Category Archives: Civic Knowledge: American Government and Politics

Posted on by

Article for Discussion: Is “Kneeling for Life and Liberty … Patriotic”?

I personally agree with this argument, but I think this is a useful for teaching even if for those who don’t agree with it. Among other things, it shows how the Declaration of Independence can serve to set the terms of debate in American politics and delineate between that which is acceptable and unacceptable. It can also provoke a discussion about what patriotism requires and whether or not it is a virtue.

Link to article

Link to US Civitas Facebook Discussion Thread

 

Posted on by

Article: Freedom of speech and tolerating the intolerant

Image result for richard spencer

This would be great for provoking discussion of First Amendment freedom of expression. Notice he does not seem to realize that the central issue here is whether the First Amendment protects speech like Spencer’s. If it does, then according to the Supreme Court, the university must allow him to speak (subject to time, place, and manner restrictions) even if it might (due to its controversial nature) create a less than perfectly safe work environment (and even it therefore violates federal workplace safety laws) unless the speech promotes, and is likely to incite, imminent lawless action. Notice also his claim that allowing Spencer to speak is somehow ignoring the threat of ethnic cleansing Spencer poses. By the Court’s approach — and that endorsed by the ACLU — suppressing expression of the ideas is not the best way to acknowledge and confront them. Rather, it is better to allow them to be expressed so that they are out in the open and then to counteract them with other acts of free speech. I’m not saying SCOTUS / ACLU necessarily have the best approach to this, but that is nevertheless the current understanding of the 1st Amendment in the U.S., and this history professor appears completely unaware of that fact. His argument seems to be, “I’m an expert on the history of National Socialism. It’s an evil ideology. Anyone espousing it is advocating evil. Therefore, it is too dangerous to allow anyone to espouse it.” One need not be an expert on the history of National Socialism to agree with every premise in that argument. But the conclusion doesn’t follow from the premises. According to SCOTUS/ACLU, the evilness of ideas is insufficient grounds for suppressing the expression of the ideas, and such suppression is not the only or best way to confront and defeat such ideas and mitigate any threat they might pose.

‘Do We Have To Fight Nazis Again?’ Professor Says Of Spencer At UF-WUFT

Link to US Civitas Facebook Discussion Thread

Posted on by

Article: The American Way of Government: Plutocracy or Democracy?

Another insightful analysis of the current plutocratic tilt of the American regime. This would be a great counterpoint to discuss when covering the American Form of Government. It also covers themes relevant to sections on interest groups, lobbying, and the bureaucracy and Supreme Court as Countermajoritarian.

‘America Is Not a Democracy‘-The Atlantic

Link to US Civitas Facebook Discussion Thread

Posted on by

Article: Democratic cynicism among America’s younger generations

Young people demonstrate in Lyon

I wonder how many of these millennials have heard about the empirically demonstrated advantages of living under democratic, rather than authoritarian, governments? I wonder if they would still be convinced? This could be a great way to provoke discussion when teaching the American Form of Government, particularly the section on the advantages of democracy.

‘Have millennials given up on democracy?‘

Link to US Civitas Facebook Discussion Thread

 

Posted on by

Article: When the state of nature prevails: a recent case study

This could be useful for discussing the purposes of government (in general) and the Hobbesian / Lockean argument for why government may be necessary for protecting the right to life (in particular), but also how the government itself can be a source of threats to rights. (The people wanted security guards to protect them from the “violent / aggressive family,” but then the guards appear to have themselves become abusive.) I think this is also an excellent illustration of how one doesn’t have to assume that all or even most people are naturally violent in order to conclude that a well-ordered government can significantly reduce violence. In this case, one family was violent, but this led everyone else to hide, acquiesce, or fight for themselves in order to be secure from the instigators. Given enough time, and without security guards, the otherwise non-violent cruise members may have concluded that “the best defense is a good offense,” and thus begun to act even more violently towards the instigators. This kind of security logic is a significant part of the analyses of violence (and its decline) by Stephen Pinker in Better Angels of Our Nature and, to a lesser extent, by Daniel Deudney in Bounding Power.

‘A Carnival cruise in the South Pacific descended into violent anarchy‘

Link to US Civitas Facebook Discussion Thread

 

Posted on by

Article: The fuzziness of the establishment clause in practice


The decision to have Rev. Billy Graham lie in honor at the Capitol has raised questions about the contemporary meaning and purpose of the Establishment Clause. This article discusses that briefly, while also providing a brief discussion of how religion in American society has changed over the last sixty years. An excellent book on that topic is Robert Jones’ “The End of White Christian America.” And here’s an interesting Atlantic article by Jones (adapted from a new afterword in the paperback version of his book) about white evangelicals’ support for Trump: https://www.theatlantic.com/…/robert-jones-white-ch…/532587/.

‘Billy Graham is the first religious leader to lie in honor at the U.S. Capitol. Some say he should be the last.‘-Washington Post

Link to US Civitas Facebook Discussion Thread

Posted on by

Article: Understanding voter behavior: The Case of Evangelical Trump Voters

Image result for evangelical trump supporter

This would be great for critically discussing public opinion, the notion that support for “theocracy” is outside the mainstream of American politics, and also the notion that ideological disagreement — understood in liberal vs. conservative terms — is a major cause of political conflict in American politics.

‘Despite porn stars and Playboy models, white evangelicals aren’t rejecting Trump. This is why.’-Washington Post

Link to US Civitas Facebook Discussion Thread

Posted on by

Safeguarding Electoral Integrity: Video prompt for classroom exercise in political participation

I could imagine — at least with a smaller class — showing this video at the beginning of class when covering political participation, and spending the class period working together to take action on the issue. Students would spend 20 minutes researching the issue, finding consensus expert recommendations, spend 10 minutes getting a list of officials to contact, and then the rest of class drafting messages and sending them to the officials. Part of the messages would highlight the importance of voting and other forms of participation for our democratic form of government. Obviously, this would be a bit risky, and it would be hard to get everyone participating — especially in a larger class — but the basics of participation are something easy for students to learn on their own from textbooks, so even if this bombs, they would probably still be fine for their exams. And if it went well, they could learn the content while also improving their sense of efficacy and developing basic political participation skills; and maybe actually making a difference on an important issue.

Link to video

Link to US Civitas Facebook Discussion Thread