A Civics Education for the 21st Century

Surely you remember the most famous line from the 1967 film Cool Hand Luke: “What we’ve got here is failure to communicate.” Delivered by the Captain as he asserts authority over Luke, the defiant protagonist, the line ostensibly justifies the punishment Luke will endure after his escape attempt. Yet it reveals more than the Captain’s desire for control; it underscores the system’s inability—or refusal—to comprehend Luke’s individuality and resistance to conformity.

The Captain frames Luke’s defiance as a failure to align with institutional norms rather than a legitimate expression of autonomy. This misinterpretation perpetuates a cycle of punishment and resistance, exposing how institutions often dismiss dissent instead of addressing deeper issues. Beyond the film, the line has become emblematic of situations where entrenched power mislabels resistance as a failure of communication, using this narrative to rationalize harsh measures against those who challenge authority.

This theme resonates with recent analyses of the Democratic defeat in the 2024 presidential election, where several commentators attributed the loss to a “failure to communicate.”

In “The Right Is Winning the Battle for Hearts and Minds,” Thomas B. Edsall contends that conservatives have successfully undermined liberal influence by reshaping media, technology and public discourse. Conservatives have leveraged platforms like social media, podcasts and alternative outlets to craft emotionally resonant narratives around issues such as crime, immigration and inflation. In contrast, liberals’ more nuanced and complex arguments have struggled to connect with broader audiences.

Similarly, Ezra Klein, in his article “Trump Barely Won the Popular Vote. Why Doesn’t It Feel That Way?” examines how Trump’s narrow 1.5 percent popular vote victory feels transformative due to a profound cultural shift. Klein identifies four key factors driving this perception. First, Trump and his allies dominate attention-driven platforms, establishing direct and relentless connections with their audiences, unlike the Democrats’ more cautious, institutional approach to media, which fails to generate comparable engagement.

Second, many corporations that once aligned with progressive values have shifted rightward. This trend has amplified the sense of a societal shift. Third, Trump’s 2024 campaign emphasized hypermasculine imagery, appealing to feelings of male disenfranchisement and frustration with progressive cultural shifts, resonating with significant voter segments. Finally, Biden’s low-profile presidency unintentionally allowed Trump to remain the central figure in American political and cultural discourse, further magnifying the perception of Trump’s movement as transformative.

Both Edsall and Klein point to a central issue: the Democrats’ struggle to communicate effectively. In their view, Democratic messaging failed to counteract the cultural momentum of a more media-savvy opposition.

The lessons of Cool Hand Luke—that power often misinterprets resistance as miscommunication—offer a compelling metaphor for the Democrats’ challenges in 2024. Like the Captain in the film, they risk framing their inability to connect with voters as a failure of the electorate to understand, rather than addressing the deeper cultural shifts driving contemporary politics.

---

Messaging and communication strategies undoubtedly play an important role in shaping public opinion and mobilizing voters, but their significance is often overstated, particularly by journalists and commentators whose craft revolves around words. While messaging is a vital political tool, its effectiveness depends on the broader context of material conditions, policy outcomes and institutional trust—factors that frequently have a more enduring impact on electoral success.

One reason messaging is overemphasized is that journalists naturally gravitate toward rhetoric, media strategies and public narratives. These elements are immediate, observable and central to their work, making the packaging of political ideas appear more influential than the product itself. Campaigns, which spotlight messaging, often give the impression that rhetoric is the decisive factor, but long-term voter behavior tends to hinge on broader concerns such as economic stability, health care and public safety.

Messaging has its limits. While it can amplify or obscure realities, it cannot erase them. If the cost of living is high or public safety feels precarious, no amount of rhetorical finesse can completely counteract those lived experiences. Voters are more likely to respond to tangible conditions than to narratives crafted around them. For example, policies like Medicare in the 1960s or the Affordable Care Act in the 2010s resonated with voters because they delivered concrete benefits, independent of their rhetorical framing.

Voters are not passive consumers of political messaging. They interpret and respond to rhetoric through the lens of personal experiences, values and social contexts. Effective messaging works best when it aligns with pre-existing concerns shaped by these deeper realities. Democrats’ challenges in the 2024 election, for instance, were not merely rhetorical; they reflected broader frustrations with economic insecurity, rising costs of living, international instability and government inefficiency.

Moreover, voters judge parties not just on their promises but on their ability to deliver meaningful results. Failures in policy implementation or perceptions of overreach—such as excessive regulatory burdens—can undermine even the most effective messaging. Democrats have also faced criticism for being out of touch with cultural concerns that transcend traditional categories like race, gender and class. No messaging strategy can overcome a sense among voters that their values are misunderstood or dismissed.

While journalists may overemphasize the role of communication, dismissing its importance would be a mistake. Messaging remains a crucial tool for amplifying successes, framing failures and articulating a party’s vision. However, it is not a panacea. A holistic approach that combines effective messaging with tangible outcomes, cultural awareness and a clear, optimistic vision for the future is essential for rebuilding trust and regaining electoral momentum.

---

My goal here is not to offer yet another election postmortem but to consider how colleges and universities might reimagine civics education in ways that go beyond memorizing founding documents, understanding the mechanics of government or studying political systems in isolation. A truly holistic approach would deepen students’ understanding of political systems, issues and identities while fostering engaged and meaningful civic literacy.

American Politics in a Global Context

To grasp the distinctiveness of American politics, students must place it within a global framework. The structural differences between U.S. governance and other democracies are a natural starting point. Unlike parliamentary systems with proportional representation or unicameral legislatures, the U.S. relies on separation of powers, federalism and winner-take-all elections. These features uniquely shape policymaking and governance, offering both opportunities and constraints.

American political culture also sets the United States apart. Its emphasis on individualism, distrust of centralized authority and the enduring role of religion contrasts sharply with the collectivist and secular values found in many other first-world nations. Exploring these differences reveals the roots of American exceptionalism and its policy implications.

At the same time, challenges to U.S. democracy, such as gerrymandering, voter suppression and the Electoral College, provide an opportunity to examine alternative mechanisms of representation and legitimacy used in other countries. By comparing these approaches, students can better understand how American democracy aligns with—and diverges from—global norms.

The Role of Economic, Cultural and Foreign Policy Issues

Civics education must address the diverse issues that shape voter behavior, from economic concerns to cultural debates and foreign policy. Economic issues such as health care, jobs, inflation and taxation often dominate elections, but their framing reflects deeper ideological divides. For example, debates over taxation are as much about values—fairness, equity and the role of government—as they are about numbers.

Cultural issues, such as abortion, LGBTQ+ rights and racial equity, increasingly shape public engagement, often overshadowing economic concerns. These value-driven debates highlight the role of identity and morality in politics, reshaping coalitions and voter priorities.

While foreign policy has receded as a central election issue since the Cold War, it remains crucial in moments of crisis. Immigration, trade and climate change demonstrate how domestic and international politics intersect. A civics education that integrates these issues equips students to understand the interconnected pressures of modern governance.

The Growing Salience of Political Identity

Political identity has become one of the most powerful forces shaping modern American life. Over the past half century, partisan affiliation has evolved into a central marker of identity, influencing everything from social behavior to self-conception. This polarization has fostered a form of political tribalism, where ideological divides extend beyond policy preferences to define personal and cultural identity.

Demographic shifts further complicate this landscape. The Republican Party’s growing support among Black, Latino, Asian and working-class voters challenges traditional assumptions about identity politics. Examining these shifts reveals how economic concerns, cultural conservatism and dissatisfaction with Democratic messaging resonate with diverse constituencies.

In addition, social sorting—where people cluster into ideologically homogeneous communities—raises questions about civic engagement and national unity. By exploring these trends, civics education can help students understand the complexities of political identity and the consequences of an increasingly polarized society.

The History and Rhetoric of Populism

Populism is a recurring force in American politics, offering a valuable lens to examine inclusion, exclusion and power dynamics. At its core, populism frames “the people” in opposition to “the elite,” blending economic grievances with cultural resentment. Studying both left-wing and right-wing populism—from Bernie Sanders to Donald Trump—helps students uncover common themes and divergent strategies.

A historical perspective enriches this analysis. The agrarian populism of the 19th century, the antiestablishment politics of the New Deal and the civil rights backlash demonstrate how populism has shaped U.S. political development. Examining populist rhetoric, from Huey Long to George Wallace to Trump, illuminates how leaders connect with disaffected constituencies through emotive language and anti-elite appeals.

U.S. populism, however, does not exist in isolation. Comparing it with global movements in Europe, Latin America and Asia provides a broader understanding of its causes, appeals and consequences. This global perspective helps students contextualize populism as a response to social and economic disruption, offering insights into its potential for both democratic renewal and authoritarian drift.

Addressing Power, Inequality and Marginalization

Central to a civics education for the 21st century is the study of power and inequality. Systems of governance are never neutral; they reflect and reinforce existing hierarchies, privileging certain groups while marginalizing others. Civics education must critically examine these dynamics, exploring how race, gender, class and other axes of identity intersect with political power.

This analysis includes studying the struggles of marginalized groups for inclusion and representation, from abolitionism and suffrage to civil rights and LGBTQ+ rights. These histories reveal that democracy is an ongoing project, requiring vigilance, advocacy and participation. Highlighting these movements underscores the importance of engagement while challenging students to confront the work that remains in achieving a truly inclusive democracy.

In addition, civics education must explore broader systems of power, such as economic inequality, corporate influence and media manipulation. Understanding these forces equips students to critically assess structural barriers to equity and representation and to envision potential solutions.

Toward a Holistic Civics Education

A civics education for the 21st century must go beyond procedural knowledge and the empirical analyses offered by disciplines like political science, psychology and sociology. To fully engage with the complexities of political systems, behaviors and ideas, students must explore the values, ideologies, histories and narratives that underpin political life.

The humanities are uniquely suited to enrich this effort, offering tools and perspectives that foster critical thinking, empathy and bold imagination.

The humanities empower students to grapple with the philosophical and ethical foundations of governance and public life. Through the study of philosophy, students engage with thinkers like Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Marx and Arendt, examining questions of justice, freedom and equality. These foundational ideas shape contemporary political debates, helping students understand the roots of modern governance and its moral implications.

Literature deepens this exploration by illustrating political struggles and moral dilemmas through human stories. Orwell’s 1984 warns of the dangers of authoritarianism, while Achebe’s Things Fall Apart explores the cultural and individual costs of colonialism. These works prompt students to confront the ethical dimensions of politics, including the morality of intervention, war and governance.

Politics relies on effective communication, making the study of rhetoric and narrative essential. The humanities teach students to analyze political speeches, propaganda and media, revealing how leaders persuade, mobilize or divide. For instance, Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech demonstrates how rhetoric can inspire collective action and define national ideals.

The study of narrative offers further insights into how political actors construct stories to frame issues, shape identities and legitimize power. By examining the mythos of the American dream or the symbolism in campaign advertisements, students can decode the cultural and ideological underpinnings of political messaging.

The humanities excel at contextualizing contemporary politics within broader historical narratives. Historical analysis shows how political institutions and movements evolve in response to changing social, economic and cultural forces. For example, studying the Reconstruction Era sheds light on current debates about race, citizenship and voting rights.

Comparative history broadens students’ understanding by revealing how different cultures and periods approached governance and power. Meanwhile, cultural history explores how art, literature and religion have reflected and shaped political struggles, offering insights into the dynamics of power beyond formal institutions.

The humanities also investigate how politics intersects with identity, including race, gender, class and religion. Intersectional studies draw on feminist theory, critical race theory and queer studies to analyze the impacts of policies on marginalized communities and how these groups resist and reshape political norms. By examining cultural representation in literature, film and media, students gain insights into the dynamics of inclusion and exclusion and how identity influences political participation and perceptions.

One of the humanities’ greatest strengths is their ability to nurture empathy and imagination. Through first-person narratives such as memoirs, diaries and oral histories, students connect emotionally with the experiences of individuals and groups navigating political systems. This humanization of abstract issues fosters a deeper commitment to justice and equity.

The humanities also inspire imaginative thinking, encouraging students to envision alternative political futures. Utopian literature and speculative fiction challenge the status quo, offering models for rethinking governance and societal organization.

The humanities provide essential tools for interrogating political systems and ideologies. Critical theory, drawing on thinkers like Adorno, Foucault and Derrida, reveals how power operates through language, institutions and cultural practices, fostering an understanding of hegemony and resistance. Aesthetic critique examines how art and culture challenge or reinforce political authority, offering unique insights into the relationship between politics and society.

The humanities situate politics within larger existential and moral debates about what it means to live well as individuals and as a society. Philosophy and ethics explore notions of human flourishing, grounding political discussions in questions about the good life. Literature and theater illuminate the complexities of political life through tragedy and comedy, capturing the hubris of leaders, the resilience of communities and the moral ambiguities of governance.

The humanities enrich civics education by transforming it into more than a study of systems and strategies. By examining the ideas, histories and narratives that shape political life, the humanities cultivate critical thinking, empathy and imagination—qualities essential for informed and engaged citizenship. This approach prepares students not only to understand the world as it is but to envision and work toward what it might become.

---

Civics education holds a unique and paradoxical place in public discourse: It is broadly celebrated as essential for fostering informed and engaged citizens, yet the specifics of how it should be taught are deeply divisive. These disagreements reflect ideological divides over what it means to be an informed citizen and how education should prepare students to participate in a democratic society.

Many conservatives consider “action-oriented” civics—approaches that encourage students to engage in political advocacy, activism or community organizing—as overly partisan and ideologically driven. They argue that such methods risk turning classrooms into platforms for political indoctrination, privileging progressive causes and viewpoints rather than fostering balanced, critical engagement.

Critics also contend that action-oriented civics can place undue emphasis on issues like race, gender and inequality, sidelining broader discussions about national unity, shared values and the rule of law. They worry that this focus may deepen divisions rather than promote constructive dialogue.

Furthermore, conservatives often assert that action-oriented approaches prioritize activism at the expense of foundational knowledge, such as the Constitution, the separation of powers and the Bill of Rights. In their view, this undermines students’ understanding of the principles that underpin democracy.

Liberals and progressives, in turn, often criticize civics curricula that center solely on the Constitution and foundational documents without addressing power dynamics, inequality and the historical context of exclusion. They argue that such approaches risk promoting an idealized and mythic narrative of American history that glosses over systemic injustices like slavery, segregation and gender inequality.

A civics education focused solely on governmental mechanics—such as the branches of government, checks and balances, or the legislative process—fails to address how power and representation have been contested and shaped by race, class and gender. Liberals argue that teaching civics as a static body of knowledge does not equip students to address contemporary challenges, including political polarization, voter suppression and social inequality. Instead, they advocate for a critical approach that empowers students to identify and challenge systemic issues.

At the heart of these debates are competing visions of what civics education should achieve. Conservatives emphasize instilling respect for the nation’s founding principles, fostering patriotism and highlighting individual responsibility. They view the Constitution as a unifying document that transcends partisan divides and provides a framework for resolving political disagreements.

In contrast, liberals prioritize critical reflection on the nation’s shortcomings and encourage students to participate in efforts to build a more equitable and inclusive society. They stress the importance of understanding how power operates and how citizens can advocate for systemic change.

The polarized nature of these debates makes it challenging to design a civics curriculum that satisfies both perspectives. However, several approaches offer potential for bridging the divide:

• Critical constitutionalism: This approach presents the Constitution as both an enduring framework and a living document, exploring how its principles have been interpreted and amended to address evolving issues like civil rights, voting rights and equal protection.
• Deliberative democracy: Focusing on skills like debate, dialogue and consensus-building, this model encourages students to engage with diverse perspectives, fostering mutual understanding and respect while wrestling with difficult questions.
• Historical contextualization: A balanced curriculum integrates both the achievements and failures of American democracy, highlighting how the nation has struggled with and adapted to issues of inequality and representation.
• Service learning: While action-oriented civics can be contentious, nonpartisan community projects—such as voter registration drives or local environmental initiatives—offer students opportunities to engage with civic life constructively.

A civics education for the 21st century must navigate ideological divides while equipping students to understand the complexities of democracy, power and representation. By incorporating elements of critical analysis, historical context and active engagement, educators can craft a curriculum that bridges competing perspectives and prepares students for thoughtful and informed participation in civic life.

---

Civics education once meant memorizing the Constitution’s Preamble or listing the three branches of government. But in the 21st century, civics education must go beyond foundational documents and processes. It must address the complexities of power, inequality and identity that shape our political landscape and prepare students to navigate an increasingly polarized and interconnected world.

In the early years of the American republic, civic education was seen as essential to sustaining democracy—a means of cultivating informed and engaged citizens. Today, amid rampant misinformation, deepening political polarization and persistent social inequities, the need for a more robust, inclusive and humanistic civics education has never been more urgent.

By incorporating the humanities, civics education can transcend rote memorization to examine the moral, cultural and historical forces that shape political life. It can equip students with the tools to critically analyze power structures, empathize with diverse perspectives and imagine a more just and equitable society. Through the integration of historical context, ethical reasoning and critical thinking, civics education can empower students not only to understand democratic processes but also to participate in them meaningfully and thoughtfully.

At a time when the foundations of democracy face unprecedented challenges, a holistic, humanistically informed civics education is not a luxury but a necessity. It can move students beyond procedural knowledge to engage with the profound questions that define political life: What does justice demand? How do we balance individual rights with the collective good? What responsibilities do we bear as citizens in a democracy? By encouraging students to wrestle with these enduring questions, civics education can reclaim its role as the cornerstone of a vibrant and resilient democracy.