Twenty-second Ten Postings of Gravitas

The following list of titles and accompanying dates refers to past postings on the blog, Gravitas: A Voice for Civics Education, that have been deleted.  After each title and date, the entries below include the first paragraph of each respective posting.  If you care to receive a copy of a particular posting, send your request via email to gravitascivics@gmail.com .  One posting per request.

211 FEDERALIST LEADERSHIP

(September 10, 2012)

Well, here we go again.  It's time to select our leader for the next four years.  What should we consider in this political race?  We should consider a lot of things and not just our personal situations.  We should also be concerned with the health of the commonwealth.  But pollsters tell us that few of us are so disposed to think – or feel – anything beyond those conditions that advance or hinder what we want or need.  For the sake of the ideal, though, let us for a few moments consider the very notion of leadership and how it affects the common good.

213  IDEAS ASSOCIATED WITH CONSENT

(September 14, 2012)

A concept I have associated with liberated federalism has been consent.  I have stated that our equal ability to involve ourselves with others or, to a higher degree, become federated with others, is the basis upon which equality can be defined.  We might not all be as important to a group; we might not all be equally powerful or rich or talented, but we all decide to become part of a federated union equally.  But what I have not done, to date, is give a working understanding for what exactly this consent is.  Is it merely the simple act of saying, to yourself or others, that, yes I am a part of this group, arrangement, or association?  Or is there more to the concept of consent, more to the act of joining or allowing someone else to join?

214  HOW DARE HE

(September 17, 2012)

How do I go about this without sounding partisan?  The “this” is this posting which is directed at Mitt Romney's infamous response to a question at a fundraiser he had in Boca Raton, Florida.  I'm sure you've seen and heard it by now – the one in which he dismisses the need to appeal to 47 % of the population in his run for president.  Why does he dismiss them?  Because he calls them dependents on government for “health care, food, housing, to you name it.” 

216  FEDERATION CAN'T ANSWER THEM ALL

(September 24, 2012)

There are a variety of issue clusters that determine how we as individuals align ourselves in our political preferences.  Whether we are a Democrat or a Republican or perhaps an independent can be determined by well thought out and rational decision-making or, and much more likely, by some accidental conditions under which we happen to live including family conditions, geographic conditions, religious beliefs, and the like.  Historically, I believe that more than any other condition there is the socio-economic class into which we happened to be born that will determine how we think and act politically.  When I write historically, I mean in terms of global history because in the US I think this question is answered quite differently.  Here, we see politics with a general disinterest and that lack of concern causes us to not give the question much thought or feeling.  What seems to be most influential are the general political viewpoints that prevail in a given area or region of the country where we reside.  Of course, this is truer in some areas than others.  They don't call the South the Solid South for nothing.  If you grow up in Indiana, chances are you are going to grow up Republican, whereas if you grow up in California, you have a much higher probability of being a Democrat.  Within geographic areas or regions, there are not so much issue clusters as there are bias clusters.

217  A CAUTIONARY NOTE

(September 28, 2012)

There has been a very long-standing debate between political thinkers over the question, a very fundamental question: what is the best form of government?  We can read the disagreement between two of the most famous philosophers from ancient Greece on this very question.  Plato argued for aristocracy and Aristotle argued for republican ideals.  Plato argued that the rich, the few, were the most talented, the most educated, the most qualified to rule.  Aristotle didn't necessarily argue for a republic directly, but his thoughts are used to foster the values associated with republican government, namely those values summarized by the term, civic virtue – those values that bolster communal governance.  While our rhetoric in this country, dating back to its origins, has been to promote a more Aristotelian view, we have drifted into a reality that is, for the most part, trending toward an aristocratic or, more accurately described, plutocratic polity.  Our rhetoric is following suit.  That means the rich are taking over or, at least, beginning to do so.  Is this a bad thing?

218  THE PURPOSE OF FEDERATION THEORY

(October 1, 2012)

For those new to this blog, I have been presenting the elements of a mental construct that is meant to guide the selection of substantive content in a civics curriculum.  I have given the name federation theory or liberated federalism to that construct.  A great deal of previous postings has been dedicated to describing and explaining the elements of this construct.  I have also gone about evaluating it.  With this posting, I will conclude my evaluative comments on federation theory that are based on Eugene J. Meehan's criteria for social science models and theories.  I will in future postings add two more entries based on two criteria I have added to my overall critical review – the construct's abstract level and its motivational quality.  In this posting, I want to address to what level, if any, federation theory controls the phenomenon it describes or explains.  That is, does it have purpose? 

219  FITTING THE TIMES

(October 5, 2012)

I have just, with the last posting of this blog, finished a series of statements that attempted to evaluate federation theory as a guide in determining what content should be included in a civics curriculum.  If you review those statements, you might be prone to ask whether I addressed another very important aspect of the utility of such a construct or theory – i. e., does the construct fit its time?  In those reviews, I used the criteria offered by Eugene J. Meehan (Meehan, E. J. (1969).  Explanations in social science:  A system paradigm.  Homewood, IL:  The Dorsey Press).  I think he does provide the questions one might ask of a construct or theory that addresses this concern of being timely.  Through the criterion of compatibility, for example, current views or explanations of social life and reality are given sufficient respect and, as such, one can apply the criterion to determine if the construct or theory matches the contemporary concerns of social scientists of our time.  But I would like to use this posting to address this concern for the contemporary more directly.  In particular, I want to ask the question:  does federation theory address “modernity?”

220  LIBERAL OR CONSERVATIVE?

(October 8, 2012)

When I let it be known that I support federalist beliefs, many of my liberal acquaintances assume that I am a conservative.  On the other hand, my conservative acquaintances doubt such a connection when I actually voice specific policy preferences, such as my support for a national health care plan.  So, is federalism a necessarily conservative or liberal ideology?  If liberated federalism is to serve as the primary guide in determining civics curriculum content, any bias can be suspect and subject to the charge that it is only a vehicle by which to indoctrinate students to a particular political viewpoint.  I think it, liberated federalism, is neither liberal nor conservative.

Twenty-first Ten Postings of Gravitas

The following list of titles and accompanying dates refers to past postings on the blog, Gravitas: A Voice for Civics Education, that have been deleted.  After each title and date, the entries below include the first paragraph of each respective posting.  If you care to receive a copy of a particular posting, send your request via email to gravitascivics@gmail.com .  One posting per request.

201 “BEES DO IT”

(August 6, 2012)

With this posting, I want to introduce a fairly important issue regarding federalist thinking.  The most central notion we can derive from federalism, as I have pointed out before, is not the structural element of different levels of government – such as the state and central governments here in the US.  The most central notion is the idea that individuals or groups come together and federate with each other under a solemn agreement of a covenant or a compact.  This level of joining is more binding than a union or arrangement set up by a contract.  In a contract, the agreement takes on the form of one party agreeing to do something in exchange for something else.  When I travel, for example, and stop in a motel, the motel and I form an agreement that it will provide me with a room with certain amenities in exchange for payment of a rental fee.  If my room is not provided or it lacks the amenities we agreed upon – like a working bathroom – I don't need to pay.  But if the room is furnished with the amenities, then I must pay or suffer some penalty under law.

202 THE RELIABILITY OF FEDERATION THEORY

(August 10, 2012)

As I have indicated in past postings, Eugene J. Meehan provides us with criteria by which to evaluate social science theories and models.  I have, to date, written three evaluative statements regarding federation theory, each focusing on one of Meehan's criterion.  They have been scope, power, and precision.  You are invited to look up previous postings, clearly titled, and read my evaluation of federation theory in relation to each of these criteria.  With this posting, I want to address another of Meehan's criteria:  reliability.

203 FORMING NEW PARTNERS

(August 13, 2012)

Federalism, more than anything, is about people coming together to form a political system.  That is, federalism is about people federating with each other.  A shorthand way to express this is to say a people develop a sense of partnership – what is good for one is good for all.  While this might sound and be a bit idealistic and unattainable, the ideal expressed is something a people can strive toward.  I have argued that in American political tradition, this perception has been present and significant; that it once was the underlying sense of what governing and politicking should be about.  Given the strength of this ideal, I would further argue that its precepts have made their way into public policy, in varying levels of strength, throughout our history.  It still does and we can hear its assumptions expressed in our national debates.  Take the argument for a national health program.  Those who argue that all should be entitled to quality health care are, I believe, arguing that by providing such a fundamental need, we as a nation fulfill a requirement of a meaningful partnership between the nation's citizenry.  Of course, not all agree.

204 DELTA PARTNERS

(August 17, 2012)

What are the responsibilities of a partner?  I ask because if one is to take this notion of being federated with one's fellow citizens seriously, then the obligations of such an arrangement, or should I write association, should be spelled out.  I believe one way to do that is to look at the extreme cases – those in which parties are under the most extreme conditions of need – and try to determine what all our roles, if any, should be.  And once that is addressed, for those among us who are educators, what should be taught to our students about these potential obligations?

205 THE ISOMORPHISM OF LIBERATED FEDERALISM

(August 20, 2012)

I would like, with this posting, to continue my evaluation of federation theory or liberated federalism construct.  For those of you new to this blog, let me point out quickly that my efforts in this blog’s postings have been to promote a view of civics which I call federation theory.  To date, the blog has described and explained the elements of this construct.  And in terms of evaluating it, I have, using Eugene J. Meehan's criteria (Meehan, E. J. (1969).  Explanations in social science:  A system paradigm.  Homewood, IL:  The Dorsey Press.), passed judgment on the theory's scope, power, precision, and reliability (See the postings of June 29, 2012, July 13, 2012, July 30, 2012, and August 10, 2012 respectively).  This posting will address another of Meehan's concerns.

206 YOUR MAJESTY, USA STYLE

(August 24, 2012)

In a recent op ed piece in the New York Times (Debrabander, F.  (2012).  Deluded individualism.  New York Times, August 18, retrieved from the Internet) philosopher, Firmin Debrabander, writes of an issue I have addressed in this blog.  I have argued that the nation has adopted a radically individualistic construct to guide our thinking when it comes to governing and politicking.  The natural rights construct promotes a view of the individual as an unobstructed free agent.  Debrabander, relying on the writings of Sigmund Freud and Barusch Spinoza, argues that we only have the illusion of being free to choose our courses of action; that, really, we are far more governed by our emotions, our ids.  The ego, to borrow a metaphor from the piece, is like a rider of a huge horse – the id – which gets the horse to go in a certain direction only by convincing the horse that a given direction is its own choice. 

207 AND THE GOLD GOES TO ...

(August 27, 2012)

Some time back I had the pleasure of seeing Gore Vidal's play, The Best Man, on Broadway.  I had seen the movie version years ago – as part of a political science course.  The film starred Henry Fonda and Cliff Robertson in the leading roles.  Good, but from a purely entertaining point of view, it was a bit drab.  This live production, on the other hand, was more lively with a lot of humor.  I found the evening well worthwhile and if it is still showing or you have a chance to see this version of the play, I recommend it.

208 WHO IS THE FATHER OF THE COUNTRY?

(August 31, 2012)

In this blog, especially early on, I made the extended argument that civics education has been failing at what it should be doing.  I emphasized in that argument that I did not place the blame, at least not all of the blame, on civics educators.  There are many contributing factors, but the fact remains we are not doing a very good job in that area of the curriculum.  This message can be easily lost on us given the general reports coming from the media and the politicians about how we are falling short in our efforts across the different subject areas.  Our students, we are told, are not learning math and science or other subjects such as geography.  This might be correct, but we must be sure that within these waves of criticisms we do not lose sight of the importance of civics and its role in promoting the general health of our society.

209 THE COMPATIBLITY OF LIBERATED FEDERALISM

(September 3, 2012)

As I often do in these postings, I review the blog's general purposes.  I do this because there might be some who are checking it out for the first time.  As the general comment which appears just above this posting indicates, the foremost purpose is to encourage the readers to become interested and involved with civics education, particularly as it is taught in their local secondary schools.  Second, the blog is to present and promote the adoption of a mental construct suitable to guide our efforts in civics.  I call this construct the liberated federalism construct or federation theory.  I have been arguing that this construct should replace the current prevailing one, the natural rights construct.  I have, in past postings, described and explained the different elements of federation theory.  I have also, through a series of postings, attempted to critically review the proposed construct – see the postings dated June 29, July 13, July 30, August 10, and August 20, 2012.  Each of these postings utilizes a separate, specific concern from Eugene J. Meehan's criteria evaluating science theories and models (see Meehan, E. J.  (1969).  Explanations in social science:  A system paradigm.  Homewood, IL:  The Dorsey Press).

210 LANGUAGE OF PARTNERS

(September 7, 2012)

The President, in his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention, harped on a concept that has been central to this blog – citizenship and the social interconnectedness that idea embodies.  We, as citizens, are interconnected in so many ways that we often become unconscious of the total reality that interconnectedness encompasses.  The President, in his speech, pointed out some of those ways.  It makes for effective rhetoric because, at a profound level, I believe, we all know of this interconnectedness yet we live in a time when it has become somewhat cynical to acknowledge it, voice it, and/or verbally support it.