Why are schools, universities, culture, and the way we remember the past important to those in power?
Schools, faculties, culture and public memory shape what society considers knowledge, who belongs to the community and what abilities future officials, journalists and politicians will have. Therefore, the government can simultaneously invest in education and limit the topics, methods and people that question its portrayal of reality.
Control goes through textbooks, appointments, accreditations, research funding, culture programs, archives and the way in which the past is marked. The consequence is not only in one lesson, but in whether people learn to check the claim and submit a disagreement or to recognize the “correct” answer. The state necessarily participates in these areas. The difference is in the independence of teachers and institutions, the public criteria and the real possibility of punishment.
The same school can produce both knowledge and adjustment of government. The outcome depends on what is taught, how it is taught and how free the teachers and students are.
Works supporting this answer, with their evidence type and an explanation of how they relate to the claim.
review more research
Paglayan, A. S. (2026), „Education as a Political Institution“, Annual Review of Political Science 29: 525–546.
- Contribution to this answer
- Paglayan shows why education is not just a neutral public service: schools shape political values and national identity, create a large number of jobs that can be used for patronage, can serve surveillance and influence how the state builds a social order. That is why almost every regime has a political interest in what happens in schools.
research that checks more closely what the cause is
Cantoni, D. i dr. (2017), „Curriculum and Ideology“, Journal of Political Economy 125(2): 338–392.
- Contribution to this answer
- Cantons and co-authors provide very strong evidence that the content of teaching can really change political attitudes: after the reform of Chinese textbooks, students were more positive about Chinese governance, changed attitudes towards democracy and were more skeptical about the free market. The effects on real behavior were less clear.
data from a large number of countries
Neundorf, A., Nazrullaeva, E., Northmore-Ball, K., Tertytchnaya, K. i Kim, W. (2024), „Varieties of Indoctrination: The Politicization of Education and the Media around the World“, Perspectives on Politics 22(3): 771–798.
- Contribution to this answer
- Neundorf and co-authors show that politicizing education and media is not a feature of a single regime: on the data for 160 countries they follow different ways in which states control or shape political messages through schools and media. This shows how much systematic regimes invest in what citizens learn about politics and society.
long-term direct monitoring of political life
Wedeen, L. (1999), Ambiguities of Domination: Politics, Rhetoric, and Symbols in Contemporary Syria, University of Chicago Press.
- Contribution to this answer
- “Wedeen shows that not only textbooks create political culture: public symbols, rituals, and obligatory displays of loyalty teach people how to speak and behave publicly, even when they don’t believe in the regime’s story privately.
review more research
Han, H., Baggetta, M. i Oser, J. (2024), „Organizing and Democracy: Understanding the Possibilities for Transformative Collective Action“, Annual Review of Political Science 27: 245–262.
- Contribution to this answer
- Han, Baggetta and Oser show why schools, colleges and other places where people can build lasting organizational ties are politically potentially important: real collective power arises from relationships, leadership and the ability to act together, and not just from a large number of individuals. But the work is not about education, culture or the politics of memory as such.
Is a relevant source missing? Send it to us.
Suggest a source or report an error in this answer →