How much is too much?

If we are to judge our representatives by their virtues--assuming there is some sort of common understanding of what it is to be "virtuous"--rather than an extensive understanding of their stances on certain political issues, what does this mean for the scandalmongering nature of the media? Should we view the personal lives of our political leaders as fair game for public scrutiny?

On one hand, I can see how the behavior of a politician beyond the workplace should not necessarily have any bearing on how they act in a political setting; history teaches us that many great thinkers have had rough family lives and checkered pasts. But should we trust that our elected officials can always keep the two spheres separate? How politicians act in their inter-personal relationships seems, to me anyway, an important testament to his or her character, and virtue is part of that character.

Media outlets already, in their efforts to score the highest ratings, thrive on the sensational aspects of politicians for their human-interest qualities. Intellectuals concerned with citizen competence often criticize these types of stories as distractions from political discussion. In light of our discussion of the trust-based model, and our interest in our leaders' virtues, however, should these human-interest stories be given heavier weight in the considerations of so-called competent citizens? To this end--what is and is not relevant information? What should and should not be covered by the media? Perhaps all these seemingly superfluous facts about politicians constitute a way for our modern-day society to establish trust in leaders who are unable to prove themselves in the small-community way of the Founding era.

The Whys and Wherefores

This blog will serve as a forum for students in PLAP 4130 Citizen Competence in American Democracy to discuss the class reading, ideas stemming from the reading and discussion, instances and applications of the class material, and anything related to the ideas in and surrounding the class.

We are blogging the class this semester for multiple reasons. (1) So all class members may be enlightened by the ponderings of your peers. (2) To provide an additional forum for discourse, to prolong the discussion and to give everyone a voice. So folks who have more to say, and didn't get a chance to say it in class, can add it here. And those with instincts to cleverness and creativity may find this a more amenable outlet for that voice than traditional class discussion. (3) At the end of the class, this product of our joint effort will (I hope) provide a useful roadmap of where we've been and how it fits together. (4) As the internet begins to play a greater role in citizen competence, it seems worthwhile to incorporate these elements (visual and linked) into the class directly.

Toward these ends, all students in the course will be both contributors to and administrators of the blog (which means you can alter elements outside of your posts and comments) -- the blog belongs to all of us. Don’t like the look of the blog? Change it! Think we should link to related resources? Link it! Everyone is expected to pipe in at least eight times during the semester with some relevant comments, thoughts, critiques, examples, questions, whatever about the upcoming class material. For posts to count, they need to be up by 9am the morning of class. Substantively, the only real criteria is that your post tie into the upcoming reading; beyond that, be creative. Plus, everyone is expected to respond to a colleague's post a minimum of four times during the semester (responses must be completed by 9am Friday following class).

I expect the blog will evolve with time -- as folks alter it, as outside sources are brought to bear, as the dynamic of the class changes. And I hope it proves both helpful and entertaining. See you August 30th!