In a Foreign Policy interview,
Financial Times columnist Ed Luce blames
the majority of federal gridlock on the fact that polarization is “deeply
rooted in trends beyond the Beltway, in the real America.” Our political system is designed to function
on the basis of compromise, so it is unsurprising that it “fails” when
ideological factions refuse to work together.
Luce contends that the American K-12 educational system, and
Americans’ approach to education, is largely to blame for America’s
“competitiveness” and “cultural” problems that facilitate gridlock. Our children’s minds are not prepared to deal
with the reality of the future – namely that they will surely face failure, “C grades,” and “deserved reprimand.” Luce attributes this to soft parental
approaches to education and preparing children for the real world, results of
the “neediness of overworked
parents' desire for the love of their child.”
Further, the columnist labels this approach as “un-immigrant and
therefore quite un-American.”
Luce rejects lack of educational
funding and testing as the sources of America’s declining global competitiveness,
but instead blames parents’ approach to raising the nation’s youth. Personally I find his argument forced and
unconvincing; perhaps the sheltered upbringing of younger generations does
indeed have an impact on America’s global standing, but so too does our
declining relative performance in mathematics, the sciences, etc. Luce begins the interview mentioning
gridlock, but completely fails to relate the topic of the “spoiled youth” to
the current political crisis,
although it would be relatively simple to do so.
I would tend to agree with you that the argument is a little forced. "Soft" parenting is, according to what I've read, on the rise in places that we would tend to think of as strict, or in economic powerhouses. The "Little Emperor" syndrome in China is a problem in which parents, limited to only one child, spoil that child (and commentators have linked this fawning over a single child to problems like the rise of childhood obesity in Chinese cities).
ReplyDeleteI think you could also argue that "coddled" children would be better at empathy, at respecting others' feelings, perhaps better at working in groups as they get older - things that would help reduce problems in our intransigent government. Children who are raised to believe that everyone wins might, in fact, be able to communicate better in government because they'd be less likely to see politics as a zero-sum competitive game than someone who, say, had a Tiger Mom.