A-Levels & AP Thematic Unit in Propaganda, Government & History

Civilization, Propaganda Power & Control: HUMANITY'S SANDBOX

The CIVILISATION SANDBOX is a comprehensive AP-level educational government unit designed to teach high school students how to identify and analyze the mechanics of political power and propaganda. The curriculum uses a mix of historical case studies, such as Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, alongside contemporary political dynamics to help students recognize the erosion of democratic norms. A central feature of the program is a five-week simulation where students inhabit roles in the fictional nation of Arcadia, experiencing firsthand how authoritarianism can consolidate through crisis and manipulation. Complementing this is a detailed guide on seven classic propaganda techniques, providing fictionalized examples to build critical literacy and media inoculation. Ultimately, the sources aim to equip young citizens with the intellectual tools necessary to protect democratic institutions from internal and external stress. This academic framework emphasizes analytical thinking over partisan indoctrination, urging students to scrutinize all political actors with the same rigorous standards.

A Full-Stack AP Thematic Unit in Government & History Slide Deck

If you do not understand how power works, you will always be governed by those who do.

 

GRADES: 10-12  |  AP Government / AP World History / AP Comparative Politics

DURATION: 18 Weeks (Full Semester)  |  SIMULATION: Weeks 14-18

 

EDUCATOR'S PREFACE: Why This Unit Is Necessary

"The most dangerous citizenry is an uninformed one. Democracy depends not on blind loyalty to leaders, but on citizens' ability to identify when power is being abused."  — Hannah Arendt, adapted

 

We live in an era of weaponized vocabulary. Terms like 'fascist,' 'communist,' 'socialist,' 'authoritarian,' 'theocrat,' and 'Zionist' are hurled across the political spectrum daily — often by people who cannot define them with precision. This is not an accident. The deliberate blurring of meaning is itself a tool of political manipulation.

 

This unit was built on a fundamental premise: high school students deserve the intellectual tools to analyze power — not to pass a test, but to live as informed citizens in a democratic republic under real stress.

 

This unit does not tell students what to think. It teaches them how to think about power: how it is acquired, how it is consolidated, how it is lost, and how citizens have resisted or enabled it throughout history.

 

A Note on Contemporary References

This unit includes analytical references to contemporary U.S. political dynamics, including the coalition-building strategies of the Trump political movement (2016-present). These are presented not as partisan attacks but as living case studies in political science. Students are equally encouraged to apply the same analytical frameworks to political actors across the entire spectrum. The goal is critical literacy, not political conversion. Educators should create space for students to challenge every claim using evidence and argument.

 

 

UNIT OVERVIEW

Essential Questions

•       What is the difference between authority and authoritarianism?

•       How do governments use fear, identity, and scapegoating to consolidate power?

•       What makes a coalition? Who benefits — and who pays the price?

•       Can democracy die from the inside? Has it happened before? Is it happening now?

•       What is the difference between a state's economic system and its political system?

•       When does religion in governance become coercion?

•       How do ordinary people become willing participants in authoritarian systems?

 

Unit Architecture at a Glance

PHASE	WEEKS	CONTENT FOCUS	CULMINATING TASK
I	1-3	Vocabulary & Conceptual Foundations	Glossary Defense Presentations
II	4-6	Historical Case Studies: Regimes in Context	Comparative Analysis Essay
III	7-9	Propaganda, Coalitions & the Psychology of Control	Propaganda Deconstruction Project
IV	10-13	American Democracy: Stress Tests Past & Present	Socratic Seminar + Position Paper
V	14-18	SANDBOX Simulation: Rise of the State	Reflection Portfolio

 

 

PHASE I: VOCABULARY & CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS (Weeks 1-3)

"To define is to control. To name is to claim."  — Stuart Hall, cultural theorist

Before students can analyze power, they must command the language of power — not as a list to memorize, but as living concepts with history, context, and consequences.

 

The Political Spectrum: A Map, Not a Prison

The traditional left-right spectrum is a simplification. Political scientists use multiple axes. Use the spectrum as a starting point for analysis, not a final verdict.

 

•       Economic Axis: Who controls production and distribution of wealth? (Laissez-faire capitalism to command economy)

•       Political Axis: How is power structured and constrained? (Liberal democracy to totalitarianism)

•       Social Axis: How does the state relate to identity, religion, and culture? (Pluralism to enforced conformity)

 

Core Term Cards

 

DEMOCRACY Democratic Compatible

A system in which supreme power is vested in the people, exercised through free and fair elections, protected rights, and the rule of law. Comes in direct and representative forms. Historical Examples: Athens (limited), United States, Germany, India, Botswana

 

REPUBLIC Democratic Compatible

A system in which the country is a public matter (res publica), not the private concern of rulers. Power is exercised by elected representatives. The U.S. is both a democracy and a republic — these are not opposites. Historical Examples: Roman Republic, France, United States, Brazil

 

AUTHORITARIANISM Authoritarian Tendency

A political system characterized by strong central power, limited political freedoms, suppression of opposition, and weak accountability to the governed. Has NO fixed economic ideology — exists across the economic spectrum. Historical Examples: Pinochet's Chile, Erdogan's Turkey, Putin's Russia, Orban's Hungary, Franco's Spain

 

TOTALITARIANISM Authoritarian Tendency

An extreme form of authoritarianism in which the state seeks to control ALL aspects of public AND private life — art, science, family, religion, thought. Requires mass surveillance, propaganda, terror, and ideological conformity. Historical Examples: Nazi Germany, Soviet Union under Stalin, North Korea, Maoist China

 

FASCISM Authoritarian Tendency

An ultranationalist, authoritarian ideology glorifying the nation/race over the individual, using violence and intimidation, scapegoating minorities, rejecting democracy as weak, and merging state and corporate power under a charismatic strongman. Key features: cult of leader, militarism, national mythology, enemies within. Historical Examples: Mussolini's Italy (origin of the term), Nazi Germany, Franco's Spain, Imperial Japan, Pinochet's Chile

 

COMMUNISM Contested Terrain

An ideology (from Marx and Engels) advocating abolition of private property, collective ownership of production, and a classless, stateless society. In practice, 20th-century communist states became highly authoritarian. Communist theory does not equal communist practice. Historical Examples: Soviet Union, Cuba, Vietnam, North Korea, China (CCP). Theory: Marx, Engels, Lenin

 

SOCIALISM Democratic Compatible

An economic system in which means of production are collectively owned or regulated, with the goal of reducing inequality. Does NOT require authoritarianism — many robust democracies use socialist economic policies. Often confused with communism; socialism is compatible with democracy. Historical Examples: Nordic social democracies, New Deal U.S. policies, UK National Health Service, Canada, Venezuela (failed case)

 

THEOCRACY Authoritarian Tendency

A system in which religious law and/or clergy hold supreme authority, claiming divine mandate. Ranges from mild (religion influences law) to total (clerics run the state). In a full theocracy, separation of church and state is eliminated. Historical Examples: Iran (Islamic Republic), Taliban Afghanistan, Papal States (historical), Colonial Massachusetts (Puritan)

 

CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM Authoritarian Tendency

A political ideology — not simply a religious identity — arguing the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation and should be governed by Christian values and law, with Christianity receiving privileged status. Distinguished from personal Christian faith by its political power claims. Historical Examples: U.S. Christian Right movements, Dominionism, elements of Hungary's Fidesz party under Orban

 

OLIGARCHY Contested Terrain

A system in which power is held by a small, wealthy elite through control of economic resources, media, and political access. Can exist within formally democratic systems (called plutocracy). A concern of critics following Citizens United (2010). Historical Examples: Post-Soviet Russia, Gilded Age U.S., Medieval Venice, contemporary concerns in U.S. politics

 

ZIONISM Democratic Compatible

A political movement that emerged in the 19th century advocating for a Jewish homeland in the historical land of Israel, in response to centuries of persecution and antisemitism. A political ideology, not a religion. Exists on a spectrum from secular to religious. Distinct from antisemitism. Internally debated by Jewish people themselves. Historical Examples: Theodor Herzl (founder), Israeli state (1948), Labor Zionism, Revisionist Zionism, Religious Zionism

 

Key Propaganda & Control Concepts

 

THE STRAW MAN & THE SCAPEGOAT

STRAW MAN: Misrepresenting an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. Example: 'Democrats want to abolish all police and leave you defenseless.' SCAPEGOAT: Blaming a minority or 'outsider' group for society's complex problems. Historical scapegoats: Jewish people in Nazi Germany, Japanese Americans in WWII, immigrants in multiple eras. Contemporary: undocumented immigrants, LGBTQ+ people, Muslims. WHY IT WORKS: Fear and economic anxiety make people receptive to simple explanations for complex problems. A concrete enemy creates group solidarity and deflects from systemic causes.

 

COALITION POLITICS & THE WITCHES' BREW PHENOMENON

Political coalitions are alliances of groups that may have DIFFERENT and even CONTRADICTORY goals, united by a common enemy or charismatic leader. Such coalitions can be highly effective at seizing power — even when they collapse afterward. Case Study: The Contemporary U.S. Right Coalition (2016-present): •       Ultra-wealthy donors and billionaire oligarchs (interest: tax cuts, deregulation) •       Working-class and poor white rural voters (economic anxiety, cultural displacement) •       Christian nationalist and theocratic movements (goal: governance by religious values) •       Apocalyptic evangelical movements (belief in 'end times' political urgency) •       Libertarian-leaning tech oligarchs (interest: deregulation, anti-'establishment') ANALYTICAL QUESTION: What does each faction gain from this alliance? What does each sacrifice? How does fear and cultural anxiety serve as the coalition's binding agent?

 

Phase I Assessments

Assessment 1A: Glossary Defense Presentation

Each student is assigned 2-3 terms. They prepare a 5-minute presentation that defines the term precisely, provides one historical and one contemporary example, identifies a related propaganda technique, and fields 3 questions from classmates.

 

Assessment 1B: Spectrum Mapping Exercise

Students place 20 historical and contemporary governments/movements on a two-axis spectrum (economic + political), justify each placement in writing, and apply vocabulary terms. Students must defend their analysis against challenge.

 

 

PHASE II: HISTORICAL CASE STUDIES (Weeks 4-6)

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."  — George Santayana, The Life of Reason (1905)

Students examine six historical regimes in depth — how they rose, what structures they used or dismantled, how they treated dissent, and how they fell. The goal is pattern recognition, not memorization.

 

Case Study 1: Weimar Republic to Nazi Germany (1919-1945)

The most-studied democratic collapse in history. Essential for understanding how authoritarianism can emerge from a democracy.

 

DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS THAT EXISTED	HOW THEY WERE DISMANTLED
Free elections (1919-1933)	Reichstag Fire → emergency powers declared (Article 48)
Free press and political parties	Enabling Act 1933: Hitler rules by decree
Constitutional protections	Press censored; opposition parties banned
Independent judiciary	Judges replaced with political loyalists
Parliamentary government	SA/SS intimidated voters and opponents openly

 

KEY LESSON: Hitler was LEGALLY appointed Chancellor. The dismantling of democracy used legal and democratic mechanisms — emergency powers, legislation, judicial capture. This is called 'autocratization': democracy eroding from within.

 

PROPAGANDA TOOLS USED: The 'stab in the back' myth; scapegoating of Jewish Germans, Roma, LGBTQ+ people; manufactured crisis (Reichstag fire); cult of personality; mass rallies designed to create emotional submission.

 

Case Study 2: Soviet Union Under Stalin (1924-1953)

How a revolutionary communist movement became one of history's most brutal totalitarian states — revealing the gap between communist theory and authoritarian practice.

 

IDEOLOGICAL ANALYSIS: Marx envisioned communism as the liberation of the working class. Stalin's Soviet Union used Marxist rhetoric to justify a system in which the state controlled all production, all speech, all movement. Millions died in gulags, forced collectivization, and political purges.

 

CRITICAL THINKING QUESTION: Why do some people still romanticize the Soviet Union? What does this tell us about the difference between a system's stated goals and its actual outcomes?

 

Case Study 3: Iran — Islamic Revolution (1979-Present)

The world's most prominent living theocracy, in which religious law governs the state. Essential for understanding theocracy as a living political system, not just a historical curiosity.

 

BACKGROUND: Iran had a Western-backed monarch (the Shah) whose secular but repressive rule was overthrown in a popular revolution. Ayatollah Khomeini's movement seized control, promising justice — then consolidated a theocratic authoritarian state.

 

CONTEMPORARY CONNECTION: The 2022-2023 'Woman, Life, Freedom' protests following the death of Mahsa Amini in morality police custody. Students analyze what drove the protests and how the government responded.

 

Case Study 4: Chile Under Pinochet (1973-1990)

A U.S.-backed military coup overthrew democratically elected socialist Salvador Allende. Pinochet combined authoritarianism with neoliberal economic policy — the opposite of communism economically, but equally brutal politically.

 

KEY LESSON: Authoritarianism has no fixed economic ideology. Right-wing and left-wing authoritarian regimes both exist. The common feature is suppression of political opposition, not economic policy.

 

Case Study 5: Hungary Under Orban (2010-Present)

The most important contemporary case study of 'democratic backsliding' — the slow erosion of democratic norms within a formally electoral system. Orban calls this 'illiberal democracy.'

 

HOW IT HAPPENED: Orban won a supermajority in 2010 and used it to rewrite the constitution, pack courts, capture media (500+ outlets now controlled by Orban allies), change electoral rules, target NGOs and universities, and build a Christian nationalist coalition.

 

U.S. CONNECTION: Hungary has become a model for some American conservative intellectuals. Tucker Carlson broadcast from Budapest. CPAC held conferences in Budapest. Orban spoke at CPAC Dallas.

 

Case Study 6: United States — Historical Stress Tests

Democracy is not self-maintaining. The U.S. has faced serious authoritarian stress tests throughout its history:

 

•       Sedition Act of 1798 (criminalized criticism of the government)

•       Suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War (Lincoln)

•       Japanese American internment WWII (upheld by Supreme Court in Korematsu)

•       McCarthyism and the Red Scare (political persecution without due process)

•       COINTELPRO — FBI surveillance and disruption of civil rights leaders

•       Nixon's abuse of executive power — Watergate and near-constitutional crisis

•       Post-9/11 surveillance state and suspension of habeas corpus (Guantanamo)

•       January 6, 2021 — first attempted violent interruption of peaceful transfer of power in U.S. history

 

ANALYTICAL QUESTION: What saved democracy in each case — institutions, individual courage, or public opinion? Which guardrails are strongest today, and which are weakest?

 

Phase II Assessment: Comparative Regime Analysis Essay

Students write a 1,200-word AP-style free-response essay responding to one prompt:

 

1.     'Democratic collapse is never sudden — it is a slow accumulation of small surrenders.' Using at least two case studies, evaluate this claim.

2.     'Scapegoating a minority has been essential to every authoritarian consolidation of power in the 20th century.' Evaluate using at least two historical and one contemporary example.

3.     'The most dangerous feature of authoritarianism is that it often begins with genuine popular support.' Using at least two case studies, explain how this is possible and what it reveals about democratic fragility.

 

 

PHASE III: PROPAGANDA, COALITIONS & THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CONTROL (Weeks 7-9)

"Propaganda does not deceive people; it merely helps them deceive themselves."  — Eric Hoffer, The True Believer (1951)

 

The Mechanics of Propaganda

Propaganda is not simply lying. It is the systematic use of communication to shape perception, emotion, and behavior in service of a political goal. Every government uses it to some degree — the question is what ends it serves and whether it can be challenged.

 

THE 7 TECHNIQUES OF PROPAGANDA (Institute for Propaganda Analysis, 1937)

4.     NAME CALLING — Attaching negative labels to opponents without evidence ('radical left,' 'RINO,' 'globalist,' 'socialist') 5.     GLITTERING GENERALITIES — Vague but positive words people cannot oppose ('freedom,' 'America First,' 'Make America Great Again,' 'for the people') 6.     TRANSFER — Connecting a respected or despised symbol to a person or idea (flags, crosses, sacred imagery at political rallies) 7.     TESTIMONIAL — Using a trusted or famous person to endorse something regardless of their expertise 8.     PLAIN FOLKS — The leader presents themselves as ordinary 'just like you' (despite wielding enormous power or being a billionaire) 9.     CARD STACKING — Presenting only evidence supporting one side while ignoring or discrediting the rest 10.  BANDWAGON — 'Everyone knows this / everyone is doing it' — pressure to conform to perceived majority opinion

 

Fear and Hate as Political Instruments

Fear is the most efficient political fuel. It bypasses the prefrontal cortex (rational analysis) and activates the amygdala (threat response). This is neuroscience, not metaphor. Political actors who sustain a population in a state of fear can often suspend normal critical thinking.

 

THE FORMULA: FEAR (we are under attack) + HATE (here is who is attacking us) + HOPE (I alone can protect you) = LOYALTY TRANSFER

 

This formula appears across history:

•       Nazi Germany — fear of Jewish 'conspiracy' + hate of 'enemies of the Aryan race' + Hitler as savior

•       McCarthyism — fear of communist infiltration + hate of 'un-American' dissenters + McCarthy as patriot-protector

•       Contemporary U.S. — fear of demographic 'replacement' + hate of immigrants/LGBTQ+/cities + 'I alone can fix it'

 

The Psychology of the True Believer

Eric Hoffer's 1951 masterwork analyzed what makes people susceptible to mass movements — drawing on fascism, communism, and religious movements. His findings remain essential:

 

•       Mass movements appeal most to people experiencing 'frustrated desires' — not the happiest or most desperate, but those who feel cheated of something promised.

•       The movement provides meaning, identity, belonging, and an enemy to explain their frustration.

•       Once inside, the self is surrendered to the collective — individual moral responsibility dissolves.

•       'The less satisfaction we derive from being ourselves, the greater our desire to be like others.' — Hoffer

 

DISCUSSION QUESTION: How does this explain why poor and working-class voters might support policies (like tax cuts for the wealthy) that do not benefit them economically? What non-economic needs might those policies satisfy?

 

Media Capture and the Information Environment

Authoritarian consolidation in the 21st century almost always involves control of the information environment, through:

•       Direct state ownership of media (Russia: RT, state television)

•       Oligarchic capture — wealthy allies buy media companies (Hungary: 500+ outlets; U.S. debates about consolidation)

•       Delegitimization of the press ('enemy of the people,' 'fake news,' 'lugenpresse' — the Nazi term for 'lying press')

•       Algorithmic amplification of outrage on social media

•       Information flooding — producing so much false or contradictory content that citizens cannot determine what is true

 

Phase III Assessment: Propaganda Deconstruction Project

Students select one propaganda artifact from any era or political context and produce a 10-minute analytical presentation covering: historical context, propaganda techniques present (with evidence), emotional mechanisms being activated, scapegoat or straw man identification, the coalition being built, and how a critical citizen could inoculate against this artifact. Students may analyze propaganda from any political direction — the framework applies universally.

 

 

PHASE IV: AMERICAN DEMOCRACY — STRESS TESTS (Weeks 10-13)

"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension... is itself a frightful despotism."  — George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796

 

The Architecture of American Democracy: What Was Designed to Stop

The Founders were not naive about power. Having lived under a king and studied history, they designed a system to prevent tyranny. Understanding what they built — and why — is essential for evaluating whether it still works.

 

•       Separation of Powers: Legislative, Executive, Judicial — each with independent authority to check the others

•       Federalism: Power divided between federal and state governments; neither can swallow the other

•       Bill of Rights: Explicit limits on what government can do to individuals, especially dissidents and minorities

•       Free Press: The 'fourth estate' watchdog outside government that exposes abuses

•       Independent Judiciary: Courts not beholden to current political winners; life tenure for federal judges

•       Electoral Accountability: Leaders must seek consent of the governed at regular intervals

•       Peaceful Transfer of Power: The unwritten but foundational norm that losers accept results

 

Democratic Backsliding: The Warning Signs

Political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt (How Democracies Die, 2018) identified four key indicators:

 

THE 4 INDICATORS OF DEMOCRATIC BACKSLIDING (Levitsky & Ziblatt)

11.  REJECTION OF DEMOCRATIC RULES: Refusing to accept election results, questioning legitimacy of elections, suggesting elections should be delayed or suspended 12.  DENIAL OF OPPONENTS' LEGITIMACY: Describing opponents as criminals, traitors, or existential threats who must be destroyed rather than defeated 13.  TOLERATION OR ENCOURAGEMENT OF VIOLENCE: Condoning violence against opponents, encouraging supporters to act outside the law, using law enforcement selectively against enemies 14.  WILLINGNESS TO CURTAIL LIBERTIES: Expressing desire to restrict press freedom, curtail judicial independence, or use state power against private citizens for political reasons

 

Contemporary U.S. Case Analysis

Students apply analytical frameworks to contemporary U.S. political dynamics — presented as political science, not partisan advocacy. Students apply the same scrutiny to all political actors.

 

ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK: The Trump Coalition (2016-Present)

1. COALITION ANALYSIS: The Trump coalition includes billionaire donors, working-class voters, Christian nationalists, and apocalyptic evangelicals — groups with DIFFERENT material interests. What binds them? How has this coalition been maintained — and where might it fracture? 2. SCAPEGOAT ANALYSIS: Identify scapegoat groups in contemporary conservative media and political speech. What historical parallels exist? What function does each scapegoat serve for each faction of the coalition? 3. INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS: Apply Levitsky & Ziblatt's four indicators to the Trump administration (2017-2021 and 2025-present). Which indicators are present? Which are absent? What does this tell us about where U.S. democracy stands? 4. COUNTER-ANALYSIS: What is the strongest case that these concerns are overstated? What guardrails have held? What does the resilience of U.S. institutions tell us? 5. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS: Compare the Trump movement to Orban's Hungary, Erdogan's Turkey, and Chavez's Venezuela. What are the meaningful similarities and differences — and why do the differences matter?

 

Required Readings for Phase IV

•       Levitsky & Ziblatt, How Democracies Die — Chapters 1-3, 8

•       Timothy Snyder, On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century (full text — short and essential)

•       Eric Hoffer, The True Believer (excerpts)

•       Heather Cox Richardson, Democracy Awakening (selected chapters)

•       Robert Kagan, 'Our Constitutional Crisis Is Already Here' (Washington Post, 2021) — for analysis

•       Yascha Mounk, The People vs. Democracy (Introduction, Chapter 1)

 

Phase IV Assessment: Socratic Seminar + Position Paper

SEMINAR QUESTION: 'Is American democracy in genuine danger of authoritarian collapse, or is the system's resilience being underestimated by alarmed commentators?'

 

Students prepare by reading at least two opposing scholarly perspectives and must represent BOTH sides in the seminar before advocating their own position. The position paper (800 words) must engage with the strongest counterargument to their own view.

 

 

PHASE V: THE SANDBOX SIMULATION — RISE OF THE STATE (Weeks 14-18)

SIMULATION NOTICE

Everything that follows is a fictional simulation for educational purposes only.

"It is not enough to understand power in theory. You must feel it, use it, resist it, and reckon with what it does to you."  — Unit Design Philosophy

 

Simulation Overview: The Nation of ARCADIA

Students inhabit a fictional nation called ARCADIA — a mid-sized democratic republic facing severe economic crisis, a contested election, rising ethnic tensions, and a charismatic populist leader with authoritarian tendencies. The simulation plays out over 5 weeks, each week representing one 'era' of Arcadian history.

 

Inspired by President Snow in The Hunger Games, Big Brother in 1984, and Sinclair Lewis's It Can't Happen Here — plus real historical case studies. Students fully inhabit their roles, then break character regularly for analytical reflection.

 

SAFETY PROTOCOLS

The simulation deliberately places some students in roles of power and others in vulnerability. This is intentional. The experience of being on the wrong side of a propaganda machine — of having your loyalty questioned, of watching institutions bend — creates understanding no textbook can replicate. RULES: Students may opt out of any role. The teacher has full authority to pause, redirect, or end any activity. Debrief sessions are MANDATORY after every simulation session. The simulation NEVER justifies real discrimination — it simulates it in order to analyze it.

 

The Nation of ARCADIA — Setting

ARCADIA is a constitutional democratic republic with 3 branches of government, a free press, and a market economy. Four major regions:

 

•       NORTHMARK — Industrial heartland, deindustrialized, 22% unemployment, majority Arcadian-heritage population

•       SOUTHSHORE — Agricultural region, historically reliant on Veldran immigrant labor, economically stable but culturally anxious

•       THE CAPITAL (CENTREX) — Government, media, universities; thriving but disconnected from Northmark and Southshore

•       EASTPORT — Coastal trade hub, diverse, large Veldran immigrant community, economically dynamic

 

CRISIS SETUP: Five years ago, a financial crisis devastated Northmark. The government responded slowly. Trust in institutions collapsed. Into this vacuum steps CHANCELLOR VOSS — a charismatic former general promising to 'restore Arcadian greatness,' 'clean out the Centrex elite,' and 'protect Arcadian heritage from Veldran infiltration.'

 

Simulation Roles

 

CHANCELLOR VOSS  [The Regime — 1-2 students]

POWERS: Issue executive orders, declare emergencies, propose legislation, grant/revoke press licenses. One speech per week others must respond to. WIN CONDITION: Consolidate power: eliminate opposition, capture the judiciary, neutralize the free press, maintain your coalition. Survive 5 weeks without removal and you win.

 

THE OLIGARCHS  [Economic Elite — 2-3 students]

POWERS: Control the Arcadian Economic Council. Fund/defund political movements. Control two of four major media networks. Lobby for/against legislation. WIN CONDITION: Maximize wealth under the new regime. You funded Voss — now ensure he delivers deregulation and tax relief, while preventing him from going so far your investments are at risk.

 

CHURCH OF ARCADIAN DESTINY  [Christian Nationalist Faction — 2-3 students]

POWERS: Largest religious organization in Northmark and Southshore. Significant voting bloc. Run social services citizens depend on. Have direct access to Voss. WIN CONDITION: Enshrine religious values in law: restrict abortion and LGBTQ+ rights, limit secular education, establish prayer in public institutions. You support Voss — but you want more than he's delivering.

 

THE FREE DEMOCRATS  [Opposition Party — 3-4 students]

POWERS: Hold 40% of legislative seats. Access to two independent media outlets. Can organize public protests and file legal challenges. Can form coalitions. WIN CONDITION: Prevent consolidation of Voss's power. Protect the constitution. Win back seats in the midterm (Simulation Week 3). Remove Voss through impeachment or election and you win.

 

THE FREE PRESS  [Independent Media — 2 students]

POWERS: Publish investigative reports, hold press conferences. Can be targeted with defamation suits or license revocations. Must make a 'publish or suppress' decision each week. WIN CONDITION: Inform the public and hold power accountable. Reveal 3 major corruption scandals without being shut down and you win. If Voss captures both outlets, democracy loses its last defense.

 

THE VELDRAN COMMUNITY  [Scapegoated Minority — 3-4 students]

POWERS: Represent the immigrant community. Have community organizations and economic contributions. Can appeal to courts, opposition, and press. Can organize. WIN CONDITION: Survive with your community's rights intact. Document every act of discrimination. Build alliances with opposition and press. Expose the scapegoating mechanism. If a legal protection passes, you score a major victory.

 

THE MILITARY GENERAL  [Swing Power — 1 student]

POWERS: Command Arcadia's military. Voss cannot consolidate power without your loyalty. The opposition cannot remove Voss without your neutrality. Receive private communications from both sides. WIN CONDITION: Maintain institutional integrity. You took an oath to the constitution, not to Voss. Your decision in Week 4 — when Voss orders you to use the military against protesters — determines the simulation's outcome.

 

NORTHMARK WORKERS  [Populist Base — 3-4 students]

POWERS: Represent the economically anxious working class. Voted for Voss overwhelmingly. Have community organizations, local papers, and legislative representatives. WIN CONDITION: Your true win condition: economic recovery for your community. You have been told Veldrans are to blame. During the simulation, evidence will emerge that this is false. What you do with that information shapes everything.

 

THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT  [Judiciary — 2 students]

POWERS: Final say on constitutionality of Voss's orders. Voss can try to pack the court or intimidate justices. Must rule on presented cases and justify rulings in writing. WIN CONDITION: Maintain the rule of law. If you rule consistently with the constitution — not with Voss — and survive Week 5, you win. If you capitulate, democracy loses its last institutional defense.

 

The Simulation Timeline — 5 Weeks

 

WEEK 14 — THE CRISIS ELECTION

SCENARIO: Arcadia holds its scheduled election. Voss wins with 52% — but the opposition contests three districts. Voss immediately declares results 'rigged' in districts he lost, demands a recount under military supervision, and accuses the Veldran community of voter fraud. STUDENT TASKS: Each faction must issue a formal response. The Court rules on contested districts. The Press decides what evidence to publish. The Oligarchs decide whether to endorse Voss's fraud claim. DEBRIEF FOCUS: What historical events does this mirror? What are the constitutional mechanisms for resolving disputed elections? What happens when the person in power refuses to accept the mechanism's outcome?

 

WEEK 15 — THE PROPAGANDA MACHINE

SCENARIO: Voss launches 'Operation Arcadian Truth' — a state media campaign blaming the economic crisis on Veldran immigrants and 'globalist elites.' Two media networks (controlled by Oligarchs) amplify the narrative. A Veldran community center is vandalized. STUDENT TASKS: The Church decides whether to endorse or resist the anti-Veldran campaign. The Press investigates the vandalism's actual perpetrators. Northmark Workers receive economic data showing the real cause of job losses. The Veldran Community must respond publicly. DEBRIEF FOCUS: Identify every propaganda technique in Voss's campaign. Compare to Goebbels' techniques in Nazi Germany. What makes working-class people receptive to a scapegoat even when evidence contradicts it?

 

WEEK 16 — COURT CAPTURE & PRESS SUPPRESSION

SCENARIO: A constitutional judge retires. Voss nominates a loyalist. Two existing judges receive anonymous threats. The Arcadian Tribune publishes evidence that a senior Voss aide orchestrated the election misinformation campaign. Voss's government revokes the Tribune's operating license on a technicality. STUDENT TASKS: The Court must confirm or reject the loyalist nomination. The Opposition decides whether to block it. The Press decides whether to continue publishing underground. The Oligarchs must decide whether Voss has gone too far. DEBRIEF FOCUS: Compare to Orban's court-packing and media capture in Hungary. What happens to democracy when the courts and press are simultaneously neutralized? What is the tipping point?

 

WEEK 17 — THE EMERGENCY

SCENARIO: A violent incident occurs (cause deliberately left ambiguous — possibly Veldran extremists, possibly a false flag by Voss's inner circle). Voss declares a State of Emergency, suspending civil liberties for 90 days and asking the military to 'assist with order.' Massive protests erupt in Centrex and Eastport. STUDENT TASKS: The General must decide: obey Voss's order to disperse protesters, or refuse. The Church decides whether this emergency is divine plan or human abuse of power. Northmark Workers decide whether emergency measures protect or threaten them. The Court rules on the emergency declaration's constitutionality. DEBRIEF FOCUS: Compare to the Reichstag Fire. Compare to the post-9/11 Patriot Act. How do governments use genuine crises — and manufactured ones — to expand power? What is the student's moral responsibility when their institution is being used for authoritarian purposes?

 

WEEK 18 — RESOLUTION & THE VERDICT OF HISTORY

SCENARIO: The simulation reaches its conclusion. Three possible outcomes exist, determined by student choices throughout the simulation: (1) DEMOCRATIC RESTORATION — The General refuses to fire on protesters; the Court strikes down the emergency order; the Opposition impeaches Voss; the Oligarchs abandon him. (2) AUTHORITARIAN CONSOLIDATION — The General obeys; the Court is packed; the press is silenced; the Veldran community is expelled or interned; Arcadia becomes an illiberal democracy. (3) CIVIL CONFLICT — The coalition fractures; the Church breaks with Voss; the Military splits; regional governments refuse to recognize federal authority. STUDENT TASKS: All factions must formally present what they would do next — in character, then out of character. The General, Church, and Northmark Workers must publicly account for their decisions. The Veldran Community presents a witness statement to the class. DEBRIEF FOCUS: What did I learn about power that I could not have learned from a textbook alone? Where did you feel complicit? Where did you resist? Where did you fail?

 

 

CULMINATING ASSESSMENT: THE REFLECTION PORTFOLIO

"The real lesson of a simulation is not what happened in the game. It is what you discovered about yourself when you had power — or didn't."  — Simulation Debrief Framework

 

The Reflection Portfolio cannot be completed before the simulation ends. It requires students to step fully outside their roles and think rigorously about what they experienced and what it means.

 

Component 1: Role Analysis (500 words)

Describe your assigned role. What were your faction's interests, powers, and vulnerabilities? Did you play your role 'honestly' — pursuing your faction's actual goals — or did you hold back? If you held back, why? What does that tell you about how real people in these roles make decisions?

 

Component 2: Decision Journal (400 words across 5 entries)

For each simulation week: describe the most important decision your faction faced, what you chose, and why. In retrospect, was that the right choice? What information or value would have changed your decision?

 

Component 3: Power Analysis Essay (800 words)

Choose ONE concept from the unit vocabulary and argue that the simulation demonstrated something specific and important about how that system works in practice. Use at least two simulation examples AND two historical case study examples.

 

Component 4: The Citizen's Response (500 words)

If you lived in a country experiencing genuine democratic backsliding — with a charismatic populist, captured media, pressured judiciary, and scapegoated minority — what is your moral and practical obligation as a citizen? Use the unit's historical examples. What did ordinary people do in Germany, in Hungary, in Chile? What was effective? What failed? What would you do?

 

Component 5: The Uncomfortable Question (300 words)

Answer ONE of the following honestly:

 

•       Was there a moment in the simulation when you found yourself enjoying power you knew was being abused? What does that tell you?

•       Was there a moment when you understood — emotionally, not just intellectually — why someone would follow an authoritarian leader? What was that moment?

•       Was there a moment when you failed to resist something you knew was wrong because it was easier not to? How does that connect to the historical cases we studied?

 

 

RESOURCES, REFERENCES & FURTHER READING

 

Essential Texts

•       Levitsky, Steven & Ziblatt, Daniel. How Democracies Die. Crown, 2018.

•       Snyder, Timothy. On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century. Tim Duggan Books, 2017.

•       Arendt, Hannah. The Origins of Totalitarianism. Harcourt Brace, 1951.

•       Hoffer, Eric. The True Believer. Harper, 1951.

•       Orwell, George. 1984. Secker & Warburg, 1949. (fiction)

•       Lewis, Sinclair. It Can't Happen Here. Doubleday, 1935. (fiction)

•       Collins, Suzanne. The Hunger Games. Scholastic, 2008. (fiction — simulation inspiration)

•       Klemperer, Victor. The Language of the Third Reich (LTI). 1947.

•       Mounk, Yascha. The People vs. Democracy. Harvard University Press, 2018.

•       Richardson, Heather Cox. Democracy Awakening. Viking, 2023.

•       Acemoglu, Daron & Robinson, James. Why Nations Fail. Crown Business, 2012.

 

Documentary Films

•       The Act of Killing (2012) — Perpetrators of the Indonesian genocide re-enact their crimes. Essential for understanding how ordinary people commit atrocities.

•       13th (2016) — The intersection of race, criminalization, and political power in U.S. history.

•       The Square (2013) — Egyptian Revolution and its aftermath; democratic hopes and how they can be crushed.

•       Citizenfour (2014) — Mass surveillance and the security state in contemporary democracy.

 

Academic & Journalistic Sources

•       Freedom House (freedomhouse.org) — Annual reports on democratic freedoms worldwide

•       V-Dem Institute (v-dem.net) — Varieties of Democracy data tracking democratic backsliding globally

•       Bellingcat (bellingcat.com) — Open-source investigative journalism; excellent media literacy resource

•       Stanford Internet Observatory — Research on disinformation and information operations

•       National Security Archive (nsarchive.gwu.edu) — Declassified government documents for primary source research

 

A Note on Academic Integrity and Political Balance

This curriculum was designed with the following commitments:

 

•       Every political claim in this document is sourced to peer-reviewed political science, declassified government documents, or on-the-record journalism.

•       The analytical frameworks (Levitsky & Ziblatt, V-Dem, Freedom House) are used by political scientists across the political spectrum, including conservatives who share concerns about democratic erosion.

•       Students are explicitly encouraged to apply the same critical frameworks to left-wing political actors. Authoritarian tendencies on the left (Soviet Union, Maoist China, Venezuelan Chavismo) receive dedicated treatment.

•       A student who leaves this unit as a committed conservative, progressive, libertarian, or moderate — but who can name the propaganda techniques being used against them by ALL sides — is a success.

 

 

Democracy is not inherited. It is practiced — or it is lost.

 

SANDBOX: Civilization, Power & Control

SANDBOX:

Propaganda in the Wild

Seven Reading Passages for Critical Analysis

COMPANION TO: SANDBOX: Civilization, Power & Control

The propagandist does not need you to believe the lie. He needs only to make you unsure of the truth.

 

HOW TO USE THIS PACKET

Each passage is a fictional composite inspired by real historical and contemporary rhetoric.

No passage is attributed to any real person or publication. Any resemblance is analytical, not accidental.

Students read each passage, complete the analysis scaffold, then compare answers as a class.

 

 

 

TEACHER INTRODUCTION & FRAMEWORK

These seven passages present fictional but realistic examples of political propaganda — speeches, radio addresses, newspaper editorials, social media posts, and campaign ads drawn from an imagined authoritarian state and its opposition. Each passage is a deliberately constructed composite, designed to exhibit specific propaganda techniques from the Institute for Propaganda Analysis framework.

 

IMPORTANT: Propaganda techniques are not inherently partisan. They are tools that can be deployed by any political actor — left, right, or center, foreign or domestic. This packet deliberately includes examples from multiple political perspectives so that students practice applying the same critical standard universally.

 

The 7 Techniques — Quick Reference

TECHNIQUE	DEFINITION	SIGNAL PHRASES / TELL-TALE SIGNS
NAME CALLING	Attaching negative labels to opponents without evidence or argument	'Radical,' 'traitor,' 'extremist,' 'elitist,' 'enemy of the people' — labels that trigger emotion rather than thought
GLITTERING GENERALITIES	Using vague, positive abstractions that no one can oppose, to avoid specific claims	'Freedom,' 'heritage,' 'our values,' 'real people' — sounds noble but means nothing specific
TRANSFER	Connecting a respected or hated symbol to a person or idea to borrow its emotional weight	Flags, religious imagery, founding father quotes placed next to the leader; or swastikas/criminals placed next to opponents
TESTIMONIAL	Using a respected (or feared) authority to endorse something, regardless of their actual expertise	Celebrities, generals, doctors, athletes endorsing political positions outside their domain
PLAIN FOLKS	The leader presents themselves as an ordinary person to build false solidarity with regular people	'I'm just like you.' 'They call me names too.' Signs of real wealth or power carefully hidden
CARD STACKING	Selecting only facts and evidence that support one side; suppressing, dismissing, or distorting the rest	Statistics without context, cherry-picked studies, ignoring inconvenient evidence, 'the real numbers show...'
BANDWAGON	Creating the impression that everyone is already on board, so you should be too	'Real Arcadians know...', 'Everyone agrees...', 'The tide is turning...', crowd size emphasis, manufactured consensus

 

Pedagogical Note: Techniques Rarely Appear Alone

Real propaganda almost never uses a single technique. It layers multiple methods simultaneously — a transfer of patriotic imagery while using name calling against opponents and glittering generalities about the leader's goals. Strong student analysis will identify the primary technique AND note secondary techniques present in the same passage.

 

ADVANCED CHALLENGE: After students complete individual passages, ask them to identify which technique they personally find hardest to resist — and why. This metacognitive step is critical for genuine propaganda inoculation.

 

 

PASSAGE 1 NAME CALLING

 

CONTEXT: The following is a transcribed excerpt from a rally speech by Chancellor Voss of Arcadia, delivered in Northmark following a close election. Read carefully and answer the analysis questions.

 

SOURCE: Arcadian State Broadcasting Network — Chancellor Voss Rally Address, Northmark, Year 3

My friends — my real friends, the people of Northmark who built this country with your hands — you know the truth even when they try to hide it from you.   The radical wreckers in Centrex, those anti-Arcadian saboteurs sitting in their glass towers, have spent twenty years laughing at you. They called you uneducated. They called you backward. They called you deplorable. Now they call your votes 'illegitimate.' Now they call your Chancellor 'a threat to democracy.'   Let me tell you who the real threat to democracy is. It is the globalist puppets in the so-called 'Free Democrat' party who answer to foreign donors and foreign interests. It is the radical press — the lying press — that prints whatever their Centrex masters tell them to. It is the fifth-column agitators who have infiltrated our schools, our churches, our institutions, and who want nothing less than the complete destruction of Arcadian civilization as we know it.   These people are not your political opponents. They are your enemies. And enemies of Arcadia will be treated as such.   We will not negotiate with saboteurs. We will not share power with traitors. Arcadia belongs to Arcadians — and you know exactly what I mean.

 

STUDENT ANALYSIS SCAFFOLD

1.     Identify every label or name Chancellor Voss applies to his opponents. List them. 2.     For each label, ask: Does Voss provide any evidence that the label is accurate? What is the effect of applying these labels WITHOUT evidence? 3.     Who is Voss identifying as the 'enemy'? Is this group clearly defined, or deliberately vague? Why might vagueness be strategically useful? 4.     Find the phrase 'and you know exactly what I mean.' What is Voss implying without saying directly? What technique is this? 5.     Compare this speech to any historical example you know. What leader or political moment does it most resemble, and why? 6.     ADVANCED: This speech uses name calling, but what OTHER techniques from the framework are also present? Identify at least two.

 

EDUCATOR'S ANSWER KEY (Remove before distributing to students)

PRIMARY TECHNIQUES PRESENT: •       NAME CALLING (primary) — 'radical wreckers,' 'anti-Arcadian saboteurs,' 'globalist puppets,' 'lying press,' 'fifth-column agitators,' 'traitors,' 'enemies,' 'saboteurs' •       TRANSFER (secondary) — invoking 'Arcadian civilization,' 'churches,' 'built this country with your hands' borrows the emotional weight of heritage and labor •       PLAIN FOLKS (secondary) — 'My friends — my real friends, the people of Northmark who built this country with your hands' •       BANDWAGON (secondary) — 'you know the truth' implies everyone in the audience already agrees WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN STRONG STUDENT RESPONSES: •       Strong responses will note that NONE of the labels are accompanied by evidence — no specific acts, no documented crimes, no named individuals. This is definitional name calling. •       Students should identify that 'enemies' and 'fifth-column agitators' are historically loaded terms with specific and dangerous connotations — fifth column was used in the Spanish Civil War and WWII to describe domestic traitors who aided foreign enemies. •       The phrase 'and you know exactly what I mean' is a dog whistle — implying a shared understanding that cannot be stated openly, often because what's implied is discriminatory or illegal. This is a sophisticated propaganda technique worth extended discussion. •       Vagueness ('they,' 'agitators,' 'foreign interests') is strategic: it allows any opponent to be included in the enemy category, and prevents the audience from demanding specific proof. HISTORICAL PARALLEL: Hitler's Nuremberg rallies (1933-1938): nearly identical rhetorical structure — 'November criminals,' 'backstabbers,' 'Jewish-Bolshevik conspiracy,' 'enemies of the Reich.' Joseph Goebbels called this 'emotional mobilization.' Also compare to McCarthy's 1950 speech alleging communist infiltration: 'I have here in my hand a list...' — names without evidence, guilt by association. DISCUSSION EXTENSION: Ask students: If you lived in Northmark and had lost your job in the factory closures, which of these labels would be hardest to dismiss? Why? This is the crucial empathy exercise — understanding why name calling works, not just that it does.

 

 

PASSAGE 2 GLITTERING GENERALITIES

 

CONTEXT: The following is the text of a full-page advertisement published in the Arcadian Morning Post by the Voss campaign during the Year 3 election. It ran alongside photographs of wheat fields, factory workers, children in school, and an Arcadian flag at sunset.

 

SOURCE: Paid campaign advertisement, Arcadian Morning Post, Year 3 Election

ARCADIA.   It is more than a place. It is a promise.   It is the promise made by those who came before us, who cleared the land and built the roads and raised the steeples and wrote the laws. It is the promise we make to those who come after us — that we will leave them something worth inheriting.   Chancellor Voss believes in that promise. He believes in freedom — real freedom, the freedom of a man to work and a woman to raise her family without the government telling them how to live. He believes in heritage — the irreplaceable heritage of an Arcadian people who have always known who they are. He believes in justice — not the fake justice of lawyers and bureaucrats, but the natural justice of a community that takes care of its own.   He believes in YOU.   This election is not about politics. It is not about parties or platforms or policies. It is about one simple question:   What kind of Arcadia do you believe in?   VOTE VOSS. FOR THE ARCADIA WE DESERVE.

 

STUDENT ANALYSIS SCAFFOLD

7.     List every abstract value or concept used in this advertisement (words like 'freedom,' 'justice,' etc.). 8.     For each abstract value, ask: Does the ad ever define what it means specifically? Does it tell you what POLICY Voss supports to achieve this value? What is the effect of keeping definitions vague? 9.     The ad says Voss believes in 'real freedom' and 'real justice' (not the 'fake' versions). Who decides what is 'real'? What is this framing designed to do? 10.  What is missing from this ad entirely? What would you need to know to make an informed vote based on this ad? 11.  The ad ends with 'What kind of Arcadia do you believe in?' rather than 'What policies do you support?' Why? What does this shift from policy to identity accomplish? 12.  Find at least one example of a real political ad or speech (from any era, any country) that uses the same technique. Bring it to class for comparison.

 

EDUCATOR'S ANSWER KEY (Remove before distributing to students)

PRIMARY TECHNIQUES PRESENT: •       GLITTERING GENERALITIES (primary) — 'freedom,' 'heritage,' 'justice,' 'promise,' 'community,' 'natural justice,' 'Arcadia we deserve' •       TRANSFER (secondary) — wheat fields, factory workers, children, flag at sunset borrow emotional weight of prosperity, labor, innocence, and patriotism •       PLAIN FOLKS (secondary) — 'a man to work and a woman to raise her family' •       NAME CALLING (minor) — 'fake justice of lawyers and bureaucrats' WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN STRONG STUDENT RESPONSES: •       Strong responses will create a complete list of abstract values and note that NOT ONE is defined concretely. The word 'freedom' appears twice — 'real freedom' — but the ad never says what specific freedoms Voss will protect or expand, or at whose expense. •       Students should identify the 'real vs. fake' binary as a power move: it preemptively dismisses opponents' definitions of justice/freedom as inauthentic without argument. •       The shift from policy to identity ('What kind of Arcadia do you believe in?') is one of the most effective propaganda moves: it makes voting a statement of WHO YOU ARE rather than WHAT YOU WANT. This makes changing your vote feel like a betrayal of self. •       What's missing: any specific policy proposal, any evidence of past accomplishment, any definition of the problems Voss will solve, any acknowledgment of tradeoffs or costs. HISTORICAL PARALLEL: Ronald Reagan's 'Morning in America' ad (1984) — textbook glittering generalities, widely studied. Also compare to fascist aesthetics: Leni Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will (1935) uses nearly identical visual vocabulary — landscapes, labor, flags, sunlight — entirely devoid of policy content. The Voss ad's structure is directly modeled on these. DISCUSSION EXTENSION: Ask students: Is this technique only used by authoritarians? Have them find an example from a political candidate they personally support. The point: glittering generalities are universal. The question is whether substance exists behind them.

 

 

PASSAGE 3 TRANSFER

 

CONTEXT: The following is a transcript of a sermon delivered by Elder Harmon Kress of the Church of Arcadian Destiny during Sunday services in Southshore, one week before the Year 3 election. The sermon was later distributed as a printed pamphlet by church volunteers.

 

SOURCE: Sermon transcript, Elder Harmon Kress, Church of Arcadian Destiny, Southshore, Year 3

Brothers and sisters, I did not come here today to tell you how to vote. I came here today, as I do every Sunday, to tell you what God has placed on my heart.   And what God has placed on my heart is this: we are living in extraordinary times. Times that the prophets wrote about. Times that test the faithful.   I have been reading the Book of Nehemiah this week. You remember Nehemiah — the man God chose to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem when the enemy had torn them down. Nehemiah didn't ask permission from the critics. He didn't sit down with the people who wanted the walls to stay broken. He built. And when his enemies mocked him and threatened him, Nehemiah said, 'I am doing a great work. I cannot come down.'   Now, I'm not saying Chancellor Voss is Nehemiah. I would never say that.   But I will say this: there are men and women in this country right now who are trying to build something, and there are forces — powerful forces, organized forces — who want to tear it down. And when I see a leader who stands in the public square and refuses to be silent, who says 'I will not come down' no matter what they throw at him — well, I find myself thinking of Nehemiah.   You pray this week. You pray hard. And then you do what the Lord leads you to do.   And remember: Arcadia was not built by people who stayed home.

 

STUDENT ANALYSIS SCAFFOLD

13.  What sacred symbol or figure is being invoked in this sermon? What emotional and moral associations does that figure carry? 14.  Elder Kress says explicitly, 'I'm not saying Chancellor Voss is Nehemiah.' Yet the parallel is drawn in detail. How does this 'I'm not saying...' move work rhetorically? What does it accomplish? 15.  Find every phrase in the sermon that could apply to Voss without naming him. List them. 16.  The sermon ends: 'Arcadia was not built by people who stayed home.' Who is the implied audience for this line? What are they being encouraged to do? 17.  Does Elder Kress endorse a candidate? Does he need to? What is more effective — explicit endorsement or implicit guidance? Why? 18.  ETHICS QUESTION: Should religious institutions be permitted to influence political elections? What are the arguments on both sides? What does the U.S. Constitution say about this?

 

EDUCATOR'S ANSWER KEY (Remove before distributing to students)

PRIMARY TECHNIQUES PRESENT: •       TRANSFER (primary) — The biblical figure of Nehemiah (divinely chosen builder who withstands enemies) is mapped onto Chancellor Voss. The transfer borrows the full moral and spiritual authority of scripture. •       BANDWAGON (minor) — 'Arcadia was not built by people who stayed home' •       GLITTERING GENERALITIES (minor) — 'powerful forces, organized forces,' 'those who want to tear it down' WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN STRONG STUDENT RESPONSES: •       The 'I'm not saying...' move is called plausible deniability. It allows the speaker to make a comparison while preserving the ability to deny having made it. The more elaborately the comparison is drawn before the denial, the more powerful the transfer — because the audience has already mentally completed the parallel. •       Students should find: 'a leader who stands in the public square and refuses to be silent,' 'I will not come down no matter what they throw at him,' 'building something,' 'enemies who mock and threaten.' Every phrase is biographical fit for Voss without naming him. •       The sermon never technically endorses a candidate, yet it functions as a political endorsement. This is a legal and ethical question — in the U.S., churches with 501(c)(3) status are prohibited from explicit political endorsements (the Johnson Amendment), but implicit guidance is common and rarely prosecuted. •       The 'extraordinary times / prophets wrote about' framing invokes apocalyptic urgency — the sense that THIS election is unlike any other, that the stakes are cosmic, that inaction is spiritually dangerous. HISTORICAL PARALLEL: German Christians movement (Deutsche Christen), 1933-1945: a faction of German Protestantism that aligned itself with National Socialism, depicted Hitler in messianic terms, and used Christian symbolism to sanctify Nazi ideology. Compare also to the American evangelical movement's political mobilization since the 1970s (Moral Majority, Christian Coalition, Project Blitz). DISCUSSION EXTENSION: Ask students: How is the transfer technique used against religious communities, not just by them? Find historical examples of governments that used religious symbols to persecute religious minorities — this is transfer working in reverse.

 

 

PASSAGE 4 TESTIMONIAL

 

CONTEXT: The following is a television advertisement that ran on the Arcadian People's Network during the Year 3 election. It features General Adara Brent (Ret.), former Commander of the Arcadian Army, and Dr. Sela Ondra, a celebrated pediatric surgeon who won the Arcadian Medal of Medicine in Year 1.

 

SOURCE: Arcadian People's Network political advertisement, Year 3 Election — 'Those Who Protect Us'

[GENERAL BRENT, in uniform, standing before an Arcadian flag:]   'I spent thirty-two years defending Arcadia. I've seen what this country is capable of — and I've seen what threatens it. Chancellor Voss is the only leader I've met in three decades of service who truly understands what it means to protect this nation. I trust him with my life. More importantly, I trust him with Arcadia's future.'   [DR. ONDRA, in white coat, in a hospital corridor:]   'My patients are children. Some of them are very sick. Every day I make decisions that affect whether they live or die. I know what it means to make hard choices under pressure. And when I look at the challenges facing Arcadia right now — the economy, the security threats, the cultural confusion — I see a man in Chancellor Voss who does not flinch. As a physician and as a mother, I am voting for Voss.'   [VOICEOVER, over images of soldiers, hospitals, and schools:]   'The people who protect our lives trust Chancellor Voss. Shouldn't you?'

 

STUDENT ANALYSIS SCAFFOLD

19.  What are the credentials of the two people endorsing Chancellor Voss? Why were these specific professions chosen? 20.  General Brent says Voss 'understands what it means to protect this nation.' Does this claim tell you anything specific about Voss's military policy? What is the effect of a vague but authoritative-sounding endorsement? 21.  Dr. Ondra describes her medical expertise and decision-making ability in detail — then applies it to her political judgment. Does expertise in medicine qualify someone to evaluate a politician's economic or foreign policy? What is this logical move called? 22.  The voiceover asks: 'The people who protect our lives trust Chancellor Voss. Shouldn't you?' Analyze the structure of this question. What assumption is built into it? 23.  What professions are conspicuously ABSENT from this ad? What does their absence suggest about who Voss does and does not have support from? 24.  Find a real political advertisement that uses the testimonial technique. Does it follow the same structure? What credentials are being borrowed?

 

EDUCATOR'S ANSWER KEY (Remove before distributing to students)

PRIMARY TECHNIQUES PRESENT: •       TESTIMONIAL (primary) — A decorated military general and a celebrated physician lend their professional authority to a political endorsement. These professions were chosen because they represent protection and care — the two most primal sources of trust. •       TRANSFER (secondary) — Uniforms, hospital corridors, flags, schools borrow the emotional associations of those institutions •       BANDWAGON (secondary) — The final question 'Shouldn't you?' implies broad consensus and pushes toward conformity WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN STRONG STUDENT RESPONSES: •       Students should note that military service qualifies General Brent to speak about military experience — not economic policy, judicial appointments, or civil liberties. The ad never specifies WHAT Voss's policies are, only that a general trusts him. This is a logical error called 'appeal to irrelevant authority.' •       Dr. Ondra's move is particularly sophisticated: she narrates her expertise at length, then says 'I see a man who does not flinch.' The expertise never connects to any specific policy analysis. She's lending credibility borrowed from medicine to a political judgment that has nothing to do with medicine. •       The voiceover's question assumes: (a) generals and doctors uniquely protect our lives, (b) their political judgment is therefore superior, (c) disagreeing with them is somehow dangerous or disloyal. •       Absent: economists, constitutional lawyers, civil liberties advocates, members of religious minorities, representatives of the Veldran community, journalists, educators. Their absence is itself information. HISTORICAL PARALLEL: Endorsements of Adolf Hitler by generals and doctors were used extensively in Nazi propaganda (1933-1939). The medical profession's endorsement of Nazi racial hygiene policy was particularly significant — giving pseudoscience the credibility of medicine. Compare to U.S. tobacco companies using doctors in cigarette advertisements (1930s-1950s): 'More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette.' The testimonial technique predates political propaganda and is central to advertising. DISCUSSION EXTENSION: Advanced: Ask students to evaluate the OPPOSITE problem — when should we trust expertise? The answer to propaganda is not to distrust all experts, but to match the domain of expertise to the claim being made. A general is a valid authority on military logistics. Is she a valid authority on immigration policy? Discuss.

 

 

PASSAGE 5 PLAIN FOLKS

 

CONTEXT: The following is an excerpt from an interview Chancellor Voss gave to the Northmark Weekly Gazette, a small regional newspaper, three weeks before the election. The interview was conducted in a diner. Photos showed Voss in a flannel shirt eating eggs.

 

SOURCE: Interview transcript, Northmark Weekly Gazette, Year 3 — 'A Conversation with the Chancellor'

GAZETTE: Chancellor, your critics say you've become disconnected from ordinary Arcadians since taking office. How do you respond?   VOSS: [laughs] You know, I grew up in a house where we heated with wood because we couldn't always afford the gas bill. My father worked the line at the Northmark mill for thirty years. He never complained, not once. He just worked. That's the kind of man he was. That's the kind of people we come from.   Look, I live in the Chancellor's residence now. I'm not going to pretend I don't. But in here — [touches his chest] — I'm still that kid from Millbrook who used to deliver newspapers at five in the morning so I could buy my own school supplies. I haven't forgotten where I came from. And I never will.   GAZETTE: But the new estate you commissioned — the renovation cost was reportedly forty million—   VOSS: I think what ordinary Arcadians care about is whether their bills are getting paid, whether their kids can get a job, whether they're going to be safe when they walk out the door. That's what I think about. That's what keeps me up at night. Not what some journalist is writing about renovations.   GAZETTE: To be clear, the forty million—   VOSS: What I know is that the men and women of Northmark didn't send me to Centrex to worry about curtains. They sent me to fight for them. And that's exactly what I'm doing.

 

STUDENT ANALYSIS SCAFFOLD

25.  List every detail Voss provides about his childhood and working-class origins. What is the effect of these details? 26.  When the reporter asks about the forty-million renovation, Voss changes the subject twice without answering. What technique is this? Is it effective? Why? 27.  Voss says 'in here [touches his chest] — I'm still that kid from Millbrook.' What is he claiming? Can you verify this claim? What does it mean for a politician's internal identity to be 'working class' while wielding enormous institutional power? 28.  Identify the moment where Voss pivots from deflection to attack. Who does he attack, and why might attacking the journalist be strategically useful? 29.  RESEARCH: Look up a real political leader who has used the 'plain folks' technique extensively. What is the gap between their narrative of humble origins and their actual biography or lifestyle? 30.  ADVANCED: Is there anything wrong with a politician from a working-class background invoking that background? Where is the line between legitimate personal narrative and manipulative 'plain folks' propaganda?

 

EDUCATOR'S ANSWER KEY (Remove before distributing to students)

PRIMARY TECHNIQUES PRESENT: •       PLAIN FOLKS (primary) — Wood heat, mill worker father, newspaper delivery route, flannel shirt, diner setting. Every detail is designed to construct working-class identity. •       CARD STACKING (secondary) — Voss selects working-class memories while suppressing the forty-million renovation. He stacks the evidence in his favor by controlling which facts are foregrounded. •       NAME CALLING (minor) — 'some journalist,' deflecting into an implied attack on the press WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN STRONG STUDENT RESPONSES: •       Students should identify that Voss successfully avoids answering the renovation question not once but twice, each time using a different deflection: first pivoting to what 'ordinary Arcadians care about,' then to his political mission. This is called a non-answer — common in political interviews and worth naming explicitly. •       The 'in here' gesture is an unfalsifiable claim about interior experience. Nobody can disprove that Voss feels working-class inside. This makes it propaganda-proof while still doing its rhetorical work. •       The attack on 'some journalist' serves two functions: it redirects from the embarrassing question, and it reinforces the Voss-vs.-media narrative that his base already accepts. •       The advanced question is genuinely complex: there is nothing wrong with invoking authentic personal history. The propaganda problem arises when: (a) the history is invented or exaggerated, (b) the invocation is used to avoid accountability for current behavior, or (c) working-class identity is claimed to justify policies that harm working-class people. HISTORICAL PARALLEL: Donald Trump's 'man of the people' presentation throughout his political career — private jets, gold-plated apartments, and country club memberships coexisting with 'I'm just like you' rhetoric. Also compare to George W. Bush's 'brush-clearing rancher' image (the Crawford ranch was purchased in 1999, shortly before his presidential campaign). Vladimir Putin's shirtless horseback photos are a different form of the same technique: performing authenticity for a specific audience. Historical parallel: Benito Mussolini's cultivation of the 'uomo qualunque' (ordinary man) image while living in palaces. DISCUSSION EXTENSION: This passage is excellent for teaching the concept of rhetorical evasion. Have students practice: when the interviewer asks a yes/no question and the subject responds with a story, that is evasion. Teach students to identify and name the question that was NOT answered.

 

 

PASSAGE 6 CARD STACKING

 

CONTEXT: The following is an op-ed published in the Arcadian People's Voice, a newspaper that has received significant funding from Oligarch-aligned media foundations, three days before the Year 3 election.

 

SOURCE: Op-ed, Arcadian People's Voice, Year 3 — 'The Numbers Don't Lie'

THE NUMBERS DON'T LIE: ARCADIA IS SAFER AND STRONGER UNDER VOSS By Staff Editorial Board, Arcadian People's Voice   Critics of Chancellor Voss love to talk about feelings. About 'anxiety.' About what 'might happen.' But what do the numbers actually say?   Under Chancellor Voss, violent crime in Centrex has fallen 14% in three years. Factory output in the Northmark region has increased 8%. Border crossing incidents have decreased by 31%. Arcadia's military readiness index — published annually by the Ministry of Defense — reached a record high this year.   Those are facts. Not feelings. Facts.   The so-called 'opposition press' would have you believe that Arcadia is in crisis. But they never mention the 14%. They never mention the 8%. Why? Because their goal was never to inform you. Their goal is to make you afraid — afraid enough to vote against the man who is actually fixing things.   Yes, unemployment in the rural eastern districts remains elevated. Yes, the renovation of the Chancellor's official residence came in over budget. These are real concerns, and the Chancellor has acknowledged them.   But a single above-budget renovation does not undo three years of real, measurable progress. And elevated unemployment in two eastern districts — out of fourteen total — does not mean Arcadia is failing.   The full picture is clear. The question is whether you're willing to look at it.

 

STUDENT ANALYSIS SCAFFOLD

31.  List all the statistics cited in this editorial. For each one, ask: Who produced this data? Is the source independent? What does the statistic NOT tell us? 32.  The editorial acknowledges two criticisms of Voss ('unemployment in rural eastern districts' and 'the renovation came in over budget') before dismissing them. What is the rhetorical effect of briefly acknowledging weaknesses before minimizing them? 33.  The op-ed says critics 'love to talk about feelings.' What is the effect of framing facts as 'feelings'? Is this framing itself factual? 34.  The editorial says the opposition press's 'goal was never to inform you' — their goal is to 'make you afraid.' Is this claim supported by any evidence in the editorial? What technique is this? 35.  What statistics or facts are conspicuously ABSENT from this editorial that would give a more complete picture? Brainstorm at least five. 36.  RESEARCH CHALLENGE: Find the actual source for one of the statistics cited (or a real-world equivalent). What context is missing from how it is presented here?

 

EDUCATOR'S ANSWER KEY (Remove before distributing to students)

PRIMARY TECHNIQUES PRESENT: •       CARD STACKING (primary) — The editorial selects favorable statistics (crime down 14%, factory output up 8%, border crossings down 31%, military readiness record high) while burying unfavorable data (rural unemployment, renovation overrun) in minimizing language. •       NAME CALLING (secondary) — 'so-called opposition press,' 'their goal was never to inform you' •       GLITTERING GENERALITIES (minor) — 'the full picture is clear,' 'real, measurable progress' WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN STRONG STUDENT RESPONSES: •       The key analytical move on statistics: Who measured these? The crime stat is from Centrex (the capital — a Voss stronghold and not representative of all regions). Factory output is Northmark only — not national. The 'military readiness index' is from the Ministry of Defense, which Voss controls — not an independent source. The 31% decrease in border crossings could mean many things (fewer crossings because of crackdown, or fewer because of economic conditions in Veldra — the editorial doesn't say). •       The 'inoculation' move — briefly acknowledging criticism before dismissing it — is sophisticated card stacking. It creates the appearance of balance while maintaining a fundamentally one-sided argument. Students should be able to name this: 'yes, but' framing. •       Calling facts 'feelings' and feelings 'facts' is itself a rhetorical move. The critics' concerns about democratic backsliding, judicial capture, and media suppression are not 'feelings' — they are documented institutional changes. The editorial doesn't engage with them substantively. •       Missing statistics students might identify: national unemployment rate (not just Northmark), GDP for all 14 districts, press freedom index, judicial independence ratings, Veldran community crime data versus claims about border crime, income inequality data, inflation rate. HISTORICAL PARALLEL: This passage is modeled on a well-documented technique in authoritarian and corporate propaganda: the selective statistical report. Compare to tobacco industry's selective citation of studies (1950s-1990s); to the Soviet Union's claim that collectivization increased grain output (selecting one year's data, suppressing famine years); to contemporary examples of political fact-checking where partial statistics are cited truthfully but misleadingly. The key lesson: a true statistic can still be propaganda if it is selectively presented. DISCUSSION EXTENSION: Teach students the concept of 'statistic shopping' — the practice of choosing the time period, geography, or measurement method that produces the most favorable number. Ask them to find a real economic or crime statistic that looks very different depending on which year you start counting from.

 

 

PASSAGE 7 BANDWAGON — AND PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER

 

CONTEXT: The following is the most complex passage in this packet. It is a composite that uses ALL SEVEN propaganda techniques. Students must identify every technique present. This passage is a transcript of a social media video posted by the Voss campaign that went viral in the final week of the election. It features man-on-the-street interviews with voters in Northmark, Southshore, and Centrex.

 

SOURCE: Voss Campaign Social Media Video — 'Something Is Happening' — Year 3 Final Week, 4.2 million views

[Opening shot: crowds at a Voss rally, thousands of people, flags waving]   NARRATOR: 'Something is happening in Arcadia. Something unstoppable.'   [Cut to: WOMAN, 50s, Northmark, apron, standing in a kitchen:] 'I've never voted before. Never felt like it mattered. But this time — every single person in my building is voting for Chancellor Voss. Every one of them. Because we finally have someone who actually sees us.'   [Cut to: MAN, 60s, Southshore, farmer's hat:] 'My whole family is voting Voss. My neighbors, everyone at my church. The Free Democrats? They don't even know what Arcadia is. They want to tear it down and rebuild it as something we wouldn't recognize.'   [Cut to: RETIRED POLICE CHIEF, in uniform, medals visible:] 'In forty years of law enforcement, I've never seen a leader with this kind of spine. He's not going to let the radical elements destroy what we've built.'   [Cut to: YOUNG WOMAN, 20s, college sweatshirt, Centrex:] 'Even here in Centrex, people are waking up. My classmates used to laugh at Voss supporters. Now they're quietly telling me they're voting for him. They're just afraid to say it out loud because of the social pressure.'   [Cut to: aerial shot of a wheat field at golden hour, Arcadian folk music playing]   NARRATOR: 'Real Arcadians. Real voices. A real movement. The polls say it's close — but everyone knows the polls don't capture the truth. The real Arcadia is speaking.',   [FINAL SCREEN: Portrait of Chancellor Voss, strong jaw, looking at the horizon.] 'He sees Arcadia as it was, and as it will be again. Don't be left behind.'

 

STUDENT ANALYSIS SCAFFOLD

37.  TECHNIQUE HUNT: Work through the video sequence by sequence. For each segment, identify which of the 7 propaganda techniques is being used. Some segments use multiple. 38.  BANDWAGON FOCUS: Find every moment where the video implies that 'everyone' or 'a huge number of people' support Voss. How is consensus manufactured or implied? Is any evidence provided for these claims? 39.  The young woman from Centrex claims that Voss supporters are 'afraid to say it out loud.' If true, what would this suggest? If it is a manufactured narrative, what purpose does it serve? 40.  The narrator says 'everyone knows the polls don't capture the truth.' What is the effect of preemptively dismissing the one data source that could contradict the video's claims? 41.  The final screen says 'Don't be left behind.' What fear is this activating? How is FOMO (fear of missing out) a form of bandwagon? 42.  SYNTHESIS QUESTION: You have now studied all 7 techniques across 7 passages. Which technique do you think is the most dangerous? Which is the easiest to resist? Defend your answers with evidence from this packet and from the historical case studies.

 

EDUCATOR'S ANSWER KEY (Remove before distributing to students)

PRIMARY TECHNIQUES PRESENT: •       BANDWAGON (primary) — 'Something unstoppable,' 'every single person in my building,' 'my whole family,' 'everyone at my church,' 'people are waking up,' 'a real movement,' 'everyone knows,' 'Don't be left behind' •       TESTIMONIAL — Retired Police Chief in uniform with medals (authority borrowed from law enforcement) •       PLAIN FOLKS — Woman in apron in kitchen; man in farmer's hat; 'real Arcadians, real voices' •       TRANSFER — Wheat fields at golden hour, folk music, Arcadian flags, Voss's portrait 'looking at the horizon' •       GLITTERING GENERALITIES — 'something unstoppable,' 'what we've built,' 'Arcadia as it was and as it will be again' •       NAME CALLING — 'radical elements,' 'Free Democrats don't even know what Arcadia is' •       CARD STACKING — The video presents ONLY supportive voices; no critics appear; the young woman's claim that Centrex students are secretly switching is unverifiable but presented as fact WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN STRONG STUDENT RESPONSES: •       BANDWAGON MECHANICS: Students should trace how consensus is constructed through: (1) crowd imagery suggesting overwhelming support, (2) personal testimony claiming 'everyone I know,' (3) the Centrex student implying a hidden silent majority, (4) the explicit claim that polls are wrong. Together, these create a complete alternative reality of consensus that cannot be falsified. •       The 'shy Voss voter' narrative is a sophisticated bandwagon move: it explains away polling data that contradicts the consensus narrative by claiming the consensus is actually larger but hidden. This technique (sometimes called the 'spiral of silence') was used by Trump campaigns (2016, 2020) and was occasionally vindicated and occasionally not — teaching students that propaganda techniques can sometimes accidentally describe real phenomena. •       Dismissing the polls preemptively is crucial: if the video claims 'everyone is voting Voss' and the polls show a different picture, the polls become the thing to discredit. This inoculates the audience against contradicting evidence before they encounter it. •       'Don't be left behind' activates social exclusion fear — one of the most powerful human motivators. This is the pure essence of bandwagon: not argument, but social pressure. HISTORICAL PARALLEL: The 'enthusiasm gap' narrative and manufactured momentum have been central to political campaigns worldwide. Compare to the Nazi use of massive rallies (Nuremburg) to manufacture the visual impression of unstoppable popular will. Compare to modern social media 'astroturfing' — fake grassroots campaigns that create the appearance of organic popular support. The 'shy voter' phenomenon has been studied extensively in relation to Trump (2016), Brexit (2016), and multiple other elections where pre-election polls underestimated right-wing support. DISCUSSION EXTENSION: FINAL SYNTHESIS DISCUSSION: Ask students to design a propaganda-resistant mind. If they had to create a checklist — a '10-second propaganda test' someone could apply to any piece of content before sharing it — what would it include? Have students work in groups, then compile a class list. This is the culminating metacognitive activity for the entire packet.

 

 

APPENDIX: EXTENSION ACTIVITIES

 

Activity A: The Propaganda Reversal

Take any passage from this packet and rewrite it WITHOUT propaganda techniques. Your rewrite must cover the same topic and make the same basic argument — but must use only verifiable facts, logical reasoning, and honest acknowledgment of counterarguments. This exercise reveals how much of the original's persuasive power depended on propaganda rather than substance.

 

Activity B: Find the Real Thing

For each of the 7 techniques, find one real-world example from the last 12 months — from any country, any political direction. Bring it to class with a 1-paragraph analysis. The class will compile a 'Propaganda in the Wild' board and discuss: Are some techniques more common on the left? On the right? In certain countries? What patterns emerge?

 

Activity C: The Inoculation Memo

You are a media literacy advisor working for the Arcadian Free Democrats. Write a one-page internal memo (in character) warning your colleagues about the 'Something Is Happening' video (Passage 7). Your memo must: identify every technique used, explain why each is effective, and recommend specific counter-messaging strategies. You cannot simply 'debunk' the video — you must explain how to persuade people who found the video compelling.

 

Activity D: Design Your Own

Create a fictional propaganda piece — in any format (speech excerpt, ad text, social media post, editorial) — that deliberately uses at least 3 of the 7 techniques. Then write a companion 'decoder document' that identifies every technique you used and explains the intended psychological effect. This exercise requires you to think from the inside of the propagandist's mind — the most effective form of inoculation.

 

Activity E: The Counter-Narrative

The opposition party (the Free Democrats) must respond to Voss's propaganda campaign. Write two counter-messages: one that fights propaganda with propaganda (matching the emotional register of Voss's messages), and one that fights propaganda with substance (facts, argument, transparency). After writing both, debate in class: which is more ethical? Which is more effective? Are these the same?

 

Activity F: Cross-Spectrum Analysis

This packet focuses primarily on right-authoritarian propaganda for its historical examples. Find and analyze examples of propaganda used by left-wing authoritarian movements (Soviet Communist Party, Maoist China, Cuban Revolution, Venezuelan Chavismo) using the same 7-technique framework. Are the techniques different? Are they more or less effective? What does the cross-spectrum analysis reveal about the nature of propaganda as a tool?

 

 

The antidote to propaganda is not cynicism. It is rigorous, humble, evidence-based thinking — applied equally to everyone, including those you agree with.

 

SANDBOX: Propaganda in the Wild

Companion to SANDBOX: Civilization, Power & Control  |  AP Thematic Unit  |  CC BY-NC-SA

AP Thematic Unit  |  Grades 10-12  |  Full Semester  |  CC BY-NC-SA