In recent years, education has become a divisive cultural and political battlefield in the United States. Statements like those from Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s prospective pick for Secretary of Defense, highlight a growing trend. The Fox News host and former Army National Guard officer publicly criticized his own Harvard education, claiming it contributed to his “idiocy.” He went further, stating he trusts individuals without college degrees more than those with them. These remarks underscore a larger narrative: the apparent glorification of the uneducated, particularly by right-leaning groups and individuals.
This rhetoric is not an isolated phenomenon. It emerges alongside increasing criticisms of higher education, efforts to ban books, and opposition to progressive curricula. Underpinning these trends is that President Donald Trump owes much of his electoral success to support from non-college-educated voters. In the 2016, 2020, and 2024 elections, Trump’s strongest backing came from states with the lowest levels of educational attainment.
Education has become a defining fault line in U.S. elections. The state of education in the United States reveals troubling disparities, with literacy levels and educational quality varying widely between red (Republican-leaning) and blue (Democratic-leaning) states. These gaps raise concerns about how the politicization of education is shaping the nation’s future. Approximately 43 million Americans, or 21% of adults, are functionally illiterate, struggling with basic tasks such as interpreting sentences and drawing simple inferences. This challenge disproportionately affects states in the South and Midwest, often Republican strongholds, which tend to have lower literacy rates than Democratic states in the Northeast and West Coast. For example, Mississippi, Louisiana, and New Mexico rank among the lowest in literacy scores, while states like Minnesota and New Hampshire lead in education. Furthermore, we see that when it comes to school funding, red states often allocate fewer resources per student, contributing to weaker educational outcomes. While on the other hand, states like New York and Massachusetts spend significantly more on education, leading to higher test scores and literacy levels than states like Alabama and Arkansas do.
We can see that maybe educational policy varies state by state, as conservative-led states have frequently emphasized traditional educational frameworks, often rolling back progressive curricula. For example, bans on certain books and restrictions on teaching topics like critical race theory and LGBTQ+ issues have been implemented in states such as Florida and Texas. However, we did see that during the pandemic, red states like Texas and Florida prioritized reopening schools for in-person learning, arguing that it was crucial for students’ academic and social development. Conversely, blue states often opted for remote learning to prioritize public health, which may have contributed to temporary setbacks in learning outcomes.
Data from the most recent presidential contests shows that non-college educated voters overwhelmingly supported Trump, while college-educated voters leaned more toward Democratic candidates. For instance, if only non-college-educated white voters had cast ballots, Trump would have won a staggering 458 electoral votes to Kamala Harris’s 25. Conversely, if only college-educated voters had participated, Harris would have secured 294 electoral votes to Trump’s 244. These stark contrasts reflect not only political preferences but also differing worldviews shaped by education levels.
While some might interpret these statistics as elitist, as college education in the US is ridiculously expensive, especially for the average American, the implications are difficult to ignore. The Republican Party, particularly under Trump’s leadership, has embraced policies and rhetoric that appeal to less-educated voters. This has included criticism of “elitist” institutions, and Trump’s administration frequently targeted critical race theory and sex education, arguing they were tools of liberal indoctrination. In states like Florida, book bans have further highlighted this educational culture war. Titles such as “All Boys Aren’t Blue” have been removed from school libraries, and educators have faced increasing scrutiny over the materials they teach. According to Tasslyn Magnusson, a Wisconsin author and teacher, the issue is not just about removing books but about controlling narratives. “It’s about power and who controls public education,” she explains. “It’s about defining what family and America mean, and that comes down to the stories we tell.”
The ongoing assault on education is not limited to curriculum content; it extends to funding and governance. Trump has pledged to dismantle the Department of Education, redistributing its responsibilities to state governments. Critics argue this would exacerbate existing disparities, particularly in poorer and more conservative states. Wealthier regions with robust local tax bases would see no effect on the education system, but underfunded districts would likely see further declines in education quality.
Trump’s proposed nominee for Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, exemplifies this shift in priorities. A staunch supporter of traditional values, Hegseth has criticized efforts to diversify military ranks and curricula, aligning with broader Republican skepticism toward progressive education. However, his lack of administrative experience has drawn sharp criticism even from Republicans. Justin M. Higgins, a former RNC researcher, remarked that Hegseth was unqualified in 2016 for the position and still is, having spent much of the past decade as a Fox News commentator rather than gaining leadership experience in national security. Linda McMahon, nominated by Trump to lead Education, has also faced controversy. As a former WWE executive, she and her husband have been named in lawsuits alleging systemic abuse of underage children. Her prospective role in shaping education policy raises significant concerns about the qualifications and priorities of those chosen to lead key institutions.
The praise of the uneducated, paired with efforts to restrict access to information and cut funding for education, suggests a deeper cultural shift. While proponents argue these measures restore traditional values and protect children from “radical” ideologies, some could see it as undermining intellectual freedom and democratic engagement. By narrowing the scope of education, these policies leave future generations less equipped to navigate an increasingly complex world. The battle over education reflects broader questions about the identity of America. Will the country prioritize inclusivity, diversity, and critical thinking, or will it retreat to a simplified vision of the past? For now, the growing divide between educated and less-educated Americans remains a defining challenge. Whether the next administration addresses this gap or deepens it will shape the trajectory of the country for decades to come.
by Gaia Mannings
