The Subordination of Free Will: Schools and Universities are NOT SYNONYMONYM – far from it – of Education.

We want to start this article with a concise and direct statement: we are a product of the system and we tend to do what we were created to do. This is all a trap, a set-up: reality is not made for you to succeed, but for you to experience success “on pre-established terms”.

In order to see the whole picture, you must go all the way to the end and pay attention to every word.

The Establishment of the Prussian Education System and the Influence of Johann Gottlieb Fichte on the Subordination of Free Will

At the heart of the Prussian educational system —which greatly influenced Europe and the whole world, especially in the 19th century— is an ideology deeply rooted in the thought of Johann Gottlieb Fichte. Fichte’s philosophy, more specifically his views on free will and its subordination “to the common good”, formed the basis of a system that was not intended to educate, but to indoctrinate: a system that sought to mould the ideal citizen, not the critically thinking individualist.

Fichte, a philosopher of the German idealist era, argued that the free will of the individual, if unchecked, leads to selfishness and anarchy. In his “Addresses to the German Nation” (1807-1808), he argued that strict, centralised education was the best way to put the individual at the service of the State. According to Fichte, free will was an obstacle to the creation of a morally and culturally homogeneous society.

Fichte concluded that education should aim to destroy free will so that, on leaving school, pupils would be incapable for the rest of their lives of thinking or acting differently from the way they were taught by their teachers.

The Prussian education system took these ideas to heart. The State made it its duty to use education to create an army of loyal and obedient citizens who would follow orders rather than pursue personal ambitions. The aim was clear: to train subjects who would not question the order and authority of the State. Teaching was strict and hierarchical, and focused on discipline and memorisation of facts rather than encouraging critical thinking and individual achievement.

The curricula were designed to support the ideas of the State and to prepare young men for their role as cogs in the Prussian military apparatus. Pupils were inculcated with punctuality, order, and obedience; virtues highly valued in the Prussian military tradition. The school was not so much an educational establishment as an institution for moulding character in the interests of the State.

Unfortunately, the legacy of the Prussian education system, despite its authoritarian traits, has laid the foundation for modern education systems WORLDWIDE.

Many characteristic elements of contemporary education (such as age group structuring, the standardised curriculum, or centralised teacher training) have their origins in this system. The irony is that the foundations that were laid to create conformity and obedience still exist in more or less unchanged form in educational institutions today.

In short, the Prussian education system was known for its structured and disciplined approach and its emphasis on education as a means of advancing the state’s goals. These developments in education came at a time of profound social and political change in Europe —especially during and after the Napoleonic Wars and the subsequent Restoration period. The Prussian education system remained influential until the founding of the German Empire in 1871, and even after.

Leaving history behind for a moment, let us turn to one of the main criticisms of educational freedom (many of which are, indeed, unfounded): when we talk about homeschooling, we do not mean that the child stays at home and has no social contact with anyone. The problem is not the schools, but the rules that govern them and the fact that education is controlled by the State. And even if you like the politician or the education minister of the day, you may one day stop liking them… The fundamental problem is that the State has the monopoly power to determine, influence, and completely control the education of children!

Children have different rates of development, different and unique interests, feelings and individual sensitivity, curiosity… and they ask big questions about life through critical thinking. ALL CHILDREN are special and unique: the worst thing you can do is to try to standardise and blame them when they behave differently than expected.

So, do we want blind obedience or critical thinking? are we still stuck in an outdated tradition or are we redesigning education to form free and responsible people? These questions are crucial if we are to shape the (real) education of the future.

Is it really important to force children to memorise (not learn) everything that is imposed on them in their syllabus? Is it necessary to force them to learn something they often do not need or are not interested in, and to judge their character according to their performance? Would it not be more interesting to form better people, people who are good (both to themselves and to others) and promote goodness, rather than brainless little soldiers?

Social Conditioning and Standardisation: Fichte’s View of Indoctrination

The cornerstones of the Prussian educational system, materialised through Fichte’s philosophical convictions, were the social conditioning and indoctrination. Fichte’s rhetoric was clear and unambiguous: he saw education as an instrument to shape society according to the requirements of the State. Consequently, the Prussian education system of the 19th century became a factory in which hierarchies and social roles were produced.

Fichte outlined this process with statements such as “the true purpose of human existence is the attainment of perfect morality”. Here we can identify the roots of his ideology, according to which the free will of the individual must be subordinated to the moral will of the collective. His vision was to use the educational system to create a generation that would, in a sense, be slaves of the State for their entire lives: unconditionally loyal, without any critical questioning of their own.

The Prussian system sought to standardise and uniformise the individual, and schooling in the 19th century was highly regimented: curricula, examination systems, class timetables, and even the architecture of school buildings followed a standardised (prison-like) pattern. The introduction of grades and promotion systems in the 1820s and the establishment of compulsory education in Prussia in 1819 were milestones on this path. By the end of the 19th century, almost 100% of Prussian children attended primary school. School became the first instance of socialisation, educating children and young people according to the State’s ideology.

This homogenisation through education was demanded by Fichte when he stated that “the new education must indeed draw everything to itself in order to lead all youth through it”. Fichte’s ideas were translated into figures: a uniform educational system with standardised teacher training was established, which was institutionalised in 1834 with the founding of the first Prussian teacher training colleges.

His works contain numerous quotations underpinning his idea of an education designed to subjugate the individual:

• “The only way to educate is not to allow any self-will”.
• “True freedom implies that the individual does not obey himself, but the collective”.
• “What a man must pursue as a true member of the State is not freedom, but insight and the will to do the right thing”.

The Role of Punishment and Discipline: Fichte’s Legacy of Punishment

The matter of punishment for misbehaviour is inextricably linked to the Prussian educational system. Punishment plays a fundamental role in maintaining discipline and obedience.

Discipline in Prussian schools was notoriously strict: corporal punishment was a commonly accepted practice and frequently used to force pupils to obey. The aim was to mould will and character. Punishments varied widely, ranging from corporal punishment to deprivation of privileges… any resemblance to taxation, lockdowns and all that we experience nowadays is no mere coincidence —it is true that in some countries state violence has been left behind, but not in all.

Fichte himself saw discipline as an essential part of education, as reflected in his writings: Fichte wrote that “The first quality which the teacher must inculcate in his pupil is obedience”. In this view, punishment was not seen as a means of correction, but as a tool to generate obedience.

The reports and historical documents from the 19th century show that the Prussian school system was harsh and authoritarian. Teachers had the absolute right to punish their pupils, and school regulations stipulated that disobedience and disregard for the rules were to be severely punished.

In this system, there was little room for individuality or mistakes: both were seen as disturbances of the social and moral order. Consequently, many pupils were afraid of school and teachers, and associated learning with anguish and pain. Severe punishments for misbehaviour created an atmosphere of fear and influenced children’s psychological development.

There are no mistakes, only opportunities to learn. A “quick” way to learn is to see the “mistakes” of others and not repeat them, but mistakes are also relative, as failure depends on one’s goals. Mistakes are often part of the process of development, learning and discovery: the more you penalise failure, the less children will try, the less children will dare, the less children will risk, and the less children will step out of their comfort zone. Growth can only come through mistakes. Even muscles “grow” if they are strained and stressed by lifting weights to failure.

As for indoctrination through education, Fichte stressed the importance of early childhood in the formation of the human mind. In his view, it was necessary to bend the will of the child in the first years of life to make it mouldable and compatible with the social order to which it was intended to be subjected. This shows how deeply rooted the idea of the subordination of the individual to the collective is in the history of education.

In fact, the reality is diametrically opposite: each of us must look after ourselves so that the “collective” improves and prospers, rather than forming an “ideal collective” at the expense of the well-being of each individual. If each of us prospers, the collective prospers.

The Disempowerment of the Family

Prussian educational policy systematically deprived families of their influence on the education of their children. The system, influenced by the ideas of Johann Gottlieb Fichte, was designed in such a way that the State became the main educator of the young. Families had little opportunity to teach or educate their children according to their own ideas, as this was often incompatible with state requirements. Compulsory education, introduced in Prussia in 1819, made school attendance compulsory for all children and thus removed a fundamental part of the autonomy of families.

This mechanism served to combine “duty to work” with “compulsory education”. Parents were forced to send their children to school while they themselves fulfilled the demands of their 8-hour working day. The law of the time provided for severe penalties for truancy: parents who did not send their children to school risked not only social sanctions, but also loss of custody or even imprisonment.

And so, it is with everything: really good ideas should not be imposed. They can only be considered truly good if those who benefit from them support them. No one can decide freely under duress —especially under threat of fines, deprivation of liberty, violence, or even death.

This strategy resulted in nothing but a slow and gradual death aimed to avoid revolutions, civil wars, uprisings, attacks on the government… all to give those in power the time they needed to build a narrative around this authoritarianism that they could sell to the people.

As the law forced parents to work 8 hours a day, it was a “relief” to send children to school. Today we know that working for hours makes no sense (because the better you are, the faster and more efficiently you work) and that the school system is not the best place to learn, because it simply serves the purposes of the government.

Also, remember that education is not a right, and that it is irrelevant what the various constitutions of the world say in this regard —after all, constitutions are still the mandates of people who do not even know you and who are in charge of your life. When we say this, many people are speechless and shake their heads: education is a service, like health care, infrastructure, restaurants, or hairdressers. Every time someone serves you in some way, they are providing you with a SERVICE. When we say that education is not a right, it seems that we do not want children to learn. It is okay to call a spade a spade, because saying education is a right is like saying everyone has the right to drive Porsches and Lamborghinis. Everyone understands the difference. A good education does not have to be expensive, but for many it is a privilege, just like driving a new or top-of-the-range car.

This tale of education being a right is just a narrative so that no one can question the State taking over and indoctrinating children. We hope you now understand…

In fact, most people feel “protected” by the State, and send their children to school with a broad smile and a clear conscience, not knowing what this is really based on.

And we are not telling you all this to be confrontational or to sow discord among the parents who read us: we just want to give you some context and explain the whole story.

–

A testimonial from Juliana, our Brazilian content creator

I myself felt compelled to get the best grades in school (i.e. be a bookworm) so that my family would be proud of me. As a child, I could not understand how other kids did not commit to school and why they refused to do their homework or take notes on everything the teacher wrote on the blackboard. When I came home with a report card full of A’s, I was told that I had done nothing more than I should have, because all I was supposed to do was “studying”.

I grew up thinking that “to have a future” I had to study at university or else I would never be able to live a decent life or have a decent income. For many years (many, many years!) I lived and grew up in this bubble.

I am eternally grateful to Denationalize.me for literally opening my eyes, for teaching me about self-reliance and for helping me to see the world through different eyes: Denationalize.me taught me to think about how to actually solve multiple problems, to add real value and make a difference; rather than explaining how to negotiate a pay rise (which would really be nothing more than a lie, as taxes take more than half of our salary) or how to get that promotion at the end of the year.

That is why I write these words with such conviction: Today it is easier and more accessible than ever to break all paradigms and live the life that belongs to you! There are countless ways to earn money at your fingertips, and you do not need any printed paper with your name on it —call it degrees, diplomas…— to be a great person and succeed in life! All that I spent YEARS memorising and all the effort I put into studying was in vain and, honestly, I have never had so much desire to study, so much motivation and so much energy as I do today, already after having handed in my thesis!

I have nothing against people who want to study (assuming they do it out of their own conviction and not because of State brainwashing): if you think that is the right path for you, go ahead. I really wish you the best! I just want to show you that studies are not the only (safe) path to success… and in fact, depending on your intentions and goals, it can be a very bad choice!

–

Fichte’s influence on this evolutionary process of education should not be underestimated. His view of education as a means of moulding the minds of the people and promoting the interests of the Sate fits perfectly with the idea that the State should have the upper hand in the education of children. He argued that it was wonderful that “Both work and school should be compulsory”, because this ensured that children would attend school, as parents had to go to work and do their duty towards the State (as well as paying taxes, of course!).

This paradigm shift had a profound impact on family structure and social order. It created a situation where children spent most of the day in a state-controlled environment, which facilitated state indoctrination and socialisation. Schooling became the main instrument of socialisation, while the role of the family was relegated to a very secondary position. The Prussian system not only institutionalised education, but also a social order in which the family was marginalised.

The conclusions of this article are a good reminder of how an excessive concentration of power over education in the hands of the State leads to a weakening of the family sphere of influence and a restriction of individual freedoms.

Some argue that the rise of National Socialism in Germany was facilitated by a culturally anchored obedience to the State among the German people. This perspective suggests that the obedience and conformity present in German society, presumably a product of the Prussian educational system and social norms, paved the way for the Nazi totalitarian regime and allowed it to flourish. Unfortunately, German cultural history shows a tendency to worship strong leadership figures (the so-called “Führer cult”).

And, of course, the other nations copied the Prussian model, which made the education system what it is today.

In many parts of Germany, the church played a traditional role, teaching the faithful obedience and submission to a higher power. This religious component may also have contributed to the mentality that one should not question authority, which makes it easier to integrate into a totalitarian system.

Religion is based on the premise that “someone up there is watching over us” and that “things happen because someone has a plan for us”, all of which takes away the individual’s responsibility for their actions. It takes away the initiative to do what we want and, if we screw up, to learn from our mistakes and improve. Instead of accepting and learning, the believer seeks forgiveness, just as people, companies, and banks seek forgiveness for their mistakes and always ask the state for help —for example, when their prayers work and the State prints money to act as a “saviour“. You are the only person who can save you from yourself, the only one responsible for the life you have.

Religion and State are based on the same principles: you have never seen “God”, nor the State, for they have no “form”. To some extent, both are the same and play on people’s faith, making them believe that there is something or someone who cares about all of us beyond ourselves.

Critical Reflection and Appeal to Today’s Parents

The realisation that the current education system is based on a foundation originally conceived to educate subjects rather than free citizens is disturbing, to say the least. Parents should ask themselves whether they really want to support a system that forces their children to conform and prevents them from becoming critical and creative thinkers.

Yes, it is one thing to question a system and another to change it, but without initial questioning, change can never come. Children have no prejudices or beliefs: they are fearless, naturally curious, uninhibited, and disrespectful.

They literally have the energy to change the world, which is precisely why they always want to be superheroes, doctors who save lives, policemen who protect people, veterinarians who care for animals, and other professions always focused on achieving unprecedented greatness.

Why is it that all that magic and ambition is always lost in the end?

We must abandon the idea that schools are the only ones capable of preparing children for “real life” and start believing that they themselves can shape “real life” as informed, engaged, and free people. If they are interested in something, no one will have to force them to get up early or do their homework: they will trust themselves and achieve more than you imagine.

This article is not only intended to make you think, but also to provoke a crucial debate about the role of education. It is about respecting the dignity and freedom of every child, just as we want our natural rights to liberty and private property to be respected.

The education we give our children will be the foundation of the future. You cannot have a good future with an outdated foundation that is more than 200 years old and based on pure social injustice.

Learning for Life or Learning to Pass an Exam?

In a system so focused on exams and grades, failure results in a situation where learning is reduced to passing exams rather than understanding concepts and developing skills that matter in life outside school. Students may feel compelled to learn to be evaluated positively rather than to acquire real knowledge or develop their personally.

Back to the question: what is the purpose of education?

Johann Gottlieb Fichte himself laid the foundations of an educational system centred on indoctrination, and contemporary society is now faced with the task of challenging these rotten foundations. The aim of education should be to prepare young people for a full and self-determined life in which they can develop their talents. It is about fostering skills such as critical thinking, creativity, and self-reflection; rather than merely the ability to memorise and reproduce information.

Nowadays, especially thanks to the internet, we do not really need to retain everything we were forced to learn during our school years. Who needs to know the mass of the sun? Why should I learn to calculate the duration of a free fall on Saturn without considering the friction and the mass of the object? What is the point of learning all the cycles of plants or being able to calculate the integral of a fifth order mathematical equation without a calculator, to know the entire periodic table of the elements by heart or to be able to name all the components of a mitochondrion?

We learn not only to seek information, but also to ask the right questions and to know where and how to find the answers we need (as appropriate and according to the needs of the context). It is about developing the judgement to be able to distinguish between truth and nonsense. We learn to take care of ourselves, to maintain independence, to cope with adversity, and to remain calm. It is important to communicate clearly and expressively, to eat healthy, to take care of our body and mind, to control our breathing, to manage money judiciously, and not to punish ourselves emotionally for making mistakes. All these skills help us to be better people.

…And this is not a general rule, but just another opinion, and just as each person has their own, each of us should be able to live the life that belongs to us as we really want to.