Why SNC? Dominant Culture’s need for Change…

Our Why: the Dominant Culture of today’s world does not set up everyone for success, much less to become creative free thinkers and innovators.

No matter in which country you live, Dominant Culture has us living in a world where success means the acquisition of wealth and material possessions. Most of us live in a world that encourages competition as a means to success. Not everyone thrives in a world where this success is far too often reached at any costs, be it physical or emotional harm towards others.

Since the mid-1830s in India, we have been taught the path to success is linear, narrow, and unidirectional. The path to success points away from the backwards villages of our birth. It inspires ambitions towards bigger opportunities that can only be found in towns. It leads far away from home, towards cities, or even abroad, places with modern conveniences and British cum American, ie. Modern-Western lifestyles.

Often rural students are pressured to become something else. Something other than what they would become if they returned to their village after University. Someone very different than if they continued to live in their village after high school.

This ultimately leaves the villages lacking in a young adult population. Also lacking in the prosperity that once existed before British rule.

Back in the day, education was also based on logic, philosophy, languages, grammar, local cultural arts and most importantly, self-sustainability.

This was when education was locally based. When education was focused not just the mainstream academics (to which we are accustomed today).

The pyramid-based hierarchical society, built under the current mainstream education system, is unhealthy. Almost toxic, it is also ridden with greed, corruption, oppression of the lower castes and economic classes. It fosters within its student population the stressful pressure to succeed, as much as it does the crushing fear of failure.

Originally in India the school system operated on a localized level. Individual villages assessed the needs of the community to determine what should be taught in school. Most often localized curriculums included the production of local handicrafts. This and other hard-skills, making use of the natural resources in the surrounding environment, offer communities self-sustainable livelihoods.

The school system the British introduced was set up to indoctrinate others into their culture or way of living, in which they wanted everyone else to fit.

By passing down to younger generations certain types of knowledge, in order for one to become something, education was set up to guide students down a path leading towards a specialized career. These career paths were meant fulfil certain roles needed to maintain the British rule.

In order for the common people to fall inline, the first thing the smaller wealthier ruling class had to do was eliminate the concepts of self-sustainability. Why? Because self-sustainability previously enabled the villages to maintain themselves as smaller collectives independent of the ruling class. As such, school (as most of us today commonly know it), has been a place of discipline, insuring students learn how to “fit” into particular societal norms.

In order for this indoctrination to work, school has been mostly operated on a system of rewards and punishment:

• Stars or good marks for good behaviour, or correct answers on exams.
• Warnings or punishments for bad behaviour or incorrect answers on exams.
• Public display of these awards and punishments.
• The push for participation and success in sports, academic contests and debates.

All of the above foster an almost cruel sense of competition. Observing any dominant culture, one can see how intense competition can develop extreme levels of pride or ego. Conversely they can also develop disappointment or weak self-confidence.

Teacher as Authority, Students in Obedience:

In most cases in the style of school introduced by the British, the teacher assumes the role of authority figure, standing at the front of the class. The teacher’s responsibility then is to dictate to the students what is important to learn. While the students are expected to memorize and regurgitate the lessons.

In the education system of dominant culture, students are considered successful each time they climb up another rung on the ladder.

The rungs on the ladder to success consist of: passing an exam, passing a grade level, graduating with a particular degree, etc. Students are considered successful when they are able to fit into a particular notch in society, fill a role, start a career or job. Furthermore this style of education was not at all designed to develop students into creative free-thinkers. That would be something the current/modern school system finds dangerous. Too many free thinking minds may become potentially rebellious and revolt against the ruling class of society.

Dominant Culture itself and therefore most school subjects encourage students to look outward for their answers, not inward.

There is little room for exploration of one’s consciousness. No space to ask what it means to be human. In dominant culture schools, few of us learn how to relate to one another with compassion and care. This lack of inter-connectivity perpetuates our inclinations to compete and fight among each other. If we cannot consider the relationships between us, how can we consider working together.

Question-Answer-Guide books (and now open AI apps such as ChatGPT), offer a short cut to receiving the minimum 33% required to pass an exam.

These tools act like a crutch in lieu of active participation in the classroom. They also foster a deep-rooted sense of mediocrity. Students who lean on such tools often lack inspiration to take any initiative to go beyond the status quo.