Thursday, March 4, 2010
Wolfe & Hirsch on our common culture
Alan Wolfe has an interesting review of E.D. Hirsch's new book, The Making of Americans. Apparently Hirsch, as characterized by Wolfe, takes issue with school choice as a "conservative" movement:
School choice by its very nature militates against one of his major recommendations: the adoption of a common curriculum that all students must learn. Libertarianism, his analysis reminds us, is not the same as conservatism. Unquestioning reliance on the free market puts the individual and his or her immediate desires at the center of the moral universe, not unlike the cultural and moral liberationism celebrated during the 1960s. If the New Left was particularistic rather than universalistic, so are advocates of school choice. By contrast, Hirsch argues that we need more common space and not the invasion of the schools by consumer culture.
And then Wolfe adds:
[Religious schools] are not part and parcel of the common culture. Even if they are not narrowly sectarian, they still teach from a particular point of view. In doing so, their insistence on Christian or religious ways of knowing borrows from advocates of identity politics in the secular realm who insist that women or racial minorities have voices that must be heard in a multicultural curriculum. I for one do not believe that there would have been a religious revival in the 1980s without the countercultural revival of the 1960s as a model. If our common culture is fractured, religious communities must share the blame.
I agree that school choice need not be portrayed as "conservative," and that many Christians who are active in the public square today owe a lot to the identity politics of the past. But the purported tension between the emerging pluralism in the educational sphere (of which I'm a fan) and a "common culture" is overstated, I fear. There is a lot to say in response, but not having read the book yet, I'll limit myself to pointing out that a common culture is not a uniform culture, and that a shared civic culture is not necessarily precluded by a rich diversity of communities within that culture. If we think of American civic culture as the lowest common denominator in terms of shared ideals about liberty, equality, and virtue, why would we need to discourage communities from inculcating values that transcend -- without necessarily defying or ignoring -- the lowest common denominator? In that regard, does religious diversity itself threaten our common culture?
https://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/2010/03/wolfe-hirsch-on-our-common-culture.html
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the
comment feed
for this post.
And we might think too of the democractic foundation of this civic culture, which would allow for the effective exercise of moral agency and fill out a meaningful conception of citizenship (i.e., the effective exercise of political agency). In other words, taking care of what today are seen as basic or primary needs, such goods, for example, as health, education and housing, would serve to both instantiate these shared ideals as well as widen the circle of those citizens who can further realize them in everyday life. Where such goods are lacking or provided in meager measure, the civic culture is not common but the prerogative of some classes and groups and not others.
With regard to education, we need only set generalized standards and aspirations that articulate our conceptions of the Good in this area as discovered through deliberative democratic processes (a necessary condition). As long as religious schools meet these standards and share these aspirations, the teaching of religious worldviews and ways of knowing ('inculcating values that transcend--without necessarily defying or ignoring--the lowest common denominator') should in principle not harm this common culture but serve to fortify it. As many citizens have a religious identity, one cannot rationally or seriously speak of a common culture that is contingent upon ignoring or suppressing such identity. And religious traditions are one of the few sources our society has for reliable and consistent moral instruction and ethical socialization (by precept and model).
Wolfe is half right: it's capitalism and its corollary economism of values that relentlessly, insidiously, and invariably fractures and corrupts our endeavors to establish a common civic culture.
Incidentally, Wolfe has quite a cramped if not inaccurate and even implausible understanding of the 1960s, the New Left ('particularistic'? Oh my, what nonsense), and the counterculture movement, but we'll have to address that another day.