From Paradoxes in Education to Public Sector Fatalism

I recently posted a response to Kirschers post about the paradox of progressivism in education (https://www.kirschnered.nl/2025/04/15/the-paradox-of-progressivism-in-education/) - this post is a further reflection.

(My previous post:

https://www.nerdreflections.blog/p/when-traditional-is-the-new-progressive

Reading Paul Kirschner’s provocative article on the paradoxes of progressive education sparked a broader reflection for me. The critique—valid in many aspects—highlights how progressive ideals in education often fail, unintentionally widening achievement gaps instead of closing them. But what really struck me was something deeper, something lurking beneath this criticism: the creeping fatalism about public services themselves.

Public services like education, justice, and healthcare often seem trapped in monopolistic, bureaucratic systems that struggle to deliver effectively, consistently drawing criticism. This criticism is justified, of course. We all see the inefficiencies, the inequities, and the frustrations inherent in these systems. But here's where things take an unsettling turn.

Instead of inspiring us to innovate or reform, this relentless critique sometimes leads us down a path of fatalism. The narrative subtly shifts from "this isn't working, let's fix it" to "this isn't working, let's abandon the whole project and go back to the 'good old days'." This nostalgic regression isn't just about preferring simpler methods—it's about surrendering to the belief that complexity, growth, and innovation themselves are fundamentally flawed or even impossible.

Degrowth movements, regressive educational practices, and idealizing traditional systems are often reactions against the perceived failures of progress. But these reactions risk throwing out the baby with the bathwater. When we adopt an overly romantic view of past methods, we overlook why those methods evolved in the first place. We forget that traditional education, traditional justice systems, and traditional governance structures also had profound flaws—often more hidden but no less damaging.

The solution to struggling public services isn't to regress into idealized past models. It's to courageously face their complexities head-on. That means embracing reform, integrating smart technology thoughtfully, and using proven evidence-based practices to improve rather than retreat.

Moreover, we should actively champion entrepreneurship as the dynamic counterpart to bureaucratic public services. Yes, the private sector can also be bureaucratic, yet it typically manages to overcome such obstacles more effectively, driving forward innovation, efficiency, and tangible results. Private enterprise isn't immune from criticism—but crucially, it consistently delivers. Public servants often criticize the private sector precisely because it succeeds where public bureaucracy falters, reflecting a defensive reaction rooted more in envy than genuine critique.

Entrepreneurship represents the spirit of proactive change, creativity, and resilience. Embracing this spirit within public services could foster a culture of constructive innovation rather than defeatist fatalism.

Criticism is necessary, but fatalism isn't inevitable. Let's choose to move forward, innovatively addressing complexities and challenges by combining the best of entrepreneurial dynamism with thoughtful public service reforms, rather than succumbing to the illusionary comfort of a bygone era.