DeSantis is Requiring an America-first Civics Curriculum to Combat Critical Race Theory. Three Reasons Why Conservatives Should NOT Applaud.
Governor DeSantis (FL-R) signed HB 5, which counter-acts the push for Critical Race Theory (CRT) in school by setting standards for pro-American civics curricula that students must pass in order to graduate. I disagree with CRT, but have serious reservations about this conservative reaction.
1# The State Shouldn’t Dictate What Students Are Supposed to Love
Education is about teaching facts — the basic Reading, Writing, and ‘Rithmetic. But, done well, education also teaches students what to admire. Classical Christian education seeks to give its students a desire for what is good, true, and beautiful. STEM-centered education focuses on appreciating science and math. Unschooling tries to instill a love of freedom and creativity. There’s no such thing as a values-free education.
That’s why simultaneously giving the government control over education and trying to uphold intellectual and religious liberty is like walking on a tightrope stretched over a minefield. The state should have minimal power in this area and the parents should have maximum power to determine how, where, and what their children learn. Someone protesting a governor mandating Critical Race Theory into school curriculum should also protest a governor mandating American exceptionalism into the curriculum — it’s about the amount of power we give politicians (with zero guaranteed background in education and who may not even have children in the public schools) to decide what students can and can’t learn. (This article from FEE.org further explores that point.)
2# Propaganda You Agree With is Still Propaganda
Under the “Portraits of Patriotism Act” (HB 5.2.4B) students would be required to study “personal stories of diverse individuals who demonstrate civic-minded qualities, including first-person accounts of victims of other nations’ governing philosophies who can compare those philosophies with those of the United States.” Again, there’s nothing wrong with this and everyone could benefit from reading some Solzhenitsyn. But commanding students to learn about other nations’ atrocities, but not their own, is a step towards, at best, shallow jingoism, and, at worst, an inability to make needed reforms because they seem to conflict with a predetermined narrative about what America is.
If you’ve only been taught that non-Americans are communist sheep, you’ll probably have fewer reservations about, say, toppling foreign governments and participating in an aggressive foreign policy motivated by the belief that America Knows Best. Funny how the state might have an interest in painting itself in a good light.
Ironically, one of the most famous survivors of communist totalitarianism, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, might disagree with Governor DeSantis. Solzhenitsyn warned of communism’s horrors, but was also critical of what he saw as America’s hyper-fixation on individual rights and inability to address issues from anything but an “American” ideology.
A good curriculum would have students read books by both communists and capitalists. Banning CRT won’t make it go away — any student with an internet connection will still hear about it. The controversy usually centers around whether CRT or American exceptionalism is “true” or “false.” But these are complex questions that require a clear understanding of definitions, history, and the underlying ideologies. Rather than simplify the debate by declaring one side “right” or “wrong”, schools should encourage students to study both sides and have the freedom to discuss their beliefs without fear of being shut down as either “racist” or “anti-American.”
3# You Don’t Need Patriotism To be a Good, Well-Educated Person
One of DeSantis’ stated goals is to encourage students to develop “A sense of civic pride and desire to participate regularly with government at the local, state, and federal levels” (HB 5.6.A.2). The governor wants students to know and appreciate American exceptionalism. He argued, “ ‘Why would somebody leave a place like Vietnam? . . . Why would people leave these countries and risk their life to be able to come here. It’s important students understand that.’” All well and good. But students should also ask the other questions — like, Why would America bomb Vietnamese villages? Every issue has two sides and students should learn both.
HB 5 filters education through a state-centric worldview. Public schools are not factories to pump out politically-oriented citizens. To what extent should the state or nation we live in define us? How patriotic do we care to be? That should be up to each person. Some students will graduate seeking careers in law and politics. Other students will want a career that has very little to do with what kind of civics education they have — carpentry, nursing, religious orders, welding, baking.
There’s nothing wrong with patriotism — a healthy dose is usually admirable. But quasi-forced patriotism is authoritarian. Only a tyrant forces love. A civics-centered education runs the risk of defining students’ academic success in relation to their appreciation for the state rather than to their own interests and passions. Centering virtue around civics also fosters an us-versus-them mentality where people with opposing political views see each other as enemies rather than as humans who disagree on a particular issue but can agree in many nonpolitical areas.
