Mediaboss Marketing

Opinion

editorial

By Post Editorial Board

May 6, 2023 | 7:33pm

The latest data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress show that almost a third of 8th graders can't describe the basic functions of our government.Getty Images

Can a democracy survive if its youth know nothing about government or civic participation?

The United States is about to find out.

The latest data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (a k a the nations report card) show that almost a third of 8th graders cant describe the basic functions of our government.

The nationwide average score on the 8th-grade NAEP civics test fell to where it was in 1998 when it was first administered.

Scores in history were below the 1994 first-year level.

Were back where we started, in other words, with billions of taxpayer dollars spent and literally less than zero to show for it.

Shed a tear for the American Experiment.

The NAEP civics scores have been mediocre from the start, but had shown signs of upward movement this century.

Then came the pandemic, and mass school closures.

The result?

In civics, 79% are below the proficient benchmark.

Only 2% are advanced.

In history, 86% of students scored below proficient, and only 1% scored advanced.

The history scores have actually been slipping down since 2014, well before COVID.

Blame the growing emphasis on woke nonsense over actual instruction.

Indeed, poisonous ideologies like critical race theory teach kids that America itself is irredeemably evil.

Can you think of a better way to destroy any interest in let alone of love of country among kids?

The dismal NAEP results on reading and math, released weeks ago, are bad enough.

They mean that our schools are failing our kids, who will enter adult life unprepared to succeed.

The civics and history scores suggest that the basic fabric of American democracy is eroding.

Apathy and ignorance are not compatible with a participatory democracy.

They cede the field to the kind of hucksters and charlatans from Trump to AOC that characterize our contemporary politics.

Teachers unions and educrats wont demand anything like real instruction. Turning this disaster around is up to Americans who actually care about education and democracy.

Indeed, heres a test to try at home: Next time a politician (cough, Joe Biden) pontificates on threats to our democracy, listen for even a mention of this one.

Load more...

https://nypost.com/2023/05/06/us-civics-scores-show-the-real-threat-to-democracy/?utm_source=url_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons

Link:
US civics scores show the REAL threat to democracy - New York Post

There may be a stronger argument, however, that the hereditary principle operates as a linchpin in our democracy.

The democratic election of a head of state because of its political nature is inherently divisive as seen spectacularly on January 6, 2021 in the United States when a mob of republican supporters attacked and almost overwhelmed the Capitol in an attempt to undo the outcome of a democratic election. In the United States democratic competition has evolved into visceral hatred and threatens the renewal of civil war. The UK, however, has evolved an apolitical head of state which, as amply demonstrated by the Coronation ceremony, is open to all political leanings, to all faiths and to those of no faith and to anyone who likes a good shindig and provides an opportunity for the people to come together to celebrate a liberal democracy that is the envy of the world.

The survival of liberal democracy in our constitution is confirmed beyond all doubt by some of its most enthusiastic, if unintended, proponents, those football fans who regularly address the nations royalty by their own idiosyncratic banners and chants and those adherents to Scottish independence who convened their own separate rally in Glasgow while the nation at large celebrated the Coronation. How those fans and marchers must appreciate their liberty to entertain themselves in the manner that they chose.

Michael Sheridan, Glasgow.

Divisive use of language

MY wife and mother-in-law decided to watch at least part of the Coronation ceremony, simply because they had paid for it. They switched off after the Defender of the Faith had used the word "Protestant" three times.

Exactly how does he think this divisive, sectarian use of language is going to unite his imaginary kingdom? How many Catholics does he think bent the knee at this drivel?

I, unfortunately, caught an edited lowlight of the event as I unwittingly passed a television screening it. The sight of the Archbishop of Canterbury on his knees debasing himself and his church before an elderly billionaire made me shudder.

On the up side, I can report that when Charlie was getting his golden hat, my local Asda was doing a very brisk trade. Normal people doing normal stuff. I know. I was there.

Steve Brennan, Coatbridge.

Trouble over the Anthem

RECENT letters (May 5 & 6) concerning the etiquette of standing for the National Anthem the anthem at the end of a film brought to mind a rather frightening occasion in Belfast in 1969 experienced by myself and two friends.

Working for a few weeks in Northern Ireland as young trainees, we decided on an evening at the cinema. As usual in Scotland and England, when the film ended and the Anthem started we did what we always did, make for the exit.

This was Belfast at the height of the Troubles. As we attempted to move along the row, eyes down to see the way, I became aware of a sudden tense atmosphere. Looking up we saw, in a large cinema, probably a thousand faces looking menacingly at us. That was enough in itself to stop us dead in our tracks, and dead we might well have been if we hadn't taken the hint.

John Jamieson, Ayr.

Read more:A lot has changed since last a monarch was crowned

We need less anger, not more

COUNCILLOR Tom Johnston (Letters, May 6) wants to see more anger in the debate about Scotlands future governance. I disagree: we need less anger in our debates, about independence and much else, not more. Anger seems to be the default condition these days.

Emotion only gets us so far. We need a rational debate about the advantages and disadvantages of self-government, and the risks and opportunities it would bring. The greatest disgrace in the UK today is the number of its citizens who cant afford to feed themselves and their families, and cant heat their homes to a comfortable level. Given the great wealth of the UK, on open display this weekend in Westminster Abbey, thats something we should be ashamed of.

There are areas where I believe Scottish governments have got it wrong, but I give credit to the current SNP Government for the measures it has taken to tackle poverty, especially child poverty. I welcome Humza Yousafs commitment to continuing that good work, which will take many years to deliver results; but better slow progress than continuing with Tory measures that exacerbate the problem and Labour indifference to it. Progress could be faster, of course, if Scotland had fuller powers over its affairs.

Unlike many of your unionist correspondents, I have confidence in my fellow citizens here in Scotland that we can thrive as a self-governing country, with lower levels of inequality and in a comfortable relationship with our European neighbours, including those south of our border. Better to make the attempt than to resign ourselves to continuing decline as part of the UK.

Doug Maughan, Dunblane.

HAVE SNP supporters learned nothing? Councillor Tom Johnston is calling for his party to stoke national anger to win independence". The disastrous Sturgeon/Murrell regime was built on anger, it was built on division, blame, xenophobia and what happened? The First Minister and her cabal of incompetents could make no case for an economically sound independent Scotland and all they had was anger which has alienated the majority.

Clearly Mr Johnston might have to agree with Doug Maughan (Letters, May 3) that a long hard slog might be the best option; but wait, the SNP has been in existence for about 90 years when Arthur Donaldson was siding with the regime in Germany, that long hard slog has achieved nothing.

Douglas Cowe, Newmachar.

We are well rid of Sturgeon

"NO-PLATFORMED" Joanna Cherry's very recent comment that the SNP is "intellectually dead from the neck up" and "afraid of debate" ("Cherry wry", Unspun, The Herald, May 6) dovetails with Tom Gordon's revelation that "Nicola Sturgeon spent almost 2 million of public money on a record 18 spin doctors in her last year as first minister" (The Herald, May 6).

Ms Sturgeon has been so bereft of ideas that she has hired spin doctors not to spin her ideas but, in desperation, to found ideas to spin. We are well rid of this impostor who has been no more than an eloquent presenter of the intellectual property of others.

William Durward, Bearsden.

Read more:Scottish independence: Hundreds take to Glasgow streets for indy march

Do they think before they speak?

THERE are times when I genuinely wonder if politicians ever think before they speak. With the SNP in crisis it was probably too tempting for some to start promoting their claims to be the rightful heirs to government, only to then fall foul of events.

A few months ago ex-Labour minister Brian Wilson opined in an article on the gender reform rebellion within the SNP that Labour unlike the SNP could accommodate a wide range of views within its ranks. But then a week later Sir Keir Starmer promptly does the opposite by sacking Jeremy Corbyn from the party simply because Mr Corbyn disputed the anti-Semitism claims made against him.

Next there was Gordon Brown claiming Glasgow could become a pharmaceutical and medical research powerhouse. Unfortunately just prior to making this claim Astra Zenica had announced it was quitting the UK for Ireland to build its new research centre there. This was followed shortly afterwards by Cancer Research UK reducing the scale of its Glasgow medical research centre in order to concentrate its activities in England.

Not to be outdone, Jackie Baillie stated at the Scottish Labour conference that if elected she will reform the Scottish NHS by cutting its management bureaucracy in order to concentrate resources on frontline staff. Really? Did she simply forget a conference speech made by Neil Kinnock in 1985, when he famously lambasted the folly of Labour politicians going round in taxis handing out redundancy notices to its own public sector workers?

The Conservatives as usual lag behind in the faux pas league. But their Scottish chairman Craig Hoy was doing his best to catch up recently. He denounced the SNP claiming it was riven with division which made it unsuitable to govern. But when asked about the differences within his own party he promptly commented that theres always a disagreement about strategy in any organisation that is actually probably quite healthy. Aye right.

Meanwhile his Conservative colleague John Lamont announces that far from dealing with the cost of living crisis amongst his constituents, the Scottish Secretary Alastair Jack had decided instead to prioritise guarding the Stone of Destiny at Westminster. Yet are these not the very people who claim that the Scottish Government spends too much of its time on constitutional issues and is "not getting on with the issues that matter"?

Im drowning in the hypocrisy.

Robert Menzies, Falkirk.

See the article here:
Be grateful we have the monarchy as the linchpin to our democracy ... - HeraldScotland

The newly-founded Stanford Democracy Initiative, which brings together scholars and community stakeholders to examine Stanfords role in the promotion of democratic norms nationally and globally, has compiled and released a list of courses, projects and activities at Stanford that the initiative claims advance democracy.

Spearheaded by political science professor Larry Diamond of the Hoover Institution, Karina Kloos of the Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society, president and CEO of the United States-Japan Foundation and previous Distinguished Career Institute Fellow Jacob Schlesinger and Thomas Schnaubelt of the Deliberative Democracy Lab, the initiative has approached completion of its inventory process. Researchers collected information on activities across Stanford that fit the parameters of advancing democracy. According to the initiatives researchers, 266 courses, 109 research labs and projects and 121 engagement activities at Stanford advance democracy. The initiatives next step is to develop recommendations as to how to improve and deepen these efforts to advance and understand democracy.

This is, I think, one of the first times that weve really stepped back to take stock of all the things that Stanford is doing, not just in one school or one center, but across the whole university, to advance democracy, Schnaubelt said.

According to the initiatives website, Stanford researchers seek to answer the question, What is Stanford doing and what can and should we be doing to understand, defend and advance democratic norms and practices, in the United States and globally?

According to Schnaubelt, the initiative was formed after some members of Stanfords Board of Trustees asked Michael McFaul B.A, M.A. 86, the director of Stanfords Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, about what Stanford is doing to advance democracy. From there, McFaul asked Diamond, a to lead the effort to answer this question, resulting in the birth of the Stanford Democracy Initiative.

The initiatives team has identified over 60 similar initiatives that other institutions of higher education have started, according to Kloos, some with budgets in the $150-200 million range. Johns Hopkins University, for example, recently launched its SNF Agora Institute on Democracy, which started a similar effort.

I didnt know this democracy initiative existed in the first place but I think its really interesting, said Sawyer Williams 26, a prospective political science major. Williams said that researching how to advance democracy is super important right now, with the decline of democracy and increasing distrust in our government.

While a majority of democracy work was found in the schools of humanities and Stanford Law School, the researchers said that they also came across some surprises during their inventory process.

I was surprised by all of the different offerings of democratic courses and opportunities that Stanford has, especially in the STEM fields, said Rita Shuster 26, who is a research assistant on this project.

A particular surprise cited by researchers is a program called Vote ER, which aims to promote voter registration among patients in emergency rooms.

People who work in the emergency room at the Stanford Hospital have badges that have a little QR code on it and as theyre talking with patients, they ask, are you registered to vote? Schnaubelt said. Theyll say, if youre not registered to vote, scan this QR code and you can get information about how and where and when to vote. Thats one of the surprises that we didnt know about.

Since the inventory phase, the Democracy Initiative has begun the deliberation phase. From their interviews, the researchers have thus far compiled 19 different ideas for Stanford, as a campus and a community, to move forward on the promotion of democratic norms.

Next week, well be deliberating those ideas with a set of project advisors, primarily faculty, but we have staff and students, Kloos said. Were going to then be opening up for open deliberation, so those ideas will be made available for other members of the Stanford community to weigh in and share ideas.

The researchers say they hope the Democracy Initiative will help offer visibility and courses of action for Stanford to advance democracy further, especially in this period of time.

Globally, democracy has been in decline for more than a decade and a half, Schnaubelt said. Universities have a really distinctive obligation because they have resources, they have prestige and with all of that comes an even higher level of responsibility to advance democracy. Its not just about preparing the next generation; its about doing what we can to strengthen the institutions of democracy.

A previous version of this article reported that there were only 16 initiatives similar to the Stanford Democracy Initiative at other institutions of higher learning. The Daily regrets this error.

Here is the original post:
New initiative examines Stanford's role in advancing democracy - The Stanford Daily

What is included in my trial?

During your trial you will have complete digital access to FT.com with everything in both of our Standard Digital and Premium Digital packages.

Standard Digital includes access to a wealth of global news, analysis and expert opinion. Premium Digital includes access to our premier business column, Lex, as well as 15 curated newsletters covering key business themes with original, in-depth reporting. For a full comparison of Standard and Premium Digital, click here.

Change the plan you will roll onto at any time during your trial by visiting the Settings & Account section.

If you do nothing, you will be auto-enrolled in our premium digital monthly subscription plan and retain complete access for $69 per month.

For cost savings, you can change your plan at any time online in the Settings & Account section. If youd like to retain your premium access and save 20%, you can opt to pay annually at the end of the trial.

You may also opt to downgrade to Standard Digital, a robust journalistic offering that fulfils many users needs. Compare Standard and Premium Digital here.

Any changes made can be done at any time and will become effective at the end of the trial period, allowing you to retain full access for 4 weeks, even if you downgrade or cancel.

You may change or cancel your subscription or trial at any time online. Simply log into Settings & Account and select "Cancel" on the right-hand side.

You can still enjoy your subscription until the end of your current billing period.

We support credit card, debit card and PayPal payments.

Read more:
Media lies threaten the truth and decency on which democracy ... - Financial Times

Last month, Informing Democracy released a report identifying election officials from six battleground states who exhibited anti-democratic tendencies or actions ahead of the 2022 elections, based on research into the personnel in charge of elections across Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The group identified over 200 officials in its report, laying out how anti-democratic tendencies are rampant at the local level and warning that our democracy is still under threat from potential bad actors.

In total, Informing Democracy found 94 local officials responsible for administering elections and 110 state lawmakers who provoked concerns about harboring anti-democratic biasfrom abusing their authority to sow doubt about results to attempting to reject ballots from the counting process.

Heres what Americans all across the country are reading about these anti-democratic actors and election deniers who still could pose a threat to our elections:

You can read the full report into who could threaten elections in 2023 and 2024 here.

Link:
Informing Democracy: Watchdog identifies growing threat to ... - WisPolitics.com