Why University Should Be Free

This isn't actually a blog post on the university fee changes, but more of an ideological argument as to why there should not be any fees for higher education whatsoever. To me, a human being has certain 'rights', and indeed most of these are covered under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Under Article 26 it is defined that each human being should have a 'right to education'.

Now obviously the main argument here is where does the pin fall? You wouldn't find many people disagreeing that free schooling should be provided to anyone up to 16, or 18, but there is a lot more debate over university level qualifications. To me, these are still a right. Just because not every human being will get the grades to go to university, or indeed have the desire to follow that path, does not mean that an entirely level playing field for every citizen to get to university should not be provided. Just because you choose not to exercise your right to go to university does not remove the fact that you had the right in the first place. And what we have to recognise is that tax based systems do not actually pay for certainties; they pay for opportunities.

Just because you choose not to exercise your right to remain silent, does not mean that the right did not exist. Just because you choose not to exercise your right to use the NHS does not mean that you should be exempt from paying towards it. Law is all about what citizens are offered, not what they are guaranteed. Because really you cannot force an individual to do anything, so all that is ultimately possible is to provide them the opportunities and the support to exercise their right when the chance so arises.

For me personally every citizen has certain definable 'rights' which should be free, because if you have to pay towards them you don't have 'rights'; you have a shopping list. One must accept that under a capitalist society inequality is unbreachable, unemployment is infallible and poverty is unconquerable. So even if university fees were just a few hundred pounds it will still be clearly disadvantaging poorer students unequally. Because when you're talking about money, £100 in the hands of a poor family is worth so much more than in a rich one; this goes without saying. Essentially it's the same idea as inflation. That £100 has a far inflated value in the poorer family in the same way that the figure would have been worth so much more in the 1980s compared to now.

Obviously 'free' is a very loose term to use, considering nothing is really 'free'. These rights would be paid for by taxes, so the money is still going in. But when something is paid for by taxes it just means that every citizen is 'buying in' to these rights. So maybe either way it's like a shopping list, but when every citizen is obligated to contribute towards the maintaining and support of an opportunity such as university accessibility it becomes a right. It becomes a right because they've already paid for it. It becomes a right because they've all got an equal footing in it. A 'right' is absolute, and thus absolutely affecting equally. A right is a concept, and Plato would tell us that concepts do not waver. They do not change. And for something to be constant, it must provide equality; you can't give someone slightly less of a right than another because a right is an absolute term. It reminds me of an argument I was having on 'justice' earlier in the week. One cannot have 'tough justice', messrs Clegg, Miliband and Cameron, because 'justice' is absolute. Justice does not waver and one cannot order justice in larger portions. Justice only comes in one portion, because it's a concept just like a right. So for these concepts to follow their very meaning, and definition, it's necessary that these portions are offered entirely equally.

Now, I'm sure there are those of you who would say that every citizen already does pay towards university fees, which is true. But when a price is put on a right at its access point it is not a right. True equality of opportunity can never be guaranteed unless there is equality at the access point, because people will always look at a figure and be deterred. Every student when looking at the fees for university goes 'wow, that's a lot'. And even though they understand just how these are paid for over time, it's still a deterring factor just from the emotive dynamism that is created initially. It doesn't feel like a right when one knows that one is paying £3,300 a year towards it and the remnances of this 'right' will be lingering alongside them under the alias of 'debt' until they are in their 30s. A debt is a reminder that one owes something. That from choosing to exercise the right to higher education, they are indebted to society. It's a punishment. It's a constant reminder almost to tell them off; to say they were wrong to go to university. And sure the repayment schemes are very generous, but if it's still £7 a week off your wages that's still society slapping you in the face and taking your money to remind you of your terrible past. That terrible past where you decided to aim for something; to educate yourself. You selfish motherfucker.

And that's the stench of capitalism. But I believe free university fees would work within this towards a far more equal society. A right is free and it is unwavering. It is equal and constant. When one has to pay towards rights at their point of access, then the original right is being undermined: the right to life. Because you're not being given a right to live; you're being given a loan to live - to be born and to pay towards what should be offered equally to begin with. And that's not a right; that's a debt. Your entire life is lived to be repaid; and your breaths a further bite into the overdraft.

Yes, that recurring anti-capitalist sentiment to close off.