Education, Not Indoctrination
Unwilling enslavement by humongous student loans must not be a part of the right to get educated, especially if the goal of a higher, tertiary, education is to prepare a student to become a very sophisticated and constructive participant of a particular society, and not only another preacher of dogma through indoctrination.
The real problem arises when a student is done with his/her education, and afterward there is no intelligent way to repay these loans utilizing the knowledge and tools that one got enriched and trained through his/her education to use it later in his/her life. In this case the most serious problem arise in the field of a higher, tertiary, education because this is the one that is actually the most expensive.
What is the purpose of the higher education such as the education in the field of Visual Art?
What is the role of the academically educated visual artist?
Why students, during their undergraduate and graduate education, are encouraged to think that the goal of their education is also to challenge the ills of the systems to which they belong, when such acts will be severely punished as soon as one dares to do so, and further more, such an individual will be suddenly left on its own?

If a student is encouraged to challenge the ills of a system, and we know that dogma and indoctrination are the very serious ills of any system, then challenging indoctrination and dogma in within and around the system of education, itself, is a very important task to be done.
Therefore, I ask why the individual who is following those standards he/she had been exposed to through his/her higher education, i.e., "we should always challenge ills of our system,” is suddenly left on its own?
Those who are encouraging students to challenge the ills of the society in which the very same students live, and afterward leave them aside, on their own to suffer under the consequence of his/her actions, are engaged in the worst type of Hypocrisy and Doublespeak “ ... Doublespeak is language that deliberately disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words. ...”

Also, setting up values of a system on unrealistic footings represent the utter failure of the those who are building values of such a system, and those who support it by their dogmas intentionally and or unintentionally represents a total failure of the real or the unreal values upon which one wants to build the system that as such creates these ills I am talking about.

The worst thing in all of this is that the one who dare to challenge the true ills and not only those ills that are allowed by the dogma of a society is punished by the very sophisticated coercive system, in the case of the free market capitalism in the US, i.e., those who went though higher education are punished and controlled by the mechanism of the "financial aid," - repayment of the student loans. If one dares to complain about unfair nature of such a coersive tool, one is faced with accusations, “you took it, you pay it,” totally ignoring the fact that world “of taking something” is not based only on the action of taking it, but it is also closely interwoven with the whole historical set of social-economical interaction that follow all the way up to the moment of taking a loan. In my opinion, historical set of social-economical interaction plays more important role then a mere act of taking it. But we do not question it, for it is a part of a dogma that is engrained into our “common sense” through all different variety of indoctrinations that are in play around us, and we are taking them for granted. So here we see there is no need for the prison, the system of student loans is quite good tool for coercion.
Now let me explain how this mechanism of "financial aid" is working.
If one is engaged in challenging the ills and dogmas of a society because “challenging the ills and dogmas of a society” was actually the part of his educational-intellectual training, i.e., how to recognize those social anomalies and address them in a most successful way, and at the same time, one does have individual source of the income that doesn't require him/her to depend of the system of "financial aid" that is provided by the system, then one is safe. But one can also ask why is the other one safe if he/she posses the financial independence from the system of "financial aid?"

Those, who are forced to take loans are exactly the ones who doesn't have, to begin with, an independent of the mechanisms of the system (the system of "financial aid" is exactly part of the overall state system) source of income that can be used to cover the expenses of the education. So what does it mean? It means that only those who have already independent income, which is off the system he/she is engaged with, wealthy ones, are allowed to critically engage with the ills of the system that otherwise is exactly the system who provides the financial assistance to those who doesn't have financial means to pay for an education.
We really have to be extremely naive, up to the point of stupidity to believe that the system that financing a student, will allow the student to be critically engaged with itself. Yes it will allow it in within the border of permissive parameters what is perceived through its dogma as a good thing to do, but anything beyond it , will be punished.
While the wealthy students, and or individuals can do so without a serious fear of the system, for then they do not need to depend on the structural mechanism of the system that provides, as well, means for survival. Anyone else who dares to challenge any part of the system, i.e., the one that also provides financing education, system of financial aid, will lose his/her access to tools necessary for its existential need, well payed jobs and though this action will be forced not to engage in any serious critical discourse with the system in order to get allowed to have access to the tools necessary for providing oneself existential need and or paying off the financial debt acquired during education.

What is the connection of tool that provides oneself existential need to the tool for the providing the means for financing education.

After the education is over, a former student is suddenly faced with the obligation to start paying the student loans. In order for one to start paying loans, he/she has to get a steady, decently paid job that will provide him/her means to pay the loans, but this job also has to provide enough income so that the student can use it for providing oneself existential needs, and I am still not mentioning here, financial need for ones professional engagement in the area of ones education
We cannot play the game of free market of capitalism all the way up to this moment, and suddenly stop.
Education is a product as any other, it is only that we, or rather the system, thought its institutions of higher education is creating dogma where education is something more than just a mere product of a capitalist free market exchange of goods, this for that. But than if we want to define it with some other terms, as being something else than this simple exchange, this for that, why do we have to pay such a huge amount of money for our education, to begin with. How one can get enrolled in classes in schools, when in order to get enrolled, if accepted, one has to be able to pay for these classes, and under what circumstance one, who is considered poor – doesn't have income-wealth, or enough of it to pay for those classes, in the first place, will be able to pay for those classes. The only way one can do this, is to ask the system to provide him/her means for paying for those classes. And this system is called student private and or governmental loans. Now here we can see this hideous coercive mechanism in action.
Now, here is an example one (1), a student has to have a source of income that can pay him his obligation toward a school loan provider. What if this source of income is barely enough to provide only for the expense of the costs of the loans, but the costs for life expensive cannot be met, for all income was spent to cover the school loan expense. So it means that a student must find an additional resource of income, that will be used to cover living expense. Here, we can not just say OK, find another job and there you are. What we do not ask, and I find it to be a very important question, is what is happening with students product, his education, for which he paid by borrowing money, known as the student loans.
We cannot play the game of free market of capitalism all the way up to this moment, and suddenly stop.
As the story of free market capitalism doesn't conver teh education, regardless the facts that pricing for higher education goes up to hundred of thousands of dollars.
Therefore the education is a product as any other. It is only that we, or rather the system, through its institutions of higher education is creating dogma where education is something more than just a mere product of a capitalist free market exchange of goods, this for that. But than if we want to define it with some other terms, as being something else than this simple exchange, this for that, why do we have to pay such a huge amount of money for our education, to begin with.
So there it is this paradox where one asks the system to get provided with the means that will help him/her allow to get educated. Once one start getting educated, and during this process one start utilizing those sophisticated mechanisms acquired through knowledge in such a manner that there is no other way, if one is to utilize them in a proper mode, than to start to question and through very action of it, start debunking this system of financing education.

Now let me ask a question, what one can expect he/she will go through if he/she find it to be of a very serious importance to address this system of funding of education which he/she has debunked through the education of his/her, regardless the fact that exactly this system provided him/her means to get educated. It seems to me that the general system, through its parts, system of education, ( providing the means for education to those in need - financial aid is also the part of this system of education ), expect the one who get educated to actually practice indoctrination, rather than education. If one practice indoctrination, than that one is practicing a dogma, and dogma is just another tool to create environment where the general system of relationship in a society is never questioned. Otherwise, there is this kind of paradox. And I can say it through my personal experience that system does not allow in any, and I am saying it, by any mean any serious discourse that truly debunk its ills. But what the system is encouraging indirectly, at first, but if it doesn't work then directly, is indoctrination that appears to be education.

Here we are getting to the beginning lines of this writing where I argue against professing the ideas of what is to be the role of a student engaged in a higher, tertiary, education, for I see that these professing are based on unrealistic values rather than what one can see that is taking place in our everyday reality.

Unfortunately many things play role and I just do not have enough time in here to discuss this matter in a very detailed and intelligent manner, for I have to get engaged in other physical and or intellectual activity that will provide me means of survival. But this activity as such will not provide me a space needed enough to address intelligently the subject of matter I am discussing here.