The discussion thread is for casual and off-topic conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Links

Ping Groups | Ping History | Mastodon | CNL Chapters | CNL Event Calendar

Upcoming Events

• Dec 13: Boston New Liberals December Happy Hour
• Dec 17: Houston New Liberals December Social
• Dec 18: Atlanta New Liberals December Social
• Dec 18: Twin Cities New Liberals December Meetup
• Dec 18: DC New Liberals Holiday Party
• Dec 20: Chicago New Liberals Holiday Social

What is the neoliberal answer to subsidizing industries in the name of security or defense? What do you do when you can't produce things like steel, cars, or electronics competitively?

First and foremost I love America. I love my country. I revere our founding fathers and our mission. I have a BA in history and MA in education and went to law school. I served a member of our Congress for almost a decade focusing on international affairs. Yes I realize this is an Appeal to Authority fallacy, but we as neoliberals know more than most that credentials are necessary to establish credibility.

Anyway, here are some things I see in 2024 that I can’t accept in the America I grew up with:

1. an uneducated populace and crumbling education system (imo this is the root of all our issues)

2. crony capitalism and crony politics/oligarchism

3. an executive with monarchal power

4. foreign sway over domestic sentiment and elections; misinformation

5. increasing executive and federal power

6. minority rule

7. unjust living standards relative to our national resources and international influence

8. corporate and aristocratic wealth influencing candidates

9. the electoral college

10. partisanism and polarization

11. exclusionary politics

12. individual liberty

These are the issues that matter most to me as a Montesquieu/Jefferson liberal, the issues that cause me to believe this nation has declined to the point it needs to be rethought and fixed as soon as possible before it collapses in on itself like an old star. Nobody thought Rome could fall until it did. We are at a point of no return and the actions we take - or don’t take - now will shape future generations. Sometimes a vote isn’t enough. Sometimes history calls on people to stand up to the wrongdoings of its government. The day a democratic government ceases to represent its people is the day it loses its legitimacy. I fear that day has already passed us by.

The Question

What is the purpose of education in a free society? Should it focus on vocational training or the liberal arts? STEM or the humanities? What should we expect from our schools and universities?

This question seems particularly urgent in light of the dire results of the OECD's Survey of Adult Skills. In the US and in a number of developed countries, many adults (more than 25% in some countries, including the US!) lack even elementary school-level literacy skills.

What is Education For?

To me, I think there is one core philosophical question that needs to be answered before we consider policy solutions: should education be oriented primarily to training people for the workforce or whether it should primarily train people as citizens of a free society.

This is not a simple question, and I welcome discussion on this point. Education consumes at least 12 and sometimes more than 20 years of a person's life. It is essential that we as a society get this right. And it seems that many people want education to prepare them for jobs above all else. This is probably economically rational, as for most people the financial benefits of a vocational education far outweigh the intangible benefits of a liberal one.

Even so, I think this is wrong. A free society can only function if citizens make the irrational choice to be politically engaged. Keeping up with political news and weighing carefully how to vote is a waste of time for most people, whose vote will never be the tipping point in an election. But a free society cannot function without people putting their faith into the system and deciding to play their part as citizens. A liberal education provides them the tools to do that.

To quote Robert M. Hutchins, former President of UChicago

The foundation of democracy is universal suffrage. It makes every man a ruler. If every man is a ruler, every man needs the education that rulers ought to have. The kind of education we accept now when everybody is destined to rule is fundamentally an extension of the kind that in Jefferson's time was thought suitable to those destined to labour not to rule. When we talk of our political goals, we admit the right of every man to be a ruler. When we talk of our educational program, we see no inconsistency in saying that only a few have the capacity to get the education that rulers ought to have-either we should abandon the democratic ideal or we should help every citizen to acquire the education that is appropriate to free men.

What are the implications of this for educational policy?

1. Universal Access to Education

This approach strongly argues for policies that provide a liberal education to everyone. It is unacceptable that so many people in free societies have been ill-prepared by their schooling to take on the responsibilities of citizenship, which we see manifest in anti-intellectualism, civic illiteracy, and the like. We should be willing to contribute a significant amount of resources to meeting this goal.

2. No Tracking

By "tracking," I do not mean separating students by academic ability necessarily. This can be useful in some settings. I mean the policy adopted in much of Western Europe where students are selected rather early on to pursue primarily vocational programs on the basis of their academic ability. If everyone is to be a citizen, everyone should get an education befitting a citizen.

3. Breadth of Education

We should ensure that students get an education of sufficient breadth. Policies like England's where students decide by age 16 which subjects to study and which to abandon do not allow for students to learn the broad range of subjects necessary for competent citizenship.

4. Focus on Skills, Not Facts

As preparation for their role as citizens, students should learn how to think critically, understand the news, and assess evidence. Beyond these narrowly political skills, they should also learn how to understand the scientific method, analyze literature, appreciate art, and all of the other things that are necessary to fully participate in the social and cultural life of the country.

Conclusion

I believe that if all citizens had a quality liberal education, we would have better politics and better societies. I think making citizens who can participate in the liberal polities we hope to build is essential to the achievement of new liberal values in the long run.