Why Education is Free in Some Countries but Not Others: A Comparative Analysis

Why is education free in some countries while it is not in others? This question is at the heart of a myriad of socio-economic and philosophical discussions, particularly in the United States, where the concept of free education often seems alien. According to many experts, the structure of society and the priorities of its people play a critical role in such decisions. This article explores the reasons behind the provision of free education in certain countries, the cost implications, and the importance of community and shared expenses.

Cost Allocation of Education

Nothing in society is truly free. As stated by the author, whether it is paid by individuals, through government funding from taxpayers, or through government debt, the cost is always there. The responsibility for education falls on these same sources, and the decision to make it free or not is a collective one that reflects the values and priorities of a society.

Government and Legislative Decisions

In democratic countries, the legislative assembly decides on education policies that reflect the will of the people. In Sweden, for example, education is free up to the master's level, with doctoral students receiving a salary. This system promotes both educational opportunities and economic stability, as exemplified by the author's eldest daughter, who earns a monthly salary of 4,000 euros during her PhD studies.

The Role of Community and Survival

Education is not just about individual achievement; it is also a communal responsibility. When people are taught to be self-centered, they may make poor choices that negatively affect the entire community. Conversely, in societies where selflessness is necessary for survival, education is seen as a communal good. This explains, for instance, why some Scandinavian countries prioritize free education to foster a strong, competitive national identity.

Case Studies: Finland and the United States

Finland: A neighboring country to a hostile power with a harsh environment and small population, Finland has had to make wise and practical decisions to survive and compete externally. The current Finnish president embodies these values, showcasing the country's commitment to diplomacy, strength, and practicality. Free education, in this context, is seen as essential to prepare the nation for external competition, ensuring that every citizen has a fair chance to succeed.

United States: In contrast, the vast and diverse nature of the U.S. allows some individuals to prioritize their personal interests over community well-being. However, this mindset often leads to the neglect of communal responsibilities, such as education, which can have long-term detrimental effects. The lack of prioritization for shared expenses like education can ultimately undermine the nation's potential and stability.

Efficiency and Collective Benefits

Education is most effective when it is shared and utilized by the entire community. Just as a field is best harvested by the entire village, education is most potent when everyone participates. Free education ensures that potential is not wasted, and that all members of society can contribute to their full potential. In countries where education is free, the community benefits from a more educated population, which leads to better decision-making and problem-solving.

Challenges and Solutions

In some parts of Finland, there is a growing trend of self-centered individuals who are more focused on their own interests than the community's well-being. This shift can be destructive, as it leads to a breakdown in social cohesion and diminishes the collective potential of society. To counteract this, small-scale community efforts can be initiated. For example, a neighborhood could make a collective decision to support their children's education by ensuring that every child has access to schooling, even if some cannot afford it on their own.

These local efforts can then be expanded into larger-scale initiatives, such as building and funding schools that cater to the entire community. Through cooperation, wisdom, and planning, such initiatives can lead to a more balanced and equitable society. This requires a shift in the philosophy of thinking from a selfish level to a more community-minded perspective.

The author argues that without wise people working together for the betterment of society, the U.S. risks falling into a state of collapse and self-destruction due to selfish and foolish competition. However, the lessons from countries like Finland highlight that when communities come together and prioritize the collective good, they can achieve much more than they ever could individually.