There is a not-so respectable strand of conservative thought that sensationally labels those who criticize American policies and actions as members of a fifth-column "hate America" movement. That strand of hyberbolic ad hominem attack unfortunately works to discredit both patriotism (by making it look like unthinking jingoism) and that time-honored American tradition of demonstrating one's respect for one's country and its institutions by subjecting them to relentless scrutiny and energetic open debate. At the same time, there is a not-so respectable strand of liberal thought that holds that America has historically been little more than a consummate exercise in applied hypocrisy--that the rhetoric of freedom and equality have worked not to liberate people, but to imprison them in the belief that they are free when in fact they are the victims (and victimizers) of one of the most oppressive and arrogant regimes the world has ever seen. This strand of venomous thought works in tandem with its conservative counterpart to polarize and oversimplify public debate in the U.S.; together, the two are doing a great deal of damage to our collective civic sense, hijacking reasoned debate in favor of distorted rhetorical war, and implicitly asserting that the proper way to be a citizen of this country is to adhere religiously to an extreme and ultimately illogical position rather than to reason responsibly and independently from a base of balanced information and historical knowledge. Nowhere is the damage done by our present and deepening confusion of ideology with fact, and emotion with conviction, more palpable than in education.

Bear that in mind as you read Brooklyn College history professor KC Johnson's recent account of a new federally-funded program called "The Arts of Democracy." Johnson's essay is a chilling reminder of how even at the college level education in America has become hopelessly confused with indoctrination, so much so that taxpayers' money is now being used, ironically, to finance educational programs that seek to undermine young adults' understanding of and belief in their country.

At the Rochester Institute of Technology, for example, participation in "The Arts of Democracy" program means that federal funds are being used to hire a "cadre of new, multidisciplinary faculty" who will develop courses questioning "globalization." Johnson reports that that program's course offerings center on such topics as the "Western veil of ignorance" and the "apartheid" of globalization, and that as part of their grades students are required to keep journals about their "involvement in social-advocacy groups." At his own Brooklyn College, Johnson observes that there is no attempt being made at all to build critical analysis of democracy--or international relations, or political science, history, economics, or philosophy--into its "Arts of Democracy" program. Instead, students take courses in cultural diversity and global cinema. The end result is a distressingly anti-intellectual combination of political indoctrination and insultingly easy makework, one BC admins are eager to adopt as a curricular model:

...declaring "The Arts of Democracy" the model for making "an understanding of global perspectives an integral part of the general education curriculum," Brooklyn College hopes to use it to replace the college's nationally respected core curriculum.

The provost, Roberta Matthews, termed the idea that colleges should focus on transmitting knowledge "a very outdated notion." That, perhaps, explains why the instructors in Brooklyn's "Arts of Democracy" include the dean of student life--who notes that before the attacks of September 11, few understood the nation could be targeted by "those referred to as 'terrorists' or by other American citizens." The new curriculum will help students answer such questions as, "Was September 11 contrived?" and "What did the United States government know and when did it know it?" and "Whose rights would be violated now?"

Underlying the "Arts of Democracy" project is a fascinating attempt to redefine college education. The group coordinating the program--the Association of American Colleges and Universities--holds that middle- and working-class students enter college deeply sexist and racist. Such students need "education for the 21st century" to abandon their hostility to "diversity." The association's project director describes "The Arts of Democracy" as "one small way of beginning to work toward another kind of global community rather than the fractured, violence-ridden one represented by the kind of heinous acts committed on September 11th." The program will create "knowledgeable, empathetic members of society" who would "help ensure enlightened policy decisions."

The association seems unable to understand that different people may, in good faith, define "enlightened policy decisions" in different ways. Nor has the organization explained why or how a college curriculum should promote specific policy decisions--even those related to the "heinous acts committed on September 11th."

By underwriting the "Arts of Democracy" project, the federal government has used Americans' tax dollars for a program that views the entire modern democratic project as a sustained effort to suppress and marginalize in the interests of power, privilege, and profit--in fact, for a program that not only fails to inform students about their civic foundations but undermines respect for the American achievement.