Since mid-December 2021, this blog has been
making a dialectic argument.[1]
That argument was made with one aim in
mind; that is to answer the question: does
a federalist perspective, in the form of liberated federalism, provide a
legitimate and viable construct for the study of governance and politics in
American secondary schools? The segments
of the argument, in dialectic form, are claims that four various approaches to
civics education should be that subject’s guiding construct.
The four approaches are parochial/traditional
federalism (as a pre thesis), natural rights view (thesis), critical theory
(antithesis), and liberated federalism (synthesis). As one familiar with this form of argument
can surmise, it ends up giving a positive response to the central question. Yes, liberated federalism should guide civics
education in American classrooms.
Any attention to the national political
landscape through the media indicates that the nation is experiencing an exceptionally
challenging period with a former president being charged in various courts with
a number of suits and criminal crimes, a House of Representatives having a
difficult time naming a Speaker of the House, a worrisome increase in
politically related incidences of violence (including a physical attack on the
husband of the then Speaker of the House), and general discourse among citizens
that disregards respectful language and even indulges in threatening messaging.
There seems to be a growing concern for the
levels of uncivil, violent, and criminal behavior that the nation is currently
experiencing.[2] No one institution can be held accountable
for that state of affairs or be responsible for fixing it. What is being proposed in this blog is
admittedly a modest step – some might argue otherwise – in addressing the slew
of problems facing the polity and the social makeup of the nation.
But the step is seen as a viable one toward
righting the wrongs. As small as the
step might seem to be, this blogger is not underestimating the problems and
challenges in implementing this approach to civics. He would like to leave readers with a sense
of the importance of this general issue – that is, how Americans teach their
young about the state of the nation’s governance and politics.
A brighter future for the nation is surely
possible and one avenue toward that potential is through what is taught in
schools. This blog’s review of this
argument was written under the assumption that curriculum content in the areas
of government and civic affairs makes a difference and should be part of a
general socialization pattern whose aims are a healthy, productive, and moral
citizenry of the United States.
This blog will next stretch beyond this
dialectic argument and address how the concerns of the argument affect
interpersonal relationships. Here, the
blog will count on the work of the journalist, David Brooks.
[Here’s wishing everyone a joyous Thanksgiving.]
[1] Interested readers who wish to look up the postings
that present the dialectic argument from its beginning, see Robert Gutierrez,
“Dealing with Ideals,” Gravitas: A
Voice for Civics,” December 14, 2021, accessed November 14, 2023, URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2021_12_12_archive.html.
[2] From an extended literature, see, as an example, Kirsten
Kukowski, “Overwhelming Number of Americans Frustrated by Incivility in
Politics, But Conflicted on Desire for ‘Compromise and Common Ground,’”
Institute of Politics and Public Service (April 24, 2019), accessed November 18,
2023, URL: https://politics.georgetown.edu/2019/04/24/new-survey-overwhelming-number-of-americans-frustrated-by-incivility-in-politics-but-conflicted-on-desire-for-compromise-and-common-ground/.
No comments:
Post a Comment