By: Dr Matevž Tomšič
That the plans of the fourth Janša government would face opposition not only from the left‑wing parliamentary opposition, but also from its allies in the media, civil society, academia, and elsewhere, could have been predicted in advance. It is a rejection of almost all the policies they have announced, regardless of the field in question and regardless of how far‑reaching the proposed changes are.
One of the announcements that attracted a great deal of attention concerns the field of education. The new Minister of Education, Science and Youth, Borut Rončević, already stated during his hearing before the competent parliamentary committee that he firmly supports an ideologically neutral school. Reactions followed, questioning what this even means, whether it is truly necessary to emphasise it, and whether schools are not already ideologically neutral.
At first glance, the idea that a school, regardless of the level of education, should be ideologically neutral seems normal, even self‑evident. Of course, we are referring here to the public education system, the one maintained by all taxpayers. Private schools are different; they may follow a specific value orientation, for example a confessional one. But within public education, ideological indoctrination must not be permissible. This is characteristic of states with autocratic systems, where education functions as an apparatus serving the regime and its officially prescribed ideology. This was the case in communist Yugoslavia, where the main task of the school system was to contribute to the creation of the “new socialist person”. Meanwhile, democratic systems are based on pluralism and respect for diversity. There are indeed certain fundamental values, but these do not arise from any particular ideology, they are part of the heritage of Western civilisation. All intellectual, ideological, and political orientations that fall within this value framework are equally legitimate. Public educational institutions must therefore maintain equal distance from all of them.
However, it seems that the left‑leaning part of Slovenian politics and the public has certain problems with the concept of an ideologically neutral school. The most common criticism we have heard is that emphasising this concept is unnecessary, since Slovenian schools are already ideologically neutral. In other words, the government is promising something that already exists.
But is this really the case? Of course, at the declarative level, the education system does not prefer or promote any specific ideology. Such a thing cannot be found in official documents or in prescribed curricula. Yet ideological indoctrination can occur in other, more subtle ways, no less effectively. It already matters which content is highlighted. Some topics may be placed in the foreground, while others are neglected. This happens, for example, in the teaching of history, where the so‑called National Liberation Struggle (which was in reality a cover for the communist revolution) still receives more attention than the independence of the state – even though the latter is unparalleled in Slovenian history. And it is not only about topics, but also about the people who are promoted. Years ago, one Ljubljana secondary school invited representatives of various professions to speak in civic education classes; in principle, this is fine, but they chose only those who were left‑leaning, and their presentations to students reflected that.
It should also be emphasised that Slovenian education is heavily – if not predominantly – staffed by individuals strongly connected to left‑wing politics. The most obvious example is the “eternal” president of the teachers’ union, Branimir Štrukelj, a radical leftist who once ran on the Levica party list. Recently, union activists were actively collecting signatures against the development law, inside educational institutions. This is certainly not in line with the principles of ideological neutrality. The latter will have to be ensured – in practice.