Duties of a Citizen

This is a problem that I'm sure we've all known about for some time.

I make it clear to my students that it is not only their right but their duty to arrive at their own conclusions. They are free to defend rendition, waterboarding, or any other aspect of America's post-9/11 armamentarium. But I challenge their right to tune out the world, and I question any system or society that can produce such students and call them educated. I am concerned for the nation when a cohort of students so talented and bright is oblivious to all such matters. If they are failing us, it is because we have failed them.

...

As a nation, we spend an inordinate amount of time fretting about illegal immigration and painfully little on what it means to be a citizen, beyond the legal status conferred by accident of birth or public processing. We are too busy building a wall around us to notice that we are shutting ourselves in. Intent on exporting democracy — spending blood and billions in pursuit of it abroad — we have shown a decided lack of interest in exercising or promoting democracy at home.

This ties into a discussion I had a while back. I think, on a moral level, voting should be mandatory. It is more than a right, it is a duty. The problem comes when you try to actually make it policy. Voting day is not a national holiday, workers are not guaranteed time off, voting credentials are constantly questioned inappropriately, etc. Also, how do you enforce it? Economic penalties? A large portion of the people that aren't voting for all these reasons are doing so because they are already poor. Several other countries do levy a fine for not voting, even absentee, but I'm just not sure that's fair, given our country's current makeup. And I suppose voting is useless if the voter is uninformed, so Gup's perspective may have more relevance. We are in complete agreement in that democracy requires participation - if there is no will to participate, how can we hope to control our own fates?

Schools Training Americans to be Subservient

We all know school is as much about training kids to respect authority and function in a hierarchical society as it is about math, science, social studies, and language arts. But lately we've seen a few cases where school teaches us that authority is absolute and can do whatever it wants with regard to students' rights. We've seen unauthorized locker searches be justified, but strip searches of 13 year old girls? With no real cause?

When Wilson ordered the search, the only evidence that Savana had violated school policy was the uncorroborated accusation from Marissa, who was in trouble herself and eager to shift the blame. Even Marissa (who had pills in her pockets, not her underwear) did not claim that Savana currently possessed any pills, let alone that she had hidden them under her clothes.

Savana, who was closely supervised after Wilson approached her, did not have an opportunity to stash contraband. As the American Civil Liberties Union puts it, "There was no reason to suspect that a thirteen-year-old honor-roll student with a clean disciplinary record had adopted drug-smuggling practices associated with international narcotrafficking, or to suppose that other middle-school students would willingly consume ibuprofen that was stored in another student's crotch."

Does anyone still wonder why no one is in a major uproar about wiretapping and an authoritarian state? We're being taught that this is how it's supposed to be at the earliest levels. Or am I mixing up cause and effect - are they teaching it because it's become the norm in society? I hope so - at least that might be more quickly correctable.

Anti-Intellectualism II

Jessica Hagy makes my point in the equivalent of 1000 words.

American Anti-Intellectualism

Anti-intellectualism is the root of all evil. Or at least the root of all willful stupidity and ignorance. Anyone got suggestions on how to correct this? Will it self correct? Do we have to get to the point where America falls behind the rest of the world before we remember that trying to be the smartest is what got us on top in the first place?

From Singapore to Japan, politicians pretend to be smarter and better- educated than they actually are, because intellect is an asset at the polls. In the United States, almost alone among developed countries, politicians pretend to be less worldly and erudite than they are (Bill Clinton was masterful at hiding a brilliant mind behind folksy Arkansas sayings about pigs).

Alas, when a politician has the double disadvantage of obvious intelligence and an elite education and then on top of that tries to educate the public on a complex issue — as Al Gore did about climate change — then that candidate is derided as arrogant and out of touch.

Maybe when we elect Obama, it will signify the end of it - he is a Harvard-educated policy wonk. Though he'll likely be elected in spite of that. As long certain talk show hosts feed the hatred of the educated, intelligent, and informed liberal, I'm not sure how to fix anti-intellectualism. I'm not sure there is a way. This might be the one issue I'm really not optimistic about. It's going to take more than an ad campaign. It might take a realization that evolution-doubting, UFO seeing, "elitist"-hating America has suddenly become a second citizen in the world. By the time we stop being anti-intellectual, the world may be so fundamentally changed that the best we can hope to climb back to is not dictating world affairs, but being a good world citizen. Hell, maybe that's a good thing for all of us.

When did "elite" stop meaning something to strive for, and begin meaning something to despise?