INSTRUCTIONAL “MYTHS”

In this blog, I usually address content issues in the curricular field of civics. I find from time to time that content issues border on instructional concerns. That's the case with this posting. We have the President to thank for that. President Barack Obama gave civics teachers a good suggestion for a set of lessons during his speech this past Wednesday on the expanding gap in income and wealth distribution between the rich and the not so rich. In his speech, he identified what he called three myths regarding this issue. Let me paraphrase: one, low income is a problem of minority populations such as African-Americans, Hispanics, or some other ethnic groups; two, policies that are aimed at securing equality in income or wealth are detrimental to economic growth; and three, efforts by government to ameliorate or solve lower income or wealth rates do not accomplish their aims and, therefore, are not useful. What civics or other social studies teachers can do is look at these claimed myths as hypotheses and have students test them to see whether these claims are true or whether they are, in fact, myths.

The first of these “myths” seems fairly easy to test. One can readily gather demographic information that identifies those portions of the population that earn near or below poverty rates and then see what percentage of those people are non-Hispanic whites, blacks, Latinos/as, Asians, or any other nationality or ethnic grouping the teacher would want to identify for the lesson. For example, CBS news reports that “[f]our out of 5 U. S. adults struggle with joblessness, near-poverty or reliance on welfare for at least parts of their lives, a sign of deteriorating economic security and an elusive American dream.”¹ While non-whites are becoming a majority in the population, one can mathematically determine that if the four out of 5 figure is correct, many of those who make up disadvantaged segments of the population are non-Hispanic whites. As a matter of fact, survey results show that “[p]essimism among that racial group [non-Hispanic whites] about their families' economic futures has climbed to the highest point since at least 1987. In the most recent AP-GfK poll, 63 percent of whites called the economy 'poor.'"² This type of information is readily available from what are considered objective sources. US Census and IRS information sources can be highly helpful.

In terms of the second “myth,” policy aimed at promoting equality counteracts economic growth, one can view historical efforts historians consider serious efforts at promoting equality. I would include in that list the Progressive efforts of the early twentieth century, the New Deal initiative of the 1930s, and the War on Poverty/Great Society programs of the 1960s. One can see what the resultant economic indicators show governmental efforts had on income and wealth distribution as well as the overall economy. One can also look at efforts to undo those “progressive” initiatives such as during the 1920s during the administrations of Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover and of that of Ronald Reagan's administration and see what resulted from those efforts. Did income and wealth distribution gaps increase, decrease, or stay the same? I believe the most telling statistic that gives a quick view on how evenly distributed income is is the median wage; that is, the wage level at which half of the incomes of households fall below that mark and half fall above that mark. If the median wage increases during a segment of time when the GDP is growing, one can say that the economy is growing and that that growth is somewhat more evenly distributed than is the case if the median wage were going down. Another telling statistic is the percentage of the population living below the poverty rate. Of course, if the poverty rate is going up, one can say, unless there is a drastic lowering of GDP, that the lower classes are not benefiting from economic growth. A more sophisticated study can trace income levels of the five quintile³ groups – the division of the workforce according to twenty percent groupings of the population from the lowest income earning group to the highest – over time. These income levels or poverty rates can be matched to prevailing economic policies, particularly those that are aimed at shrinking the distribution gap. A warning needs to be stated: this type of analysis can be misleading in that it is difficult to determine when policies take effect and have any meaningful influence on economic conditions. But what one can easily determine is whether policies that are aimed at equality have a meaningful, negative effect on economic growth. Does one see, for example, a drastic downturn in the GDP or in the median income in the years during and immediately after the onset of the Great Society programs? Students can do such calculations.

Closely related to myth number two is myth number three. To study this hypothesis, that government cannot help conditions of inequality, a teacher can have students do case studies of particular government programs that were designed to ease or solve some condition of inequality. For example, did Medicare solve the problem of the elderly not being able to afford healthcare? Or, does raising the minimum wage assist lower income people in securing living wage employment? In this type of instruction, the teacher should take care as to how he or she poses the question to be studied. So, in the case of the minimum wage issue, asking whether raising it results in higher income, the question misses an important element in the debate over the minimum wage. Many argue that raising the minimum wage will result in fewer jobs since employers will cut back on this factor of production due to its higher cost. By asking about the policy change in terms of securing employment, as I suggest above, the number of jobs employers are willing to offer is taken into account. Well-stated questions can have students test how effective government programs can be.

These three “myths” or hypotheses reflect important issues. The American people usually indicate that their most important issue at any given time is the economy, at least according to their responses on surveys. As such, politicians of all stripes manipulate their language to advance their economically related positions in order to make what they say more amenable to interested voters. I heard a politician today say that the minimum wage should not be raised because this would discourage businesses to hire teenagers, even though vast majority of the jobs in question are held by people 20 years and older. This type of manipulation can be combated by students doing the type of studies I reviewed above. And civics teachers, if they choose to take advantage of the recent help provided by the President, should offer, if only under their breath, a “thanks” to – what should we call him? – Instructor-in-Chief.

1See http://www.cbsnews.com/news/80-percent-of-us-adults-face-near-poverty-unemployment-survey-finds/ .

2Ibid.

3According to the Free Dictionary, “[s]tatistics the portion of a frequency distribution containing one fifth of the total sample.”

“CONSTITUTIVE CONCEPTION”

What can we expect of an individual who claims to be part of an association – a federal union? What seems reasonable, even if we are asking in terms of an ideal? One can start such an inquiry by considering a person who has normal ambitions in life. There is a line in the HBO series, Boardwalk Empire, that goes something like this: all of a man's [woman's] problems stems from his [her] inability to live contently sitting in his [her] room. We all want more out of life. So we go about dreaming, planning, training, sacrificing, risking, sometimes conniving to achieve the “better” life. Yet none of this can be accomplished alone. We are all dependent on others so that those kinds of activities can take place. I just heard of a study that links the incidence of lower crime rates to the prevalence of abortions. It seems that lower incidence of unwanted children being born has eventually resulted in fewer people wanting to commit crimes. I don't offer this relationship as an argument or a justification for abortions – many unintended positive consequences begin from either immoral acts or, at least, less than desirable acts – but it does hint at the importance of a nurturing home. A good and loving family, a caring community, good schools, and enriching environments in general all increase the probability that children will grow up to be productive, law abiding, and, at a minimum, contented citizens. And yet, this whole amalgamation of factors is provided by others: parents, teachers, neighbors, priests or ministers, relatives, and public officials.

So, a civics curriculum, I believe, should address this reality. It should take on what Michael Sandel calls a strong view of community. What is that? Let me attempt to describe a “strong” view by first reviewing what a “weak” view is. A weak view sees community or a sense of community as either being instrumental – a view of community as a field of opportunity to advance one's interests – or being sentimental – a view of community as one composed of a compilation of people who have shared, final ends. Instead, a strong view is one that has other characteristics. One, the community is seen and felt as being a part of who one is. “It is a part of me.” Two, as such, the community or a sense of a community is not something one chooses – as is the case when one sees community instrumentally or attaches oneself to it to seek mutual ends with others – but instead is something one discovers as one understands who one is. It is one of an array of items that helps determine the essence of one's identity, but is not so obvious as other essential characteristics such as religion or nationality. Sandel refers to this view of community as part of a person's “constitutive conception” of community.¹

Here is what Sandel means. He believes that community ideally should become a part of a person and, as such, is not dependent on a person having a sense of obligation or seeing community in terms of gains or losses, advantages or disadvantages. This is a view that is dependent on a higher degree of self-knowledge or understanding. It takes the dependency I describe above – of family, neighbors, etc. – and internalizes it within a person who can appreciate how constitutive of his or her being that reality is. If a person doesn't appreciate the constitutive role that community plays in whom he or she is, perhaps he or she can feel it when considering his/her family. Or perhaps a person can transcend the community and extend such a view to the region or even the nation within which he/she lives, because a lot of what a community can do is, in turn, dependent on the factors that exist in its environment.

A telling response which indicates whether a person has such a constitutive conception would be his/her answer to the question: what keeps you from breaking the law or keeps your behavior within the boundaries of legitimate social norms? Is it fear of detection, being arrested, being beaten up, or being ostracized? Or is it a logical choice in which you see your interests served by supporting a system of rewards that is dependent on some minimum level of cooperation? The first reason is one that is based on coercion and the second is one based on predictable and reliable rewards. The first reason, if universally or extensively held, is expensive for a society and the second is too dependent on many whimsical factors. In either case, the health of the society is not well-served if these are the bases for the prominent motivations in citizens obeying the law or otherwise cooperating with essential social activities. Where there exists a close psychological relationship, however, between what one wants and what a community is trying to achieve, there is no need for excessive coercive measures or an unrealistic reward system that is unsustainable.

So how does one see his or her community, state, or nation with a strong view of community? He or she, in simple terms, strives to see other citizens as partners. He or she understands that his or her interests, if not in immediate terms, then in long range terms, are linked. Therefore, he or she should conduct his/her business in such a way that any resulting advancement should be for all. This idea begins with one understanding how dependent one's self reality is unalterably linked to one's community and to the efforts exerted by the community on one's behalf. And even in our competitive environment, which is a product of our capitalist system, this idea or view can be sustained. If I produce and bring to market a useful product and do all I can to lower my costs, yet treat my employees fairly – which does not mean extravagantly – and treat my customers honestly and fairly, then I am helping everyone's interests, including my competitors', not just my own. As Robert Reich says on TV, while promoting his recent documentary film, if businesses pay their workers a fair wage and treat their workers fairly, everyone will do better than if they don't. He applies this principle by comparing Walmart to Henry Ford² and also by his analysis of the effects of the Affordable Care Act:

[As a result of the ACA] everyone does come out ahead in the long term: Even the best-off will gain from a healthier and more productive workforce, and will save money from preventive care that reduces the number of destitute people using emergency rooms when they become seriously ill.³

But such an analysis, while helpful in promoting positive images of community, gets us back to seeing community and society as a transactional arena and offering our allegiances for instrumental reasons instead of reasons based on a constitutive conception that Sandel would like us to adopt when viewing our community. Perhaps encouraging a transactional view is a good place to start with students. When this reality is well understood and accepted, then students can start inquiring into how integral community and society are in determining who we are.

1See Dagger, R. (1997). Civic virtue: Rights, citizenship, and republican liberalism. New York, NY: Oxford, pages 48-50. The reference to Sandel can be found in Sandel, M. J. (1992). Liberalism and the limits of justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

2Henry Ford is historically remembered for his business philosophy which held that businesses should pay their workers well so that they in turn can be good consumers of his products.

3See http://robertreich.org/ .