Politics by Other Means? Rawls, Feminists, Religious Conservatives, and Public Education
- PDF / 582,911 Bytes
- 18 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 96 Downloads / 131 Views
Politics by Other Means? Rawls, Feminists, Religious Conservatives, and Public Education Patrick J. Casey1 Accepted: 14 September 2020 © Springer Nature B.V. 2020
Abstract In response to the feminist concern that various religions undermine the ability of young women to realize themselves as free and equal citizens, Rawls has suggested that mandatory civic education could balance out non-egalitarian faiths. However, mandated civic education, if substantive enough to meet the demands of feminists, would likely disrupt the ability of religious conservatives and their children to develop and freely exercise the two moral powers. The result of this dilemma is twofold: the first is that a Rawlsian society which includes both feminists and religious conservatives may never be able achieve a stable overlapping consensus in the right way unless substantial accommodations are made for religious conservative families with regard to education. The second result is a broader one, namely, that using the public education system to condition students’ thinking beyond what political liberalism requires may undermine legitimacy and produce instability and polarization. Therefore, the public education system ought to be depoliticized as much as possible. Keywords Rawls · Feminism · Religious conservatives · Civic education · Stability · Political polarization · Trust
Introduction The last several years have witnessed the emergence of a decidedly vocal form of conservatism. The more the United States moves toward policies that are in sympathy with liberal ideals, the greater the undertow in the opposite direction becomes. As our society changes, conservatives—especially religious conservatives—are beginning to feel that their way of life, values, and religious beliefs are in danger of being eclipsed. This has led many on the political right to be suspicious of progressives, and even mainstream liberals, who take positions that are at variance with * Patrick J. Casey [email protected] 1
Saint Joseph’s University, Philadelphia, USA
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
P. J. Casey
their core beliefs and values. Their concern is that while, ostensibly, progressives are simply advocating for political equality, in reality they are advocating for the termination of certain ways of life. The result is a suspicion of the political left, and a temptation to view any progressive activism for egalitarianism as partisan political maneuvering of dubious sincerity. On the other side, many progressives—perhaps progressive feminists in particular—are deeply concerned about the new brand of conservativism, and many openly worry about losing the political gains earned over the past several generations. While religious conservatives may claim they are simply wanting to protect their own way of life, feminists are likely to see conservative activism as more pernicious—as an imposition of a hierarchical model of society and families that they deem inherently unjust. Consequently, they believe they have reason to be suspicious of what they perceive t
Data Loading...
