As I wandered through the various historical sites I continually encountered tour groups of elementary school students. There sense of awe was palpable and gave me a deeper appreciation of the drama of our founding story. As I thought about their experience of historical Philadelphia, I wondered if they would remember their sense of awe as they grow up and became exposed to competing media messages from the Left and the Right. Would they process Fox News and MSNBC as a function of the very liberties outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? Or would they become cocooned in political intransigence fostered by right or left wing “talking heads”? These questions are important to educators because our success is measured by the degree to which our students evolve into critical thinkers who are able to evaluate arguments, adopt a position based on evidence and to respond rationally to opposing viewpoints.
I dwell on this in the middle of summer when our students are enjoying their freedom from school because I find myself becoming discouraged about the tone and content of political discourse here in California. It is a mystery to me that politicians in a state blessed with such abundant resources cannot come to agreement on how to balance a budget. Rather than reasoned debate, the voters are exposed to finger-pointing and one or more versions of the “blame game.” As I reflect on the compromises that went into the writing of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, I can’t help but think that our Founding Fathers were far more successful in negotiating much thornier issues than those faced by our Legislature. And I have to ask myself: what has changed over time that makes political compromise so difficult?
I’m certain that there are many reasons for the strident voices that characterize political debate in California; but one that makes sense to me is the attempt to turn complex issues into black and white iterations of Truth. Perhaps it’s because of my many years in secondary education that I tend to be wary of arguments that claim Truth as a possession. And, where this occurs, I find the level of cynicism in response to be significantly greater. In this poisoned environment our politicians and pundits talk at each other, not to each other.
Our Founding Fathers understood this human dynamic and attempted to construct a political system that favored compromise over winning and losing. Sadly, we seem to be doing our level best to thwart their good intentions. And this is why I write about my concerns in the middle of summer. We educators and parents face an especially challenging effort to instill in our children the ability to look past the shouting and to critically evaluate all arguments claiming the greater good. It is too easy for teenagers to be swayed by a bombardment of media messages and to accept them at face value. Schools like La Salle exist precisely to ensure that the students entrusted to our care are provided the intellectual tools to evaluate a variety of messages and even to construct an argument opposed to their personal opinion.
If American history has one over arching lesson to be learned, it’s this: political debate ebbs and flows in cycles. The current cycle of cynicism will fall by the wayside sooner or later. And, when it does, our students must be prepared to shape the next cycle of political debate with integrity, honesty and thoughtfulness.
W.C. Fields believed that “second prize is two weeks in Philadelphia.” For me, one week was the grand prize as it renewed my hope in the next generation of leaders who will pass through the halls of La Salle and who will (I hope) retain their sense of awe at this grand experiment that was launched in 1776.
