Civics

The Heritage Foundation (a conservative think tank and propaganda mill) decries the politicization of civics education in an article full of conservative political judgments about what’s appropriate for civics education.

Why am I not surprised?

The 1619 Project, by the way, is a well-researched and documented effort backed by leading historians; it isn’t some leftist/activist fantasy. It just happens to discuss matters — the centrality of slavery to American political and economic systems — that the Heritage Foundation would prefer to keep hidden.

And the 1619 Project isn’t meant to be civics education: it’s a supplement to American history courses. The Heritage Foundation knows this, but they’re seeking to arouse their conservative base to oppose an historical narrative with which the foundation disagrees.

While the Heritage Foundation dismisses the 1619 Project as too activist or too political, they are attempting to present their own politicized version of history and civics as the only legitimate version. Of course, this adds to the atmosphere of politicization the foundation decries.

But that’s okay, actually, because civics education, to be meaningful, is inherently political; the Heritage Foundation just needs to be honest that they are pushing a political point of view.

However, simply reciting the three branches of government and memorizing the Preamble to the Constitution isn’t a civics education. There are important questions — political questions — that students must consider.

For example, has the promise of the Declaration of Independence been fulfilled? For everyone? What does freedom mean? What are positive and negative freedoms? How many colonists opposed the Declaration? Why? What happened to them? What about slaves and aboriginal peoples? Were women included? What are the sources of the ideas in the Declaration? Would the U.S. honor a declaration of independence from Puerto Rico or Guam? Why or why not?

Questions about who was — and who was not — included in the body politic at the time the Constitution was adopted arise naturally. Who was advantaged — and who was disadvantaged — by the Constitution? Why do rural states have so much political power? What does it mean that some people counted as “three-fifths” human? Are people more important than property? Are people and property interchangeable? Can we trust a document written by men who accepted slavery? Have we treated aboriginal peoples the way the Constitution describes? What is the Electoral College? Why is it anti-democratic? Why were women denied the right to vote? Why do we have a republic and not a democracy?

All those questions (and more!) are political, and the answers to them have varied over time. Add the Bill of Rights and more questions arise. What does freedom of speech mean? If a newspaper refuses to publish political ads, is that a violation of freedom of speech? Can schools silence student political views? Why is the separation of church and state important? Why can students pray in schools, but can’t be led in prayer by a teacher? Is that in the Constitution? Is freedom from religion protected? What does the right to bear arms really mean? What about habeaus corpus? Why did Lincoln suspend it? How is that related to the pandemic we’re currently experiencing?

There are many other amendments, Supreme Court opinions, and laws to be questioned and dissected. The point of civics education is the same as for any education: to create an educated citizenry capable of engaging with, and questioning, the political and economic ideas and actions that will arise during their lives. Most of the questions (much less the answers) can’t be known in advance, so habits of mind and discipline are important. How do we research political history? What’s the standard for acceptable evidence? How do we hold politicians accountable? How do we form ad hoc coalitions? How is legislation written, introduced, and accepted or rejected? How can citizens influence that process? How should citizens react when laws violate their consciences?

The purpose of civics education is manifestly not to enshrine behind plexiglass a set of 18th century parchment pages with funny writing on them, holy writ approachable only by approved high priests. The Declaration, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, etc., are launchpads for action, not adulation.

Of course, these aren’t the civics lessons the Heritage Foundation wants taught. They prefer a civics course in which God-fearing white people labor without complaint for a capitalist tyranny of wealth; where immigrants are ignored, discriminated against, assimilated, or corralled in concentration camps; where the suffering of people of color and aboriginal peoples is white-washed; where wars are fought by Boy Scouts opposing tyranny and are never imperialist wars of aggression. In short, the Heritage Foundation desires to maintain the myth of American Exceptionalism by hiding behind the noble language of our founding documents.

If those documents become lifeless static displays of quaint unchangeable ideas, the end of the republic is nigh. We are perilously close to that condition right now. Unfortunately, that’s the dangerous Father Knows Best prescription for a civics course that the Heritage Foundation desires.