Grassroots conservatism and participatory politics: mobilisations against the ‘perils of progressivism’ in Australian schools. 

Conference Abstract: ISA

Helen Proctor, Susan Goodwin, Jessica Gerrard

This paper provides an historically grounded analysis of mobilisations of conservative grassroots groups that aim to challenge ‘progressive’ reforms in education and schooling in Australia. Based in a large empirical study of community organising for education reform in the 1970s and 1980s, we track the emergence and persistence of conservative groups formed to counter the so-called perils of progressivism: migrant rights, Indigenous rights, feminism, gay liberation and the emergence of ‘progressive’ school subjects.   

The 1970s and 80s was a significant period of community ferment surrounding education across the globe, and was also a time when participatory politics, as an idea (and practice) took particular hold and shape. Groups seeking class, race, or gender justice, for example, were often concerned both with remaking education systems and recasting democratic participation. Our paper describes the conservative actors and groups that cohabited with progressives in this space: the religious conservatives, morals crusaders, censorship advocates, anti-feminist groups as well as the reactionary educationalists. We found that the tactics, rationales, and forms of sociality of these groups were often concomitant with those of progressive and radical groups, despite their ideological basis running against  democratic goals or sentiments.   

The paper argues that the existence of ‘participatory’ conservative politics complicates the notion of ‘participatory politics’ in liberal democracies such as Australia. While in the 2000s, calls for more citizen engagement and participation in policy processes continue to be championed as ways to interrupt anti-democratic, anti-diversity, neo-conservative and colonial interventions into education, tensions within notions and practices of participatory politics reveal deep fissures in the liberal democratic imaginary of ‘participation’ itself.  We conclude by suggesting an alternative conceptualisation of participatory politics that extends work on ‘publics’ may assist in understandings of contemporary ‘populist’ activisms as well as their resistances.