Recent decades have witnessed escalating public conflict in America over “values” issues—abortion, gay marriage, prayer in the schools, the public funding of transgressive art, and the content of American history textbooks, for example. These conflicts are more than isolated battles over particular policy issues; they symbolize and concretize deeper disagreements over the proper status of women, the nature of the family, the place of religion in modern society, the purpose of art, and the national ideals we pass on to the next generation. What is more, these conflicts tend to be linked one to another in the minds of the combatants, suggesting that they are the interrelated battles of a more comprehensive contest between rival visions of freedom and moral order (“liberal” and “conservative” visions, in common parlance). Unlike ordinary “conflicts of interest,” normative conflicts such as these resist compromise and negotiated settlement, thus posing especial challenges to democratic government. In this seminar we will explore the substantive issues over which these combatants engage, the rhetorical structure of these conflicts, their historical roots (religious, political, and socio-economic), and the sociology of their contagion (including the impact of the courts, political party competition, interest group lobbying, and modern communications technology). We will close the seminar by examining the challenges that such conflicts pose for democratic politics and evaluating the strategies that have been proposed for coping with them.

Required texts

The required texts are available at the Bookstore, with one exception as noted below. They consist of the following books:

• Berger, Brigitte, and Peter L. Berger. 1983. The War Over the Family: Capturing the Middle Ground. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday. This book is out of print and must be ordered from a used bookstore. Please do so as soon as possible, and by all means by the end of our second week. Plenty of used copies are available online from Alibris or Abe. A Google search of these store names will turn up their websites, where you may place an order.
• Ginsburg, Faye D. 1989. Contested Lives: The Abortion Debate in an American Community. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Hunter, James Davidson. 1994. Before the Shooting Begins: Searching for Democracy in America's Culture War. New York: The Free Press.
• Hunter, James Davison. 1991. Culture Wars: the Struggle to Define America. New York: BasicBooks.
• Marsden, George M. 1980. Fundamentalism and American Culture: The Shaping of Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism: 1870-1925. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Stout, Jeffrey. 1988. Ethics After Babel: The Languages of Morals and Their Discontents. Boston: Beacon Press.
• Sunstein, Cass R. 2001. Republic.com. Princeton: Princeton University Press

Other readings

ERes materials
To save you $$$, whenever possible, articles and chapter excerpts have been placed on electronic reserve. To access materials on ERes, go to the ERes webpage, at “eres.wustl.edu”. Click on “search for course material.” Scroll down to “Ciepley, David” in the “instructor” box. Click “go”. Click on the course name. Enter password “periscope.” You’re in! Click on the name of the relevant reading and either save to a file or view on the machine and print out a copy (alas, printing is slow, because these are image files, not text files). Most of the ERes materials are required reading. Some are simply recommended reading, as noted on the syllabus.

In addition to ERes materials, there are a few books on 2-day reserve at the library. None of these are required texts.

Course Requirements and Grading

Course credit will be based on class participation (10%), class presentations (10%), two short papers (25%, 25%) and a final, medium-length paper (30%). There will be no final exam in this course.

Participation: class time will be devoted primarily to discussion of the readings. It makes no sense to come to class if you haven’t done the readings: you will get very little out of the discussion, and others will get nothing out of you. You do not get credit for showing up; you get credit for speaking up. On the other hand, the classroom is not a competitive arena. If you make one reasonably thoughtful comment each class, you get full credit for the day (Woohoo!). Come with a question or comment in mind. Also, I’ll occasionally ask a “no-brainer” question. If you’ve nothing else to say for the day, or are simply shy, at least take advantage of these. We’ll all thank you for it, as it will help us keep discussion at a steady pace. Above all, be sensitive to the classroom dynamic, for which we are all responsible. Don’t take over the discussion; disagree respectfully; keep your comments on topic; try to refer to your classmates by name when referencing a point they have made (this helps keep things civil—reminding us that there is a person behind every opinion).

Class Presentations: We are all responsible for the readings every session. But each of you will be asked to take especial responsibility for the readings in one session. We will work out the form of the presentation as we proceed. Probably, they will take the form of

Papers: Papers will be divided into a style component (worth one third) and a content component (worth two thirds). Papers will vary in length from four to seven pages, depending upon the assignment.

Rewrite policy: This course is intended to develop your writings skills, and nothing so improves writing as rewriting. Therefore I encourage you to do a rewrite of one of your papers. However, rather than make this mandatory, I leave it to your own discretion, but with the following incentive: I grade papers a bit (though not too much) on the “severe” side; however, if you submit a rewrite, I take the higher of the two grades. Merely incorporating my editorial suggestions does not qualify as a rewrite. A rewrite involves a thorough rewriting, leaving little standing from the first version. It will probably entail returning to the text and rethinking your answer, in addition to doctoring the prose. Rewrites are due by Monday, December 2. (This implies, I’m afraid, that the final paper cannot be rewritten.) It is best practice to rewrite a paper immediately, while the materials are fresh in mind. Please hand in your original, marked paper along with your rewrite.

Extension policy: Paper due dates are announced and paper topics are handed out far in advance of the deadline, and the papers are short. If you budget your time and start your paper early, you should have no trouble getting your paper in on time, even if you fall ill. There are no deadline extensions in this course, with unique exception made for death in one’s immediate family, to be confirmed through an email from one’s academic advisor. Excepting this, please don’t even bother to ask for an extension. There are no extensions for illness, extracurricular activities, other schoolwork, or anything else. However, I do accept late papers, although in fairness to your fellow students, they will be penalized one third of a grade for each day late, with the first 24 hour period commencing immediately after the deadline. I will not think less of you for handing in a late paper. I realize that sometimes other things must take priority. If taking an extra day will allow you to write a much better paper, by all means take the extra day. It will more than make up for the third of a letter grade deducted. If, in order to avoid accumulating penalties, you need to turn in a paper on a weekend, call me and we will arrange a drop off at my home in Hyde Park. A rewrite will not reverse a late paper penalty. For other details, see the attached “Guidelines for written assignments.”

Electronic Bulletin Board: I am attempting to establish something akin to an electronic bulletin board for this class, where you can continue classroom discussions among yourselves. This will become particularly relevant in the second half of the class. At this point, participation in electronic discussions is not required, although it is encouraged (I reserve the right to change this policy, depending upon the potential of the bulletin board as an educational tool). As always, please be respectful of others in your postings, especially since the absence of face-to-face contact can lead to “unfiltered” expression. This can be helpful, but please make sure that what is unfiltered is not uncivil, which shuts down, rather than facilitates, constructive discussion. In general, I will not participate in these discussions. This space is for you. But I will occasionally monitor the board to make sure that discussion remains civil, and perhaps to provide occasional ideas for consideration if it looks like it may advance the conversation.

Quizzes and outlines: So long as everyone continues to do the reading and discussions remain lively, no recourse to quizzes or outlines of the reading will be made. But if the class is flagging, they may be instituted and will be factored into final course grades.

Syllabus

August 29
Session 1: Course Introduction

I: Philosophical Issues

September 3, 5
Session 1: Introduction to the main lines of the culture wars. Hunter, Culture Wars, pp. 3-51; 107-132.
Session 2: Is reasoned argument possible in the realm of “values.” Stout, Ethics after Babel, pp. 13-59, bottom of 77-105

September 10, 12
Session 1: Is belief in God rational? Wolterstorff, Faith and Rationality, pp. 135-186 (on ERes).
Session 2: Is belief in God relevant? Stout, pp. 109-123, 145-188.

II: Historical Roots of the Culture Wars: The Split Between Orthodox and Progressive-modernist Outlooks

September 17, 19
Session 1: The place of Christianity in early America. Tocqueville, Democracy in America (two selections); Siedentop, “Liberalism: The Christian Connection.” For Tocqueville, go to “http://xroads.Virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/1_ch02.htm” and “http://xroads.Virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/religion/ch1_17.htm”. For Siedentop, go to ERes.
Session 2: The role of elites; the orthodox and progressive split; introduction to Protestant evangelicals, our case study. Hunter, Culture Wars, pp. 51-64, 77-86; Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture, pp. v-vi; 3-37.

September 24, 26
Session 1: More on the evangelicals. Marsden, 43-93, 101-138
Session 2: And still more on the evangelicals. Marsden, pp. 141-228,
evening viewing of PBS series, “Mine Eyes have Seen the Glory,” first hour of tape.
Recommended reading, on the institutionalization of an evangelical subculture, post-Scopes: Hunter essay, 41-49, available on ERes.

October 1, 3
Session 1: Roots of the liberal/progressive persuasion. Reuben, pp. 1-8; Ciepley, on the relativist theory of democracy (handout); McNamee, pp. 7-14; Kallen, pp. 3-11; “Humanist Manifesto” (on ERes); Hunter, Culture Wars, “The discourse of adversaries,” pp. 135-158.
Recommended Reading: Reuben, pp. 17-60, 88-132; Purcell, The Crisis of Democratic Theory, entire. Both books on 2-day reserve. Selection from Purcell also on ERes.
Session 2: The inroads of liberal progressivism on the Supreme Court. Ciepley, 159-275 (double-spaced handout).
Recommended reading: Wiebe, pp. 17-27, 113-116, 138-150, [171-180], 206-215, 223-246. Dworkin, “Liberalism.” Wiebe on two-day reserve. Dworkin on ERes.

III: Fields of Conflict

October 8, 10 The conflict over reproduction: right to life versus right to choose
Session 1: Ginsburg, Contested Lives, pp. 1-93.
Session 2: Ginsburg, pp. 94-129, 146-155, 169-176, 187-226.

October 15, 17 The conflict over reproduction, continued
Session 1: Munson, “Becoming an Activist” (on ERes).
Session 2: Hunter, Before the Shooting Begins, 14-top of 20, bottom of 32-top of 34, 45-121, 215-226.
Recommended Reading: Smith, Christian, Christian America?, pp. 1-60, on the moderation of ordinary evangelicals. Book on two-day reserve.

October 22, 24 The conflict over the family
Session 1: Berger and Berger, The War over the Family, pp. 3-39, 53-72, 85-104.
Session 2: 105-127, 139-185, [195-216].

October 29, 31
Session 1: more on the family. Andrew Hacker, “The War over the Family” (On ERes); J. David Woodard, “The Legal Controversy over Homosexuality” (On ERes).
Session 2: The conflict over “art”: freedom of expression vs. community standards. Hunter, Culture Wars, pp. 230-249; Court cases on child pornography (On ERes).
Recommended Reading: Gurstein, Rochelle, The Repeal of Reticence.

November 5, 7
Session 1: The universities, and the conflict over national identity: multiculturalism vs. one nation, academic freedom vs. political correctness.
Hunter, Culture Wars, 211-223. Hunter, Shooting, ch 7, pp. 190-211.
Session 2: OPEN. As a default, we will examine materials relevant to the conflict over the schools (school prayer, the teaching of evolution vs. creationism, etc.), with Hunter, Culture Wars, pp. 197-211, and p. 224, as a point of departure.

IV: Arenas of Conflict

November 12, 14
Session 1: Culture war through the courts. Hunter, Culture Wars, 250-271; Kennedy, pp. 39-56, 147-172 (on ERes).
Session 2: Culture war through interest group politics. Hunter, Culture Wars, pp. 86-106; Hertzke, pp. 44-93; 161-198 (on ERes).

November 19, 21
Session 1: Culture war through electoral politics. Schattschneider, ch. 1 (on ERes); Lind chapter, 121-139 (on ERes); Hunter, Culture Wars, pp. 272-291.
Recommended Reading: James Reichley, pp. 71-93, on the electronic church and evangelical public involvements (on ERes).
Session 2: The impact of civic institutions and communications technology on the culture wars. Hunter, Shooting, ch. 6, pp 153-189; Sunstein, Republic.com, pp. 3-88.

November 26
Session 1: Sunstein, Republic.com, pp. 89-202. [Revise, only to 166.]

V: The Search for Resolution (or Simple Co-existence)

December 3, 5
Session 1: The arts of compromise. Sunstein, “Agreement without theory,” 123-150 (on ERes); Toulmin, Epilogue from The Abuse of Casuistry, 333-343 (on ERes). [Revise: Sunstein, Republic.com, pp. 167-202; Sunstein, “Agreement without theory,” 123-150 (on ERes).]
Session 2: Prospects and possibilities. Hunter, Culture Wars, 295-325; Hunter, Shooting, pp. 227-244.

Guidelines for Written Assignments

One of the basic aims of the course is to improve your writing ability. The written assignments are intended not only to stimulate reflection on the issues and problems of the reading, but also to encourage the development of skills in style, composition, and argumentation. In writing your papers, you are asked to adhere to the following general guidelines. (For further help, you should consult a good writer’s manual and, if necessary, enlist a writing tutor. If you need help, get it early!)

Formatting:
Papers should be type-written, using a 12 point font.
Papers should have a title (centered and in bold type is standard practice).
Text should be double-spaced.
Please leave good-sized margins—somewhat over an inch is preferable.
All pages should be numbered.
Please do not exceed the assigned length limits of the paper.

Organization: Your paper should be a coherent whole, with a logical movement from one sentence to the next, and one paragraph to the next. Don’t just string together a number of observations on the reading (“And another thing….”). Your paper should have an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. The Introduction is the most important paragraph of any paper. You must convince the reader that it is worth her time to read what you have to say (especially in these days, when there are so many people talking at us). So it must at least implicitly answer the question: why should I care? A typical Introduction will raise a general problem, narrow this problem to the aspect of it that you will address, and provide the gist of your solution (the thesis sentence). The Body of the paper contains your argument, backing up your proposed solution. The Conclusion sums up.

Composition: Don’t presume too much of your reader. Don’t write the paper as if it were for the instructor, but as if it were for a roommate who is decently educated but hasn’t read the author in question. Be explicit.
Avoid academic jargon. Also avoid slang. Use “standard written English” (like The New York Times, for instance). Always be clear.
Omit needless words! Omit needless words! Omit needless words!

Spelling and grammar: Proofread everything! Better yet, have someone else (someone who isn’t in our class) proofread for you. Triple check your quotations, to make sure they are exact. (It is easy to slough this off, with the thought that, hey, there are no errors here, since all I’m doing is copying it down. But you’d be surprised at what creeps into a quotation on a late night. Misquotation is a relatively serious offense, and I take off for it.) Use “spell check”! Papers with excessive grammatical and spelling errors will be returned for corrections and graded as late.