Why Conservatives Must Defend the Liberal Arts

The Case for Tradition, Intellectual Inquiry, and the Power of Reading

This article originally appeared in Minding the Campus in February 2024.

In his monumental work Culture and Anarchy, 19th-century poet and cultural critic Matthew Arnold laid out a novel curriculum that would revolutionize educational spaces in the coming century. Based on the Ancient Greek system of classical education, Arnold’s ambitious scheme envisioned the university as the center of cultural education—the cornerstone for understanding ourselves and the world around us. With its particular focus on the humanistic tradition, this all-encompassing educational model would soon evolve into the liberal arts curriculum as we know it today.

That is—if we do not do away with it entirely.

It is no secret that the liberal arts curriculum is under attack—and especially under siege is the value of reading. On the left, claims of inherent racism in the literary canon have led many educational institutions to denigrate the importance of reading, privileging media and news literacy over the timeless engagement with the literary canon under the pretext that reading itself disadvantages certain racial and ethnic groups. On the right, outrage over the woke mob in the humanities has led many policymakers to scorn the liberal arts system as a whole, encouraging students to pursue vocational education over the traditional four-year degree.

Neither approach will save future generations from our impending literacy crisis.

It’s now 2025. Having surrendered their attention spans to the TikTok gods, young people have lost interest in reading. Literacy skills are down, with only 67 percent of American 8th graders scoring “basic or above” on standardized reading tests, a steep decline from 76 percent in just 2017. And we have more than the pandemic to blame. In a rare turn of events, a New York Times opinion writer might be onto something in his overview of student reading patterns: the love of the written word has been eclipsed by a fascination with the tech boom and an obsession with career readiness. And while woke agendas in many humanities departments certainly aren’t helping, it is up to Republican legislators to take a stance against the decline in humanistic education not by lambasting it but by standing by a tenet that once led and united American conservatives: a love for tradition.

The left has run tradition to the ground, imploding humanities departments across the nation by devaluing the importance of the literary canon and replacing Shakespare sonnets with Kendrick Lamar lyrics on high school English syllabi. In response, the right has completely distanced itself from the humanistic tradition, with tech magnates such as Elon Musk leading the Republican outrage for DEI-inspired institutional systems. And while I do not disagree with Musk in his prescription against DEI, Musk’s solution, predicated on AI’s revolutionary potential, is equally as dangerous. Musk has suggested, for instance, that AI will soon replace the need for artists and will be responsible for creating video games and other popular media. He routinely scorns the need for the university system and praises the potential of AI in education. Yet generative AI, which can distill any great work of literature into soulless bullet points, has rendered the need for the literary attention span almost entirely obsolete. As students put together their reading assignments with the help of ChatGPT, they will lose their appreciation for the humanistic tradition—and the ability to engage with it entirely.

And why should they care about the loss of this particular skill set if both the educational and corporate world is telling them that the ability to read will have little to do with future career success?

Backed by a Republican legislature and influenced by ruthless corporate America, schools are increasingly pushing technical, skills-based education models over Matthew Arnold’s classical liberal arts approach. The result is a generation of emerging leaders who turn their noses up to the humanities, opting for technical-based careers and jeopardizing the liberal arts system as we know it.

Yet it would do us well to recognize the value of a humanistic education in any field.

Strong literacy skills are not just about engaging with the thoughts of previous-century scholars—they are also integral to developing critical thinking prowess and cultural awareness. Arnold’s liberal arts education model provides students with the intellectual tools to analyze and appreciate the complexities of the human experience, cultivating minds that can think deeply, communicate effectively, and contribute meaningfully to society, especially in today’s increasingly splintered political world. An educated citizenry, after all, perpetuates a strong democracy.

The solution, then, to the decline in literacy rates and reading engagement among young people lies not in abandoning the humanities but in revitalizing them. With the left’s war on classical education, Republican legislators have an opportunity to champion the humanities by recognizing the enduring value of the liberal arts—not necessarily as a Luddite act of resistance against technological progress but as a commitment to preserving the intellectual and cultural heritage that defines us as a civilization.

The left might have killed the humanities, but it is up to conservatives not to further run this unique educational model to the ground. By channeling Matthew Arnold and recalling the importance of tradition, we can restore our culture-loving society and save the human soul both from the drudgery of AI and the march of the politically-correct education machine.

So let’s think again before boycotting the university and the Department of Education. Today, we need readers more than ever, and it is up to us to save them.

Enjoyed this post? You can Buy Me a Coffee so that I’ll be awake for the next one. If you are a starving artist, you can also just follow me on Instagram or “X.”