hyalineskies

I flopped in front of an enormous Power Mac G5 to do my homework a few nights ago, surrounded by fellow students in the University’s expansive Angell Hall Computing Site, a glass-encased room with over 260 workstations affectionately dubbed “The Fishbowl” by students. After fiddling with Michigan’s finicky Kerberos login system, I finally opened Pages to begin my assignment. After no more than three words, two girls interrupted my work.

“Excuse me,” the stouter of the two said. “Are you a freshman or a senior?”
“A senior,” I replied truthfully, expecting to be the victim of some lame joke.

Instead of a punchline, I was given a six-page “survey” dubbed the University of Connecticut Civic Literacy Test, more a standardised test of political science and economics questions than a survey at all. Having been suckered into taking a supposedly quick survey, I spent the next half hour answering questions on everything from Plato’s Republic to the economics of John Maynard Keynes. I was indirectly interrogated about the chronology of Civil War battles, Cold War fiascoes, and arguments on democratic theory. Although I’d estimate that I knew 80% of the questions, I felt as if my history teachers in high school had somehow betrayed me: I had only a minimal grasp of U.S. history between 1849 and 1865, and, regardless of my absolute domination of current events topics and economics questions (probably because I’m a self-confessed news junkie,) my inability to detect anachronisms in key dates of the Confederate States of America or what key resolutions were passed in 1830 made me feel horribly stupid.

At the end of the survey, I was asked where I had gained most of the knowledge I had used to complete the survey; I checked the box marked “Other”, and entered the word (what should be obvious at this point) Wikipedia.

A collegiate failure?

I’m an Economics student at a prestigious University; I’ve taken numerous classes on Economic theory and thought, an elementary philosophy course, and some European history classes. I read The New York Times daily. At the risk of sounding facetious, I’d bet that I have an above-average knowledge of American events and economics; if I asked my friends in Engineering or Biology about the key tenets of Keynesian economics or the arguments presented by Adam Smith in Wealth of Nations, they wouldn’t have a clue what was what. Many of the most opinionated on campus can’t define what acts are generally defined as welfare in the United States, let alone argue for or against its existence. Many of these same opinionated students couldn’t tell you the difference between a Sunni and a Shi’a, yet they feel it’s their civic duty to express their misinformed (and sometimes ignorant) opinions on American foreign policy.

Our university does little to promote civic literacy, as well. Although all LSA students are required to take courses in the social sciences or humanities, there is little restriction on such subject matter to American culture or current events. Although there is a select group of interested students that are very much politically informed by their own accord, it’s frightening that top universities are still pushing politically ignorant stiudents out with degrees into a world where they have the ability to be extremely influential both in society as well as shaping the future of this country’s government.

An even worse question can be posed: what about the common American citizen? We’re all given democratic power, but should those without information on civic issues be able to vote on said issues? It’s when you sit back and look at the scope of American civic illiteracy that elections and politics seem frighteningly more like popularity contests than a populace-elected policy system. It’s this issue of political ignorance (which may be better suited to being called political apathy) that is of more danger to the ideals of the United States of America than any terrorist organisation.

It’s painfully obvious that our systems of education are to blame (and I am talking about the conceptual educational system more than our brick-and-mortar institutions) for this huge amount of ignorance or lack of knowledge about American government. We live in an information society in which our own culture places more emphasis upon celebrity culture than critical thinking, destroying potential minds by feeding them gossip instead of government failures. Somehow, and I’m not sure if it’s remotely possible, we must continually remove the social stigma of intellectualism and recognise the ability to think critically as a rewarding perceptual experience instead of a skill required for professional profitability. We must place emphasis upon the rewards of intellectualism and its own utility, as well as the benefits to society associated with an openly intellectual populace. Somehow, someone, somewhere needs to drive the point home that materialism is merely superficial, and, although almost necessary in today’s society, the deepest rewards are in the innovations behind the aesthetic beauty.

Since my only outlet is social media, here’s my plea: go forth. Let us change society through social propagation and positive reinforcement. Maybe the change will be visible within our lifetime, and, if not, at least those that outlive us will be better off.