A recent worldwide survey claims teenagers in the Third World are up to six times happier than those in the developed world.
Now, it is one thing to accept that wealth cannot buy happiness. But this seems to suggest that it actually leads to misery.
But I suspect the real issue here is not wealth at all. It is education.
Do-gooders in the West protest a great deal the use of “child labour” in the undeveloped world. After all, these kids should be in school, right?
Leaving aside the obvious problem that there are no schools to go to, though, who really thinks school is more fun or fulfilling than work? And did they have the same teachers I did?
Not usually. And, perhaps more to the point, it pays far worse. Teenagers in the Third World are already adults, in control of their own lives, and making their own decisions. That feels pretty good. Teenagers in the First World, full of the vitality of youth, are stuck in endless classes, required to obey teachers’ arbitrary commands, almost always taught things that, even when true or somewhat interesting, will be of little use to them in their later lives. How many jobs really require calculus or fluency in French?
This, of course, would be even truer in the Third World, where the only job on offer is usually agricultural labour.
We enlightened first-worlders nevertheless force our young through years of appalling ennui, poverty, and external control. They are fully equipped for it, physically and intellectually, but we will not let them take control of their own lives, marry, and have children. We will not let them earn a living, or do as they wish with their days. Imagine doing this to any distinct segment of the adult population, and the proper term for it would be “slavery.”
And we have the gall to condemn the Third World for not following suit? At the same time, insisting with perfect inconsistency that they must make their women work outside the home, but must not permit their children to do so.
Those from the First World who go off to teach in the Third are almost always struck by the same thought: outside the West, there seems to be no such phenomenon as “adolescence.” People just seem to go one day from childhood to adulthood.
Those who well remember adolescence will recognize this as a good thing.
Let’s send the little beggars down the mines where they belong.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I realize that this is meant to be somewhat ironic, of course, but, I had to comment that, being of French-Canadian background, and speaking both languages fluently, I CAN see the advantages of speaking more than one language. It does open up opportunities, although, of course, in English-Canada, you can get by without it. But you're still missing out. I also speak Spanish, and that's not something I'd give up. Most people will never have to speak Spanish in Canada, but I have been to Paraguay, and certainly, knowing the language enabled me to get to know the culture much beter than if I had never bothered to learn it. Oh, and by the way, there ARE teenagers in Paraguay, and some of them DO get to go to school (and even university) and have an education. And there is that "in between" period, they don't just suddenly become an adult, nor do they get married at 14 or 16. (Not the majority anyway) But I have to agree with your main message, that the way children are being educated is not necessarily the best way. For one, children often have no responsibility in the home (chores, caring for younger siblings, etc) and do not work. I agree that the more responsibility a young person is given, the more mature he will be. I'm all for education, but I agree that a little outside work wouldn't hurt. And chores as well. You live in the house, you take care of it too. I'll have to see, my oldest is only 12 and a half. Already he seems to be turning into a very responsible person. I might not send him down the mine shaft quite yet,... but I'm hoping for a not-so-bad "adolescence".
My sympathies for the youth of Paraguay.
Post a Comment