I am especially proud of the fact that my teacher's comment on my thesis was "Beware of arguments that concern intent". Also, that I, again, totally used this essay to articulate my own beliefs, and that I cited the US Constitution, Court cases, blog posts (including my teacher's), a magazine article, and a dictionary, in addition to the normal sources. I've never had such a diverse Works Cited page before.
The Indoctrination Doctrine
When
asked what government America had, Benjamin Franklin famously said, “A
republic, if you can keep it”. Incredibly, two hundred years later, while many
things have changed, America can still call itself a republic. This is not an
accident. By passing on certain values (such as freedom, tolerance, individualism,
the American Dream,
etc.), American democracy has successfully perpetuated itself. And yet, in
George Orwell’s 1984, the Party does a very similar thing—it indoctrinates
its children to perpetuate itself. Though America and the Party use similar
methods to achieve seemingly similar goals, their intent separates most (but
not all) of their usages of indoctrination.
According
to the Merriam Webster dictionary, indoctrination is defined as “to instruct
especially in fundamentals or rudiments”, a synonym of ‘to teach’. Encyclopedia
Britannica discusses the more pejorative definition, as “any form of teaching
that causes students to embrace a specific set of beliefs without regard for
its evidential status” (Siegel, 5). The term undeniably carries the connotation
of the latter use; one rarely hears sentences such as, “The students were
indoctrinated in the proper lab safety practices”. To display the harms of
indoctrination, it is commonly juxtaposed against critical thinking. One of the
prime examples of indoctrination in the latter sense is depicted in 1984, if mostly peripherally. Children,
for instance, are taught from a young age that the act of sex should be avoided
(Orwell, 68), and that to have sex is for the purpose of fulfilling their “duty
to the Party” (132). Therefore, for the purposes of this paper, indoctrination
will be used to mean ‘to instruct students to believe something without
question’.
In
1984, The Party uses indoctrination
to secure its future members’ loyalty and promote orthodoxy. Winston, the
anti-Party protagonist, laments that the Party’s instruction, though it (so he
believed) made children more difficult to control, “produced in them no
tendency whatever to rebel against the discipline of the Party” (Orwell, 24).
Children are depicted turning their parents into the Thought Police (25),
climbing onto roofs to remove streamers supposedly falsified by the Party’s
enemies (181), and making a paper-mache model of the Party leader and symbol,
Big Brother’s head (108). Loyalty and orthodoxy are attached; “the most bigoted
adherents of the Party” were also the “nosers-out of unorthodoxy” (10). The
Party members’ loyalty is crucial for the Party’s survival; in fact, much of
the things necessary for it to function are done by volunteers. Some, like the
part-time munition work Winston is convinced to do (129) is actually voluntary
and done by the most zealous. Others, like the “voluntary” subscription Winston
pays (56), are expected of them. From an early age, Party members must be loyal
without question and believe what is demanded of them.
Indoctrination
is also used to shape the Party members’ thoughts and feelings. As mentioned
earlier, the Party wages a ruthless war on the sex impulse. Winston comments
that “Chastity was as deep ingrained in [Party women] as Party loyalty”, thanks
to mechanisms such as “lectures, parades, songs,” etc. (68). Winston suspects,
and a high-ranking Party member, O’Brien, confirms, that the point of
eradicating the sex impulse is to destroy the bonds between people, so that
they will be tied only to the Party (267). Indoctrination of such beliefs and
impulses is not all the Party does to keep its members in line. To ensure that
its members are not bothered by evidence against their beliefs, they
indoctrinate a certain kind of thinking, termed “doublethink”. Doublethink is
“to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be
contradictory and believing in both” (35). It is perhaps the opposite of
critical thinking—where a critical thinker seeks to base his beliefs on “the competent
assessment of relevant reasons and evidence” (Siegel, 5), a doublethinker
ignores evidence where it contradicts his beliefs.
Why,
then, does the Party indoctrinate its members, seek to eradicate basic
impulses? The answer is simply its own survival. O’Brien tells Winston that “The
Party is not concerned with perpetuating its blood but with perpetuating
itself. Who wields power is not
important, provided that the hierarchical structure remains always the same”
(Orwell, 210). This motive is undeniably similar to America’s, and any other
ideological institution’s. America wishes to survive, and it wishes to survive
as a republic, with about the same hierarchical structure as outlined in the
Constitution. It is worth noting that ‘America’ is not merely the government,
local or national, but also private organizations and, arguably, the culture
itself. The Boy Scouts publicly state that “Scouting believes patriotism plays a significant role in
preparing our nation's youth to become useful and participating citizens” (Boy
Scouts of America, 4). Indoctrination of patriotism is not restricted to
government-run institutions alone. Americans, as a whole, are faithful to their
ideology; not only do they want to perpetuate it, but they also want to
promulgate it. Out of the Americans
polled in a Pew Global Attitudes survey, 79 percent agreed that “It’s good that
American ideas and customs are spreading around the world” (Pei, 5).
A major purpose of public education is
to promote fundamental democratic values, as affirmed by the Supreme Court (Bethel School Dist. No. 493, 13). To that end, many schools attempt to
expose children to other worldviews and teach critical thinking (Shiffrin, 513).
Is this indoctrination? Fostering a diverse environment does not seem, at first
glance, to be inculcating any particular value, and is at odds with one of the
Party’s motives, to promote orthodoxy. However, by examining a view against
this education, it is possible to see that it does constitute indoctrination. In
Mozert v. Board of Education
(appealed to the state appellate court), the plaintiffs argued that this
exposure violated their rights, as the parents did not want their children
to learn viewpoints other than their parents’. The court ruled that, as by
presenting multiple points of view without stating whether any was correct, the
schools were not supporting any one point of view, the school was not in
violation of the Constitution (Mozert,
33). Diverse exposure does not establish
any specific belief system, but it does foster a larger democratic value, that
of tolerance, which it attempts to impart on students at the expense of some
traditional ways of life.
Democratic values are not all that the
culture and schools encourage. Americans are highly patriotic, but it is
difficult to say where this patriotism originates. Evidence of this patriotism
is prevalent, however; much of it is technically voluntary but as good as
mandatory. Before sporting events, fans rise for the national anthem. On the
Fourth of July, citizens shoot fireworks. In schools, students say the Pledge
of Allegiance every morning. Politicians gain points by saying they wish to
spread democracy. Even if students are not explicitly schooled in patriotism,
it would be difficult to avoid learning it when it is so prevalent; children
are prone to influence from what they perceive at school to be the mainstream
ideology (Ehman, 112). In addition, teachers promote certain preferences or
dislikes, such as a dislike of the passive tense. The justification of this
dislike, if given, is that passive tense is “flat” and “awkward” or does not
convey as much information as the active tense (Klein, 5). The latter reason
further reflects a larger paradigm English teachers indoctrinate to increase
orthodoxy of language use, that language should in general be used to convey
the maximum amount of information possible when convenient.
However, it is necessary to ask if this
indoctrination is negative. For example, while there are times when the passive
voice is acceptable or preferable in Standard English (The Guide to Grammar and
Writing, 4), by conferring this paradigm of language universally, schools lower
ambiguity and therefore raise comprehensibility, which is the purpose of
language. For communication’s sake, orthodoxy is necessary. In addition, certain values essential to a
functioning society are judgments that do not have evidential status, such as
the immorality of murder—even if moral standards exist in the noumena, it is
impossible to observe them. In 1984,
the negative consequences of the Party’s indoctrination and other machinations are
severe. People are savage (Orwell, 181), subhuman (16), and uniform (28),
freedom has been corrupted (16) and will soon be unthinkable (53); indeed,
O’Brien later confirms that humankind will be destroyed (267). Though Party organizations such as the Spies,
the Party has turned Winston’s neighbors’ children into savage fanatics eager
for death (23).
And yet the Party has done all this
using much the same mechanisms as America, if in more extreme forms, as
discussed; the difference is the values indoctrinated. Can it be said that one use
of indoctrination is good while the other is bad merely because of the
difference in value? That, for example, schools teaching absolute abstention
from drugs are good but from sex are bad? This is not the only question that
must be posed. Orwell makes a troubling contradiction in the two specific
examples of the effects of Party’s indoctrination that he uses most often. The
sex impulse, which the Party seeks to eradicate, is a natural process; the
Party is trying to destroy society's humanity by destroying it (Orwell, 267).
Doublethink, however, which the Party promotes and Orwell condemns, is also a
natural process; it is a protective coping mechanism (Herman, 87). Why should
one survive and the other be repressed?
The key here is control. The Party
destroys the sex impulse but encourages doublethink to control its members
(Orwell, 267). Indoctrination is presented as negative in 1984 when it is a means of control. However, the previously given
example, indoctrination in the immorality of murder, is also used to control
people—to keep them from killing. Similarly, schools practice a certain
indoctrination in a “good” lifestyle (how effective it is is debatable) that
precludes activities such as the use of drugs, though there are those who
believe that a good lifestyle includes the immediately sensory gratification
drugs bring (Shiffrin, 509). Indoctrination in democratic values is a very
overarching method of control—it encourages people to work towards maintaining
democracy and, perhaps paradoxically, their own personal freedom. Even with
this more constrained definition of indoctrination, a contradiction arises. It
would be, after all, difficult for people valuing their freedom to so much as
move to a country with an autocratic government. To resolve this, another facet
of the Party’s motives must be examined. In theory, at least, America wishes to
“promote the general welfare” (U.S. Const. preamble), but the Party openly
desires nothing but power, which is expressed in suffering (Orwell, 266). Indoctrination,
then, is negative as a means to control people without regard for their
general welfare.
Much of the indoctrination discussed is
not the same as the Party’s. For example, though schools may be imposing a
definition of a “good lifestyle” on students, this is genuinely done out of a
desire for students to not later feel regret. Similarly, the indoctrination
American culture does to perpetuate democracy is not analogous, as most people,
as cited earlier, believe that democracy is beneficial. In addition, there are
benefits to patriotism. In “American Patriotism, National Identity, and
Political Involvement”, the authors classify patriotism into uncritical and
constructive patriotism (Huddy and Khatib, 64). Constructive patriotism is
driven by “a desire for positive change” (64), which is meant to improve the
country.
However, America has been guilty of the
indoctrination Orwell warns of. For instance, after the September 11 attacks,
Nebraska and over two dozen other states introduced bills requiring
“instruction in…the superiority of the U.S. form of government” (Westheimer,
608), attempting to remove student’s ability to convert to other ideologies.
This indoctrination correlates closely with the promotion of more symbolic
forms of patriotism. The White House, though it could not pass laws mandating
patriotic expression, encouraged the nation’s children to “take part in a mass
recitation of the pledge of allegiance”. (Westheimer, 609). This is in contrast
to the school district in the Mozert case,
which imparted the contested values to “prepare students for life in a complex,
pluralistic society” (Mozert, 48). This
indoctrination is not limited to uncritical patriotism. Through restrictions on
research and even misinformation, the American government has suppressed research
on marijuana’s benefits (Barcott and Scherer, 42) despite hypothesized benefits
in an attempt to stop its use (43).
In 1984,
Orwell paints a terrifying picture of a world of savage, subhuman, uniform
people, controlled by a Party that maintains its power and presence through
means such as indoctrination. Like the Party, America uses indoctrination to
perpetuate itself, sometimes at the expense of other lifestyles. However, there
is a fundamental difference between America’s perpetuation and the Party’s.
America, unlike the Party, perpetuates itself to serve the general welfare—for
the most part. There are countless incidents during which America uses the
indoctrination Orwell warns about. Over thirty years after the year 1984, 1984 is still very relevant as a
standard of comparison to reveal faults in American indoctrination.
Works Cited
Barcott, Bruce and Scherer, Michael.
“The Great Pot Experiment.” Time 25 May
2015. Print. This article discussed the potential benefits and harms of
marijuana, current regulations burdening American researchers of marijuana’s
benefits, and the lingering effects of the federal government’s adversarial
stance against marijuana in the late 1900s.
Bethel School Dist. No. 403 v. Fraser. No. 84-1667. Supreme Ct. of the US.
Web. 17 May 2015. This case mostly involved obscenity and free speech in
minors; however, it discussed the purpose of education in a republic, which was
essential to this topic.
Boy Scouts of America. “The Benefits of
Cub Scouting.” Boy Scouts of America.
Boy Scouts of America., n.d. Web 14 May 2015. Included in the mission statement
was perpetuating ideals such as patriotism, an example of patriotism encouraged
by institutions other than the government.
Ehman, Lee H. “The American School in
the Political Socialization Process.” Review
of Educational Research 50.1 (1980): 99-119. JSTOR. Web. 11 May 2015.
Herman, Judith. Trauma and Recovery. New York: Basic Books, 1997. Print. This
book’s focus was the experience of survivors of trauma; however, it included a
mention of doublethink as a defense mechanism.
Huddy, Leonie and Khatib, Nadia. “American Patriotism,
National Identity, and Political Involvement.” American Journal of Political Science, 51.1: 63-77. JSTOR. Web. 10
My 2015. Patriotism
can be divided into uncritical patriotism and constructive patriotism.
Conservatives tend to support uncritical patriotism, but only in the sense that
liberalism does not generally lend itself to uncritical patriotism.
Constructive patriots are more likely to be politically involved.
"Indoctrinate." Merriam-Webster.com.
Merriam-Webster, 2011. Web. 17 May 2015. “To indoctrinate” was defined as a
synonym for “to teach”. The definition clarified word choice decisions.
Klein, Christopher. “Common 10th
Grade Writing Pitfalls.” Web blog post. Mr.
Klein’s Online Classroom. Wordpress, 2015. Web. 17 May 2015. A delineation
of writing pitfalls and the reasons, according to the teacher’s judgment.
Mozert v. Board of Education. 827 F.2d 1058. 24 Aug. 1987. Department of Sociology. University of
Minnesota, n.d. Web. 15 May 2015. The plaintiffs considered the school’s use of
textbooks that included a wide range of viewpoints a burden on their free
exercise rights. The case was appealed to the court of appeals, who ruled
against them.
Orwell, George. 1984. N.p. Signet Classics, 1977. Print. 1984—specifically, the government—was the basis of comparison in
this paper.
Pei,
Minxin. “The Paradoxes of American Nationalism.” Foreign Policy. Wordpress.com, n.d. Web 14 May 2015. This article
discussed how American nationalism is defined by a belief in certain ideals
rather than ethnic supremacy, and how America is sometimes hurt by this
nationalism. Many expressions of American nationalism are voluntary (and
therefore more organic than state-mandated ones).
Shiffrin, Steven H. “The First
Amendment and the Socialization of Children.” Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy 11.3 (2002): 504-525.
Scholarship.law.cornell.edu. Web. 14 May 2015. The paper analyzed the
constitutionality of compulsory education at different ages. The discussion of
democratic education was most useful.
Siegel, Harvey. “Philosophy of
Education.” Encyclopedia Britannica
Online. Encyclopedia
Britannica Inc., n.d. Web. 17 May 2015. This article described a different,
more connotative and pejorative, as a contrast to the dictionary definition.
“The
Passive Voice.” The Guide to Grammar and Writing. N.p. n.d. Web. 17 May 2015.
An explanation of when the passive voice is appropriate or inappropriate.
U.S.
Constitution. Preamble. The
preamble of the U.S. Constitution states the purpose of the American
government. This contrasts with the Party’s purpose, which is its own power.
Westheimer, Joel. “Politics and
Patriotism in Education.” Democratic
Dialogue. N.p. April 2006. Web. 17 May 2015. Patriotism can be divided into
democratic and authoritative patriotism. The former is good, the latter bad.
Many examples of the government promoting authoritative patriotism were given.
Works Consulted
Kagan,
Donald. “Democracy Requires a Patriotic Education.” The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones and Company Inc, 2014. Web. 9
May 2015. For democracy to function, people must work for the good of
their society rather than their own benefit. That level of civic devotion
necessary to democracy can only be taught from a patriotic education, making a
patriotic education necessary to a democracy. This article was, in some ways,
the starting point for the development of my thesis.
Lagon,
Mark P. “Promoting Democracy.” Council on
Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, 2011. Web. 9 May 2015.
Democracy is, in addition to moralism, beneficial to the United States. It promotes
“greater peace, prosperity, and pluralism”, because democracy promotes economic
growth and allows for all groups to participate. US policy has focused on
democratization of other countries. I found it interesting to note that the
author did not consider that democracy is possibly not the best form of
government.
Porter,
Mary C. and Venning, Corey. “Teaching About and Education for Citizenship.” PS 17.2 (1984): 216-219. JSTOR. Web. 14
May 2015. Children naturally pick up basic democratic principles and values at
home, without interferences from the public school system. What schools do is
help them examine the principles and premises “upon which the regime is based”;
this is educating for citizenship. The purpose of a liberal education is to
help children develop the skills to enrich their community as well as
themselves.
Remmers,
H. H. “Propaganda in the Schools.” The
Public Opinion Quarterly 2.2 (1938): 197-210. JSTOR. Web 15 May 2015. The
methods relied on surveys taken at intervals, and sampled only one school, so
the data may not necessarily be accurate. The general conclusion of this study
is that attitudes can be changed in school, and that attitudes have inertia
(though the media’s propaganda generally has a significant effect on
attitudes).
Smith v. Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County. 827 F.2d 684. 4 March 1987. Belcher Foundation. Belcher Foundation,
n.d. Web. 15 May 2015. The plaintiffs contended that the textbooks, which discussed “secular
humanism” more than Christianity or Judaism, was promoting “secular humanism”,
which was a faith just as much as a religion. The court held that the schools
could use these textbooks because they promoted important secular values and
that secular humanism was not a religion. This case clarified stances on
non-religion.
Spiri,
John. “Patriotism and Education”. Dissident
Voice. Dissident Voice, 2009. Web. 9 May 2015. Patriotism is an artificial construct tying the youth to an
abstract concept—is a government manipulation America should be aware of. Love
for a country should be extended to all humanity. I agreed with the premise of
this article; it helped verbalize my thoughts on the nature of patriotism.
Stolzenberg,
Nomi. “The Paradox of a Liberal Education.” Harvard
Law Review 106.581 (1993): 588-666. Web. 13 May 2015. In America, most
educations are pluralist (expose children to a range of views and lifestyles),
to prepare them for a pluralist democracies. Tolerance is also considered
“safe” to teach. This is, however, objected to by certain traditional families,
who contend that their way of life is being destroyed by assimilation. This
paper verbalized much of what I was attempting to think, allowing me to
incorporate it but also to expand from that thought.
Vavreck,
Lynn. “Younger Americans Are Less Patriotic.” New York Times. The New York Times Company, 2014. Web. 14 May 2015.
In contrast to older generations, millennials tend to be less devoted to
symbols of America, but more devoted to American ideals. A discussion of different
types of patriotism resembling the more formal discussion of uncritical versus
constructive patriotism.
“What’s
Gone Wrong With Democracy.” The Economist.
The Economist Newspaper Limited, 2015. Web. 9 May 2015. Western democracies
have fallen prey to problems such as short-sight (especially with the old/young
divide) and disenfranchising voters. More recent democracies often fall prey to
tyranny of the majority, without the emphasis on protecting minority rights and
checking the government, and their citizens don’t always accept majority rule,
perhaps because of this tyranny. A justification of the need for certain values
for democracy to survive.
