01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13

Central High School At the age of twelve, Chomsky moved from the Oak Lane Country Day School to Central High School, also in Philadelphia. There, Chomsky became aware for the first time that he was a good student because he began to receive high grades. He was shocked to discover the emphasis that was placed upon this form of academic success. The curriculum, the hierarchies, and the system of values that prevailed at Central High, a generally well-regarded academic public school, literally compelled him to block his memories of the time he spent there, whereas his recollections of the freedom and creativity that he had experienced at Oak Lane lingered on: "If I think back about my experience, there's a dark spot there. That's what schooling generally is, I suppose. It's a period of regimentation and control, part of which involves direct indoctrination, providing a system of false beliefs." This "indoctrination" functions, presumably, by undermining natural impulses inherent in us all. When unfettered, these impulses prompt us to explore in new and unexpected ways. Also, playing off systems of "prestige and value," this process of indoctrination reinforces an individual student's desire to beat other students, a dynamic that Chomsky sees at work in most educational institutions. The pedagogical practices of Central High were, for Chomsky, "the manner and style of preventing and blocking independent and creative thinking and imposing hierarchies and competitiveness and the need to excel, not in the sense of doing as well as you can, but doing better than the next person" (Chomsky Reader 6). The shock Chomsky felt upon entering the world of high school was translated into the contention that society generally educates its constituents with the aim of meeting or furthering the needs of the ruling class. Although he is convinced that all schools could be run like the Deweyite Oak Lane, he does not think "that any society based on authoritarian hierarchic institutions would tolerate such a school system for very long. . .. [I] might be tolerated for the elite, because they would have to learn how to think and create and so on, but not for the mass of the population" (Chomsky Reader 6).

Documents on the decision to use the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Chomsky was, nevertheless, active at Central High. He belonged to a number of clubs and was well liked by his peers, but his interests were not those of the majority of students. He recalls, for example, that when he was in high school, he was "all excited, passionate, about the high school football team" (qtd. in Haley and Lunsford 7). But at some point during his high-school years, he had a revelation about the all-important high-school sporting events, and about those who became involved in them: "I remember very well in high school suddenly asking myself this kind of funny question: Why am I cheering for my high school football team? I don't know any of those people. They don't know me. I don't care about them. I hate the high school. Why am I cheering for the high school football team? Well that is the kind of thing you just do, you are trained to do. It is ingrained. And it carries over to jingoism and subordination and so on" ("Creation"). The notion of cheering for the right team is one that generally unnerves Chomsky, and even at this early point in his life he was not afraid of going it alone. Another example. The Americans dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and then on Nagasaki when Chomsky, a teenager, was attending summer camp. He did not respond to the call of patriotism and celebrate the actions that would mark the end of World War II. He could not identify with the jubilant reactions of those around him, and was unable to find anyone with whom he could share his thoughts, although there were, of course, groups and individuals holding similar views. Even today, historians continue to laud the American initiative, justifying it by suggesting that one massive slaughter of civilians may have averted another. This kind of reasoning, which demands that one support the winning side no matter what measures it decides are necessary, is derided and condemned by Chomsky.