*Topicality/Definitions Democracy Promotion Includes Military Intervention
Democracy Promotion Imperialistic: Civic Education/Civil Society Assistance
Download 2.51 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Democracy Promotion Imperialistic: Privileges Donor Interests
Democracy Promotion Imperialistic: Civic Education/Civil Society AssistanceUS DEMOCRATIC CIVIC EDUCATION ASSISTANCE IMPOSES US MODEL OF DEMOCRACY Patricia K. Kubow, Education Professor-Bowling Green University, 2008, Advancing Democracy Through Education: US influence abroad and domestic practices, eds. E. Stevic & B. Levinson, p. 159-60 School curricula in democracies of sub-Saharan Africa have been more heavily influenced by Western educational reforms rather than by the knowledge of educators in African contexts of the direction they consider appropriate for formal democratic instruction in their respective countries. This situation is the result of historical conditions such as colonialism, contemporary influences such as globalization, and even international “collaboration” whereby Western (read: United States) democracy and culture are imparted to educators in other nations through “civic” education projects. The term democracy itself has become a slogan, and U.S. civic educators who seek to spread democracy globally have considered an American model of democracy as appropriate. In general, therefore, there is a need to examine American funded projects for the kinds of assumptions about democracy that underlie such projects, as well as the procedures American educators have used with international participants as they engage in democratic education efforts. Democratic citizenship education constitutes not only an important area of study for the field of comparative education, but also provides an opportunity for comparative educators to emphasize the role that culture plays in shaping democracy in different contexts. Moreover, attention should be given to using democratic-oriented research methodologies in the conduct of citizenship education projects. US CIVIC EDUCATION ASSISTANCE DESIGNED TO PROMOTE U.S. INTERESTS Doyle Stevick, Education Professor-University of South Carolina, 2008, Advancing Democracy Through Education: US influence abroad and domestic practices, eds. E. Stevic & B. Levinson, p. 103-4 American civics partners worked primarily with U.S. government funding, which was often channeled through USAID. Groups such as USAID, writes Samoff (1999), “were created to serve national interests, including the provision of financial and technical assistance overseas. Even those that most energetically assert their role in providing development aid must defend their programs and budgets in terms of their contribution to the national economy and polity.” (p. 63) The obligation organizations have to advance national interests is illustrated by the mission statement of the Swedish Institute (SI, n.d), which promptly after the Soviet collapse hosted for 6 months Sulev Valdmaa, who became a prominent figure in civic education in Estonia through his work at an Estonian nongovernmental organization, the Jaan Tonisson Institute. (The sponsorship likely contributed to Estonias subsequent adoption of the Swedish framework for its first post-Soviet civic education curricula.) The SI’s goals are specific (and have an explicit economic component): “The SI is a public agency entrusted with disseminating knowledge abroad about Sweden and organizing exchanges with other countries in the spheres of culture, education, research and public life in general. In doing so, it seeks to promote Swedish interests and contribute to economic growth.” (Swedish Institute, n.d., para 1). Similarly, within the specific realm of foreign aid for civic education, Quigley and Hoar (1997) lay out explicitly the national interest goals of Civitas International, the U.S. funded collaboration with postcommunist countries. The first stated goal of the program was “to acquaint educators from EEN/NIS [Eastern European nation/Newly Independent States] with exemplary curricular and teacher-training programs in civic education developed in the United States” (p. 13).
Ayan M. Alsayed, Counselor in International Education and Development, 2008, Advancing Democracy Through Education: US influence abroad and domestic practices, eds. E. Stevic & B. Levinson, p. 76 This discourse of democratization and development is very attractive and presents donors as supporters of the interests of the countries in which they are promoting change, indeed often as saviors of citizens who have lived for years under corrupt or authoritarian governments. However, the good governance discourse is an essential part of a development agenda which is neither always entirely positive nor disinterested. Actually, it reflects the softer side of the neoliberal approach to global economic development, and is closely tied to the goals that the donor countries have for themselves, rather than to the priorities of the recipient nations. The kinds of democracy supported, the choice of organizations for development, the content and focus of civic education programming, and the conditions placed on its implementation all shape the political-economic systems that are developed in recipient countries. Such outcomes, not surprisingly, reflect the interests primarily of the donors and their partners in recipient-nation elites. Directory: assets assets -> Northern territory of australia assets -> Number: caveat in the [Will/Will and Codicil/Estate of] assets -> Invitation for Bid Calact/mbta for Standard Floor and Low Floor Rural Duty Vehicles ifb no. 12-03 November 14, 2012 assets -> 12 Step Retreats For Everyone in Twelve Step Recovery Ratner Fellowship assets -> 12 Step Retreats For Everyone in Twelve Step Recovery Ratner Fellowship assets -> Sigaccess annual Report assets -> Central Government is expected to ask the seventh pay commission to consider merging 50% dearness allowance assets -> List of accessible executive records assets -> Emergency telephone numbers Call toll-free from anywhere in France Download 2.51 Mb. Share with your friends:
|