The federal cutback has created a vacuum in provision for illiterate adults in Canada that cannot be easily or soon filled. In a way, the situation is in danger of reverting back to the pre-1960 period, when there was little attention to, or action on, the problem. However, in another sense, the situation is even more problematic in 1982 than it was then. In what was a buoyant climate of a growing economy in the early 1960's, the proposals for government action on the part of architects and early adherents of the newly emerging liberal perspective went relatively unchallenged. However, today, after two decades of controversial experience with liberal anti-poverty programs and unemployment strategies, and in the midst of an economic recession, there is increasingly sophisticated and effective opposition to them. Given this situation, it is not certain that an effective basis for public action on illiteracy can be reestablished, or if it can, what form this might take.

Alternative Perspectives

In this atmosphere of crisis and contention, two alternative perspectives on illiteracy have emerged to challenge the still dominant, but faltering liberal perspective, both of which represent potential new bases for public policy regarding the problem. Both perspectives, the conservative and the critical, implicitly reject the principal theoretical assumption of the liberal perspective, i.e. that illiteracy or lack of basic education is one of the primary causes of poverty, and draw their own conclusions about the meaning and significance of illiteracy and the proper means of responding to it.

The more influential of the two is the conservative perspective, which embodies the themes of neo-conservative thought and possesses a strong affinity to laissez-faire doctrines of the 19th century.16 Like those who subscribe to the liberal perspective, adherents of the conservative perspective are committed to stabilizing and preserving the institutions of capitalist society. As we have seen, liberals believe that this goal often requires governments to intervene to ameliorate the negative social consequences of what are seen as malfunctions in the economy, particularly poverty. However, conservatives reject any attempts by government to redistribute social and economic opportunity. In their view, the expenditure of government funds for such programs hinders the attainment of a goal that is more important than social equality--the maintenance of an optimum climate for private initiative and economic growth. As well, an influential current of conservative, thought even rejects the feasibility of increased social equality, arguing that a more fundamental cause of poverty than illiteracy is to be found in what are seen as irremediable deficiencies in ability, intelligence and motivation on the part of members of certain races, social classes, etc. 17 In general, while more moderate conservatives favour either scaling down or postponing government expenditures for programs like literacy education until the current economic crisis is resolved, more doctrinaire conservatives believe that they are best handled entirely through private means (e.g. through charity or volunteer efforts).18 The conservative perspective underlies much of the current cutback mentality on the part of political elites in Canada.

The other challenger of the liberal perspective is the critical perspective, which approaches the question of adult illiteracy from socialist and Marxist assumptions. The term "critical" is used in recognition of the seminal contribution of Third World literacy