a positive contribution to this ongoing intervention. References Alinsky, Saul D. (1971). Rules for Radicals. A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals. New York: Vintage Books. Anyon, Jean. (1997). Ghetto Schooling: A Political Economy of Urban Educational Reform. New York: Teachers College Press. Anyon, Jean. (2005). Radical Possibilities: Public Policy, Urban Education, and a New Social Movement. New York: Routledge. Apple, Michael W. (2000). Democratic Education in a Conservative Age. NY: Routledge. Apple, Michael W. (2001). Educating the “Right” Way: Markets, Standards, God, and Inequality. NY: RoutledgeFalmer. Apple, Michael W. (1990). Ideology and Curriculum. New York: Routledge. Bogad, L.M. (2006). Tactical Carnival: Social Movements, Demonstrations, and Dialogical Performance. In: Cohen-Cruz, Jan and Schutzman, Mady (editors). (2006). A Boal Companion: Dialogues on Theatre and Cultural Politics. NY: Routledge. Cohen-Cruz, Jan and Schutzman, Mady (Editors). (2006). A Boal Companion: Dialogues on Theatre and Cultural Politics. NY: Routledge. Dewey, John. (1966). Democracy and Education. NY: Macmillan. Originally 1916. In print: Free Press Paperback,1966. Dixon, Bruce. (February 28, 2008). It’s Time to Demilitarize U.S. Policy in Africa: No Arms! No Transfers! No Military Aid! Dissident Voice. Frank, Thomas. (1995). In Duncombe, Stephen (Ed). (2002). Cultural Resistance Reader. New York: Verso. Freire, Paulo. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York. Herder and Herder. Rosa: Savage neoliberalism and subaltern responses 15 Giroux, Henry. (2003). The Abandoned Generation: Democracy Beyond the Culture of Fear. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Giroux, Henry. (1988). Teachers as Intellectuals: Toward a Critical Pedagogy of Learning. Granby, Mass.: Bergin and Garvey Publishers. Giroux, Henry. (2004). The Terror of Neoliberalism: Authoritarianism and the Eclipse of Democracy. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers. James, Joy. (2002). States of Confinement: Policing, Detention, and Prisons. NY: Palgrave Macmillan Leistyna, Pepi. (2003). Facing Oppression: Youth Voices from the Front. In Saltman, Kenneth and Gabbard, David. Education as Enforcement. The Militarization and Corporatization of Schools. NY: Routledge Falmer. Monroe, Sylvester. (2007). A Conversation With Former President William Jefferson Clinton: In Africa-And About Africa. Ebony. December 2007. Peck, Jamie and Tickell, Adam. (2002). Neoliberalizing Space. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Robinson, William I. (1996). Promoting Polyarchy: Globalization, US Intervention, and Hegemony. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rosa, Ricardo D. (Forthcoming 2008). What Type of Revolution Are We Rehearsing For?The Possibilities and Limitations of Social Action Theatre to Critical Education. The Case of Theatre of the Oppressed. In: Apple, Gandin, and Au (2008). International Handbook on Critical Education.NY: Routledge. Rosenblatt, Elihu. (1996). Criminal Injustice: Confronting the Prison Crisis. Boston: South End Press. Said, Edward W. (1993). Culture and Imperialism. New York: Vintage Books. Street, Paul. (2007). Note to Liberals: The Right Does Not Hate “Government.” ZNet. December 17, 2007. West, Cornel. (2004). Democracy Matters: Winning the Fight Against Imperialism. New York: The Penguin Press. Education Review Vol. 11 No. 7 16 Zinn, Howard. (1995). A People’s History of the United States: 1492-Present. New York: HarperPerennial. Zinn, Howard. (2008). Are Hillary and Obama Afraid of Talking About the New Deal? ZNet. April 2, 2008. About the Reviewer Ricardo D. Rosa is a doctoral student in the department of curriculum and instruction at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. His areas of study include: curriculum theory and research, language, literacy, and culture, and social studies education. He can be reached at rosa@wisc.edu. Rosa: Savage neoliberalism and subaltern responses 17 Copyright is retained by the first or sole author, who grants right of first publication to the Education Review. Editors Gene V Glass Arizona State University Kate Corby Michigan State University Gustavo Fischman Arizona State University http://edrev.asu.edu