I think this is a selection effect. Teacher is a profession for which you must be highly educated and not too stupid.Highly educated and clever people can be found both left and right, but right-wing people with those traits usually go to a career where they use their abilities to earn a lot, or at least above average, money. Left-wing people are more inclined to have more idealistic motives (‘ I want to make a difference for others ‘) to have their choice of careers determined.
First you have to state what left and right is in politics.For example, D ‘ 66 is a party that is very popular among teachers. Not so crazy because the party has created education as a spearhead. Yet this party is socio-economically not at all left, rather even center to center-right. For example, they are for the easing of dismissal law and the accelerated increase of the AOW age and the limitation of WW time. Ideologically and on an intangible level, however, you can call this party progressively, or on the left. They are very ambitious in terms of climate, animal rights, medical ethical positions and have a generous asylum policy. Incidentally, in the denominational education, teachers usually also vote as a denominational Christian, CDA, CU, or SGP. So it is not so unilateral if your question initially suggests.
However, in the Netherlands, education is mainly a government task, the left is traditionally for a larger government that regulates more and this is also reflected in the electoral choice of teachers, just as you see from VB officials.However, not all over the world, education is seen as a public task, which means that elsewhere in the world, for example, the United States is more space for private education and companies that specifically focus on the training of people. In private education, you often see more teachers with a right-wing performance-driven institution. It also has to do with the education culture in the Netherlands, which certainly has a links profile in public education. Not for nothing there is a sea culture here, there is a lot of attention for that pupil who has to go from a 4 to a 6. But the pupil who wants to make an 8 a 9 is much less attentive, he or she saves it is often the thought.
If we would like to have more right-wing more performance-oriented teachers in the Netherlands, we will have to change this in the Netherlands.To make private education more attractive. For instance, the government could say that each educational institution receives a certain amount per child for which he or she should provide education. Now, if there is a choice of private education, there is no government subsidy at all. This makes private education only accessible to the happy few. If these institutions were to receive subsidies, they could lower their school money and thus become more accessible to more people. While such a system most likely leads to more investment in education i.e. collective + evt private funds, it also leads to more inequality. It is up to politics and us as a voter to decide what is more important. Personally, I would applaud it if the government would encourage it to also invest more private money in your child. After all, it is an investment in the future and ultimately we will all benefit as a society after my idea.
I know a teacher who votes on PVV, but since the majority of his pupils are of Moroccan and Turkish descent, he says death like he votes on D66 otherwise he gets “sinner”.
We do not know who teachers really vote for.The only thing we know is what the teachers themselves say.
Teachers can SAY they are voting on left-wing parties, otherwise most pupils are very disappointed.Children and teenagers usually think left, which is also very logical. They have more affinity with nature than economics. They do not understand why refugees are not all welcome etc.
From the article:
At the request of the General Education Association, Regio plan conducted a survey among the members of the AOb in the first week of February.
There has been a survey among members of the General Education Association and the survey shows that the majority of respondents vote on the left.
Can we possibly conclude that trade unionists generally vote left, because the non-members and non-respondents do not count in the result?
And can we perhaps conclude that trade unionists are more in need of organised solidarity and collectivity, which are traditionally left-wing themes?
Education is financially dependent on the government, so investing more in education and giving higher wage teachers means more public spending.More public expenditure is a left striving, where the right-wing endeavour is to minimize the public expenditures.
If you are right, then it is not so pleasant to work in an organization that is populated and governed by many outspoken left-wing people.Self-segregation based on political preference therefore presumably plays an ever greater role. In this way, such environments are putting a lot of social pressure on people who are not really interested in politics, which moves them to vote ‘ along ‘. Political parties, like companies, have target groups and some Parties devote significantly more attention to teachers in their propaganda, which can also attract orphaned voters among teachers.
These are reasons for polarization, but why left and not right?
A school is a model for society like many leftist people who see, or would like to see.Most people -at school -are stupid children who need the hard hand of the authorities -at school the teachers -to take their decisions for them. The ideals of right-wing people are increasingly close to this by the decline in Christianity.
Is there anything that left-wing parties do more for education?
It is a myth that people vote in their own interest.Both left and right there are many people who proudly “sacrifice their own interest” by voting on a party that seems to have unfavorable policy for those creators. It is probably more important that teachers believe that links policy is better for society, among other things, through the role that education is given. That belief of teachers is not necessarily much more correct today than in the time that teachers were predominantly Christian.
The meaning of “right” and “left” has changed enormously in recent years.
Nowadays, anyone who has an opinion based on scientific facts is automatically placed in the “links” box and anyone who has an opinion that is not in any way supported by facts is called “right”.
It is therefore a box-deviation from teachers (and journalists) that they are automatically placed in the box “left”.
It is certainly not universal that teachers are left.When I was in school, the most political teacher was an active member of the CDA and was on behalf of that party in the provincial states. And even Mark Rutte is regularly standing in front of the classroom.
But it is undeniable that a certain degree of idealism is needed for teachers. Nowadays, teachers are badly paid for their level of education and the responsibility they carry.Educating the next generation is an essential task in our society, so it’s nice that there are still people who feel called to work, rather than making more money in business more easily.
And that idealism, rather getting paid less and contributing to society, than going for the big money, you generally encounter more often at left than at the right.
Left-wing parties are often more favourable to teachers who mostly live in urban/suburban areas and are more influenced by ideals of progressiveness and liberalism.