EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Those Awful Texas Social Studies Standards. And What About Yours?
You've probably read the horror stories coming out of Texas about their new social studies standards, given final approval in a May 21 9-5 vote by the state's board of education. As the New York Times wrote back in March when the board gave its preliminary OK, these standards "will put a conservative stamp on history and economics textbooks, stressing the superiority of American capitalism, questioning the Founding Fathers' commitment to a purely secular government, and presenting Republican political philosophies in a more positive light." The Texas board of education has rehabilitated Sen. Joe McCarthy, erased mention of the 1848 Seneca Falls women's rights declaration, and required that the inaugural address of Confederate President Jefferson Davis be taught alongside Lincoln's inaugural. And that's just a taste of more than 100 amendments that Republicans have made to the 120-page social studies curriculum standards.
No doubt, the victory of conservative ideologues on the Texas board of education is troubling and worth the attention it's getting. With 4.7 million students, the Texas market is huge and exerts a powerful influence on the whole textbook industry. As Fritz Fisher, chairman of the National Council for History Education, told the Washington Post, "The books that are altered to fit the standards become the bestselling books, and therefore within the next two years they'll end up in other classrooms."
But all this Texas-bashing implies that standards everywhere else are good and fair and true. In fact, other states' social studies standards have their own conservative biases and deserve the same critical scrutiny that Texas' new standards are receiving. Other states may not celebrate Jefferson Davis, but neither do they encourage teachers to equip students with the historical background and analytical tools that they'll need to understand and address today's social and environmental crises.
Take my own blue state of Oregon. This is no bastion of conservatism. We have a Democratic governor and a Democratic legislature; both U.S. senators are Democrats, as are four of our five U.S. representatives. But our social studies standards are profoundly conservative - in big and little ways. There is no recognition of the social emergency that we confront: a deeply unequal and unsustainable world, hurtling toward an ecological crisis without parallel in human history. The standards portray U.S. society as fundamentally harmonious, with laws designed to promote fairness and progress. Today's wars don't exist. Nor does hunger or poverty.
Political Bias
The first social studies benchmark in Oregon's standards requires that 3rd graders begin a nationalistic curricular journey as they learn to "identify essential ideas and values expressed in national symbols, heroes, and patriotic songs of the United States." By the time these 3rd graders reach high school they'll "understand how laws are developed and applied to provide order, set limits, protect basic rights, and promote the common good."
Capitalism is a well-oiled machine. Eighth graders learn "how supply and demand respond predictably to changes in economic circumstances." The economics standards include not a single mention of social class. Instead, everyone is smashed together as "a consumer, producer, saver, and investor in a market economy." No owners and workers who might have conflicting interests-we're all producers.
And what about the inequality that so many students can observe on their way to school? Eighth graders should: "Understand that people's incomes, in part, reflect choices they have made about education, training, skill development, and careers." No mention of the other factors that determine income: race, gender, social class, nationality, immigration status.
Labor unions make only one parenthetical appearance. But unions are irrelevant because in Standardsland, wages and salaries are "usually determined by the supply and demand for labor"; organizing has nothing to do with wages.
In fact, in most instances, the standards do not ask teachers or texts to alert students to the power of collective action, of working in concert with others, to enhance their economic circumstances-which, in the real world, is when people's lives actually get better. Instead, students are told to get ahead by making smarter individual choices.
And
that's the message of the standards in a nutshell: in the United States
we wend our way through society as individual choice-makers. Grade 5:
"Identify and give examples of how individuals can influence the actions
of government." And then in Grade 8: "Identify the responsibilities
of citizens of the United States and understand what an individual can
do to meet these responsibilities." In the standards, individuals
may have social efficacy, but for the most part, only as
individuals,
not as members of organizations or social movements. Not surprisingly,
the standards' pull-yourself-up-by-the-
And, in these times of ecological crisis, the standards include no mention of human-caused climate change-only a line about how climate change can affect human activity. The standards encourage students to view the earth as a playground and a source of wealth. By grade 5, students will: "Understand how the physical environment presents opportunities for economic and recreational activity."
Pedagogical Bias
There is also a crucial pedagogical bias in social studies standards that was evident as far back as 1994, with the publication of the first National Standards for United States History by the National Center for History in the Schools. Those standards required coverage of such an enormous amount of material that teachers could succeed only if they adopted a stand-and-deliver rush through the ages. This academic weightlifting lives on. For example, Oregon's high school World History standards require students to learn about: how the agricultural revolution contributed to and accompanied the Industrial Revolution; concepts of imperialism and nationalism; "how European colonizers interacted with indigenous populations of Africa, India, and Southeast Asia and how the native populations responded"; Japanese expansion and the consequences for Japan and Asia during the 20th century; the impact of the Chinese revolution of 1911 and the cause of China's Communist Revolution of 1949; causes and consequences of the Russian Revolution of 1917; causes and consequences of the Mexican Revolution of 1911-1917; causes of World War I and why the U.S. entered; World War II; the Holocaust; the Cold War; the causes and impact of the Korean and Vietnam wars.
I'm not joking. In one year. And that's only a sampling of what students are expected to learn. There's more. Obviously, the only way a conscientious-well, obedient - teacher could handle such a curricular task is to start talking fast in September and not stop until sometime in June. And rely on a huge textbook. Sorry kids, no time for role plays, trials, simulations, imaginative writing, small group discussion, short stories, poetry, or anything else that will slow us down. It's December, and we haven't even gotten to Mao's Long March.
Social studies should help students grasp knowledge and tools of analysis so as to make the world a better place. Social studies should help students name and explain obstacles to justice, peace, equality, and sustainability. Instead, social studies standards like Oregon's are simply about covering material.
What Do Your State Standards Say?
This is merely my own state's standards. A few years ago, California State University at Monterey Bay professor Christine Sleeter wrote a fine article for Rethinking Schools, "Standardizing Imperialism," (Fall 2004) analyzing how the California state social studies standards endorsed a curricular Manifest Destiny that celebrates "explorers" and "newcomers" who "visit" and "settle." Sleeter found that "California's curriculum folds students into a ‘we' that is Western, Judeo-Christian, and has a democratic government with a capitalist market economy. These are juxtaposed to ‘them': non-Western, not Judeo-Christian, and totalitarian (or not free). . . . The standards have difficulty incorporating as ‘we' those whom the United States had previously colonized."
The real Texas standards story is not that the state has become some curricular outlaw. Yes, Texas has adopted some especially obnoxious standards-e.g., celebrating right-wing icon Phyllis Schlafly while scrapping United Farm Worker leader Dolores Huerta. But, as historian Eric Foner pointed out in a recent article in The Nation, Texas harms its students not so much by inserting or erasing particular facts or individuals, but in its overall framework-one that uncritically endorses "free enterprise" as it "ignores those who have struggled to make this a fairer, more equal society."
And in this respect, the Texas standards more likely resemble than depart from other states' social studies standards. So by all means, let's monitor, critique, and organize against Texas' reactionary standards. But let's also revisit our own state social studies standards and not just shake a scolding finger at Texas.
Bill Bigelow (bill@rethinkingschools.org) is the Curriculum Editor of Rethinking Schools magazine. A version of this article will appear in the summer issue of Rethinking Schools, www.rethinkingschools.org.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
202 Comments so far
Show AllI belong to "Separation of School and State" because I don't think the government should dictate what the children learn, the parents should. For years the public schools have spread government lies and it's time to stop it. Amontg the lies spread was that policing the world was defending America's freedom. Also, the United States has never been an agressor nation or gone in where it wasn't wanted. We're also number one, but in what besides outsourcing, per capita prison population or meddling in other countries' affairs, I don't know what.
My cousin home schooled her son and he just graduated from George Mason University. It isn't for everyone, and the parents have a lot of work to do, but if you have young children, you may want to consider home schooling.
Bring America Back !!!!
****Let us ask now: where was Prez JFK assassinated?; where did "W" Bush==the worst US President in history-so far- come from ?; where is home Base for the biggest corporate Predator/Corporatist on US Taxpayers==Big Oil ? where was home for LBJ--an American Prez who could've ended the Vietnam War but instead increased it?; what Border town is encountering murdered American citizens by revolutionary drug Cartels within walking distance of its crossover ? ????
****Reactionary Texas school social studies standards ???
Reactionary to what ?? No child left behind ??? Now if Texas would only adopt Arizona's illegal immigration protection law==that would be a real Good Reaction !!!!
Bravo, TruthKnoller! Reactionary my ass. what you mention above is only the outward actions of these fools. Think of the cruelty that lives in their hearts, the half of which goes unexpressed and the arrogance of mind that is seeping over their borders coating everything, like oil on a pristine sandy beach.
On the other hand, when the propaganda reaches the point where it is blatantly false then the kids totally reject it and begin thinking on their own. When I was in highschool in Texas in the early '70s, most of the better students saw the serious flaws in the school-supplied propaganda regarding the US government's mission in Vietnam to "promote freedom" and as a result these students completely rejected virtually all the government propaganda. Also, if economic times are going to get tougher, and it looks very likely they are, then kids will be much more open to claims that such propaganda is dishonest and misleading.
Unforeseen and unintended consequences can sometimes be a good thing.
Excellent point. The thing missing for fairness in these articles is the "progressive" bias installed in textbooks when we have the power. We are not exactly innocent when it comes to slipping in a bit of ideology or politicisim.
Its a shame we can't eliminate these interest groups altogether when it comes to reaching our kids.
Can you give some examples of this "progressive bias"? That racism was and still is a powerful force in US history? That labor organizing and strikes were an important part of the development of a middle class? How and why many million people were killed in hundreds of US military and CIA interventions since WW2?
These are facts, and important ones, not "biases". Bias is when these things that affected so many people around the world are ignored.
Facts are facts and how they are presented is important as you know. A very good example is calling the Triangel Trade the Slave Trade, which was changed when we had control here in Texas. Why so intent on calling it the slave trade? Its quite obvious. As obvious as the ass that wanted to put Barack in as Barack Hussein Obama, yeah, thats his nasme, but we all know exactly why he wanted to do that.
Racism was indeed a powerful force in our history, its no where near as important a noe as it was and to insist it is , is indeed a "bias" I'd say. I have seen people post here on CD that racism now is no different than in the fifties and before.
"That labor organizing and strikes were an important part of the development of a middle class? How and why many million people were killed in hundreds of US military and CIA interventions since WW2?"
I think these are certainly addressed and are not in the changes these bozo's made.
So do you believe that only these RW Conservatives present things the way they see them or put people they want to say had a greater impact on history? We would never do that right? I believe you really know what I'm saying. :)
Perhaps. I am certainly not above stepping in a cow patty when it comes to understanding.
Yes I am saying that racism in 2010 has diminished to a great degree, I expect it will reach as low a point as it ever will in another 10 years or 20 years.
I never fib, and certainly not to myself. And yes, my critics do say that "NO, racism has actually changed quite a lot, but is not really all that diminished, if at all"
Problem is that by any measurement, by any fair standard I am right and they are wrong. I grew up with it too and I sure know the difference.
I hope I'm clearer about what I mean.
I should add that much of what passes for racism these days is nothing more than classism.
Racism has changed in that there is far more black and brown racism than before, or maybe its just more overt.
As to all the black criminals, there are more because they committ more of the crimes and the crimes are mostly black on black. The crack injustice does account for a certain percentage though.
Our interfernce isn't quite as pervasive as yiou suggest, but I certainly agree, lets stop providing policing and protection to most of the woerld, lets stop interfering in their affairs at all, lets not provide any monetary help, lets just take care of our own.
Illegal aliens have absolutely little to do with racism. It simply suits Democrats to treat immigration as an issue of "race" and discrimination because it permits them to frighten Hispanic Americans and secure their votes and it fits with the cheap labor lobbies agenda. Perhaps you should check out Amnesty International's latest report about Mexico's mistreatment of its own illegal migrants if you want to see some real rights violations and systemic mistreatment.
I do think you mistake a lot of classism for racism, is that possible?
I don't believe that labor history, or US foreign intervention are taught at all in public school history. 1877?, Homestead? Matewan? Haymarket? Ludlow? Harlan? Eugene Debs, Joe Hill, Emma Goldman, Jock Yablonski or Even Sam Gompers? Do you know the significance of these places are poeple?
And I still see, in person, plenty of plain, old-fashioned bigotry here in Pittsburgh in 2010. I will elaborate with personal stories on request. Jim Crow may be gone, but institutional racism still thrives. Sale prices of homes in perfectly fine neighborhoods like Penn Hills still went way down over the past decade when black families in proportion to anything close to the 12.5% national average moved in.
And, with excellent timing, the following article just appeared here on CD:
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/05/22-2
"Homestead? Matewan? Haymarket? Ludlow? Harlan? Eugene Debs, Joe Hill, Emma Goldman, Jock Yablonski or Even Sam Gompers? Do you know the significance of these places are poeple?"
Of course I do, These were all taught in my backward Texas schools. The emphasis I remember was on Debs and the labor movement as a whole as it should be. Of course Gompers would be covered, though Matewan was mentioned only as an example of labor violence, Ludlow. Yablonski and Goldman, etc really have no business in classes below college.
I don't know that Goldman was that important except to anarchists or that she deserves as much attention as she got. I assume Mother Jones was responsible.
"And I still see, in person, plenty of plain, old-fashioned bigotry here in Pittsburgh in 2010. I will elaborate with personal stories on request. Jim Crow may be gone, but institutional racism still thrives. Sale prices of homes in perfectly fine neighborhoods like Penn Hills still went way down over the past decade when black families in proportion to anything close to the 12.5% national average moved in."
Frankly I'm not surprised. Most of the institutional racism left like this is in the Northeast I believe. (I base this on what my Black friends tell me from their families and what little I've seen traveling there) That area did not integrate when we did nor did the neighborhoods.
The same thing you mention happened in Dallas in the early sixties and soon in most of the larger cities, white flight, price drops, etc. It was ugly at times, but it passed. We no longer have that problem at all. House prices don't drop because any ethnicity moves into a neighborhood. Though we still have rich white enclaves in North Dallas, but if you have the bucks, even thats open.
It'll pass up there soon enough. Americans are changing fast.
I am curious as to your personal experiences on this since they are recent?
I can tell you the South as a whole is not what many here like to say it is, Texas certainly isn't, but I'd not like to leave the impression I'm stupid nor blind. There is still racism in the South, certainly in Texas and its running both ways still. And certainly everything isn't sweetness and light. But it beats the heck out of even 25 years ago everywhere.
i agree that the larger cities of the south are generally further along than the north in eliminating discrimination. but I suspect that the discrimination and racism is still there. Recall New Orleans in the wake of Katrina?
Good point, but also remember Houston and most of the rest of Texas, except Austin as I remember. Houston deserves a gold star!
"but I suspect that the discrimination and racism is still there"
It is, just far, far less of it and more from the non white side than before. I don't think we will ever stamp it out altogether. Though it may be more classism than racism in the end.
I grew up in CT, where things were supposed to be more liberal, or at least more balanced than things appear to be in Texas. But still I spent a lot of my adult life re-educating myself concerning world history, and Americas part in it. In my childhood a lot of total B.S. propaganda was jammed into my then impressionable mind.
But it sounds like things are going to be even worse for the next generation. Our dark history of human slavery, is to be replaced by, "Atlantic Triangle Trade". I wonder if the slaves our forefathers tortured, will now be referred to as ATT "employees", who received "enhanced encouragement techniques" so they would work harder in the cotton fields....
This article demonstrates a naivety about the role of education in a state system. Bottom line: it's to make good citizens, and by "good," I mean compliant. Critical thinking is a pipe dream, and not the goal of any serious state.
Imagine for a moment if all our students were critical thinkers: could Bush have gotten away with his lies about Iraq? Would that war ever have been started? Would the press be able to slant the news so obviously? For that matter, would Bush even have gotten elected? And moving forward, would Obama still be able to con us with rhetoric while caving in to BP, the nuclear industry, AIPAC and Israel?
No, critical thinking is definitely not something our leaders want to push in schools. Schools are where the turf war between "liberals" and "conservatives" battle for the minds and bodies of the next generation. This is where boys and girls decide whether they will join the military to "serve their country," or join the war protesters to save their country.
The precarious ledge on which we find ourselves in a dizzying attempt to prevent certain death on the jagged rocks below is in part a result of our understanding of who we are and where we have been. "Hey! teachers, leave those kids alone. All in all your just another brick in the wall"
See you all at Wall Mart.
I keep a copy of those lyrics in my grade book. Students freak out when they see it. We don't need no education...we don't need no thought control....
The unspoken mission of all public schooling is the replication of uniformity. These days it is also the task of getting students inured to boredom, for most of the jobs they will ever hold in our 'global economy' will be insufferably boring. This is not a new thing. The majority of adults I know cannot place geographic areas, do not understand the social and political terms they use, do not read. In short, most Americans are uneducated. Some of those have PhDs. After all, you can get a PhD these days in such intellectual pursuits as computer programming, economic fluctuations of stock markets, and basket weaving. It is getting worse day by day. The textbooks home schoolers are to use are full of misinformation. Our media is full of lies. It is rewarding to see sites like this one, full of people who are waking up to the horror around them. But it may well be too late. As I, and others, have pointed out ad nauseam, the majority of Americans are uneducated. These state run and organized and enforced 'curricula' are part of the problem. The indoctrination of teachers is part of the problem. The structure of schools is part of the problem. but the biggest piece is in your living room. Look at your house. Are all the seating places organized to face the idiot box - aka the altar of entertainment and information? You cannot change D.C. or Austin or Salem until you change your own house. Kill your television. Buy books. Look at international trends via this internet. Educate your children. If you let the government 'educate' your children, don't cry when that government indoctrinates with its own agendae.
well said
i think if you are attributing all these dark trends to public education, then you are throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Please read the last part of the post, not just the first.
Agreed.
But it's not merely government indoctrination, it's business indoctrination as well.
Years ago, when my daughter was in Jr. High, my wife and I went to a parent-teacher night. As we took our seats in one of her classrooms, the teacher pointed to the blackboard where she had written a list of subjects that would be covered and said that that is what business wants schools to teach our kids so that they can go out and get jobs.
Not one syllable mentioned about broadening their horizons or teaching critical thinking skills. No, it was about business.
And, then of course, as you mentioned, there is the institutional structure of schools. Holding pens, more like it, to keep them in boxes in silent attention so that they can learn to sit in cubicles...at silent attention. "Sit down and shut up!" is the message.
I'm glad we home-schooled our kids later on. At least their brains were allowed to air out a little from all the cultural indoctrination.
"You cannot change D.C. or Austin or Salem until you change your own house. Kill your television. Buy books. Look at international trends via this internet. Educate your children. If you let the government 'educate' your children, don't cry when that government indoctrinates with its own agendae."
Killing the television is not necessary in order to buy books, use the internet to look at international trends, educate our children and engage in critical, intelligent discussions in the home.
I'm sorry if it disappoints you but I like having some entertainment and I enjoy laughing at the Big Bang Theory, rooting for Clark, Sam and Dean in Smallville and Supernatural, and watching vampire movies and True Blood. I also think it is helpful to monitor what the Plutocrats Propaganda Machine is reporting and which memes they are selling, as well as monitor the weak Liberal responses on MSNBC.
Plus the Daily Show helps me keep sane.
It sounds to me like these textbooks are the perfect primer for future Harvard and Chicago business school grads.
"Class. Todays subject is the value of economic bubbles. As long as everyone believes its true, its TRUE! I mean, just look at our social studies class. It's all true, until of course, reality comes crashing in."
Yeah, just look at the drones coming out of these places. Not a critical thought in the herd.
NC Tom
Ha!!!...Good points... I listened as the debate between an NAACPer and a Texas( apparently he wasn't on the school board) person was taking place. It was hot. They brought up that Atlantic Triangle Trade thingy... The anchor remarked that at least the mention of slaves came after the naming of this major trade institution... so it was mentioned,saying doesn't that count... The NAACPer, made this point; that by naming this in general terms and leaving out the word slave, as in "Atlantic Triangle Slave Trade" as it has always been, you put people in the same class as rum and sugar and other "products and goods". Wow... I wish I was smart enough to figure these things out. I probably would not have seen through the re-naming of that partcular phrase as being so cleverly used to undercut what has been gained over the years in terms of ....truth...
The fact is that it was called the Triangle Trade, but not because of what they carried but the three destinations that made up the route for what they carried. . I actually fail to see that calling something by its historical name, what it was actually called, is not truth.
I had a history teacher that handed out two text books. One was obviously liberally biased and the other was obviously conservatively biased. He told us to read them both and make up our own minds. Then he proceed to trash both in the classroom. Imagine that, a high school teacher teaching critical thinking skills - something barely covered in your standard bachelors degree program and absorbed even less.
Thanks Lee Cork, wherever you may be.
Odds are that teacher would be drummed out of the classroom this day and age.
We should give him a raise and unrevocable tenure.
Unlike another string here today, almost everyone of these posts is a pleasure to read as they are thoughtful and discussion oriented. What a refreshing change.
George Carlin said it all.
"There's a reason education sucks, and it's the same reason that it will never,ever, ever, be fixed. It's never gonna get any better! Don't look for it! Be happy with what you've got! Because the owners of this country don't want that. I'm talking about the real owners now, the big... the wealthy... The real owners are the big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions. Forget the politicians, they're an irrelevancy. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don't. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They've long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the statehouses, the city halls. They've got the judges in their back pockets, and they own all the big media companies, so that they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear.
They've got you by the balls. They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying – lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want; they want more for themselves and less for everybody else.
But I'll tell you what they don't want... They don't want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don't want well-informed, well-educated people capable of critical thinking. They're not interested in that! That doesn't help them. That's against their interests. They don't want people who are smart enough to sit around the kitchen table and figure out how badly they're getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years ago. You know what they want? Obedient workers – Obedient workers. People who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork but just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, reduced benefits, the end of overtime, the vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it.
And, now, they're coming for your Social Security. They want your fucking retirement money. They want it back, so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street. And you know something? They'll get it. They'll get it all, sooner or later, because they own this fucking place. It's a big club, and you ain't in it! You and I are not in the big club.
By the way, it's the same big club that used to beat you over the head with all day long and they tell you what to believe... All day long, beating you over the head in the media, what to believe, what to think and what to buy... The table is tilted, folks! The game is rigged!
And nobody seems to notice, and nobody seems to care! Good honest, hard-working people! White collar, blue collar... Doesn't matter what color shirt you have on! Good honest, hard-working people continue - These are people of modest means - continue to elect these rich cocksuckers who don't give a fuck about them!
They don't give a fuck about you! They don't care about you! At all! At all! At all!" -George Carlin
Rest in Peace, George!!
Sioux Rose
MARK PADDLES: This rant (which I agree with) is right up there with Howard Beale's from "Network." There are two potential escapes to much of your assertion. One, to leave the US while there's still time. Granted, much of the world is following US trends in the way of bankster control of economies, and surveillance of citizens; but exceptions still exist. Two, live simply. While it's true one must deal with "the owners" to some extent, there is a freedom in not watching TV and refusing to be programmed to own/purchase/work for all the "necessary stuff." There is a freedom in working for one's self and living a more subsistence-style income, learning to trade many essentials on the basis of barter. The paradigm as it is cannot hold together much longer, even the assets drawn from nature/natural capitalism appear to be entering into a phase of rebellion (or in the case of oil, depetion). RD DRURY speaks in this forum about localism, and there's something to be said for that. I think "the game" as defined by and for the corporations is about to experience some radically unexpected changes of plan, and eventually... of the rules.
"This rant (which I agree with) is right up there with Howard Beale's from "Network." There are two potential escapes to much of your assertion."
To clarify: The above post is a rant from George Carlin.
But, I do agree with you and the two potential escapes that you mentioned.
Yes, we do have choices... even if many of these choices are narrowly confined by the authoritarian bastards in charge.
Last fall I took my first trip to South America (Ecuador). I designed this trip to accommodate five different ideas that I had in my head, and one of these ideas was to check out the possibility of moving down there to get out of the US. Long story short... I made some connections, loved it down there, and the idea of getting out of the US is a very real possibility for me.
And, YES, Live simply! I am trying to remove myself from the system as best as I can. There is a cool localism movement that is happening in the little rural CO mountain town that I live in -- co-op garden, farm and new urbanist development. I support these movements and work in one of them. My first barter experience was with our talented local tattoo artist.
What is refreshing is that this localism movement seems to be growing in numbers and the ideas are beginning to gain traction.
take care
Prior to the Vietnam war and the 1960's Canada was in very many ways far more "Conservative" then the United States of America.
Many of the more "progressive" Americans left the USA during that time and moved to Canada. Others that remained behind were assassinated by the US Government. Canada became more "progressive" as a consequence.
This has only recently started to reverse.
YES. I think what Canada needs is all of those progressives in the USA and elsewhere to MOVE here and help to build a better society. The United States of America is too far gone into the hands of the Corporatists. The number of true progressives down there can not make a difference.
Canada still has a population small enough wherein some 200 or 300 thousand progressive voices can make a huge difference.
I used to live in Lake Forest, Illinois, a quite wealthy community and for the most part Republican. (I was not wealthy, I taught French at the local high school.) I was a Quaker then and we used to hold rallies downtown protesting the war in Vietnam. But we were fairly treated by the public, for the most part. A few years ago I returned for a visit, and attended the Friends Meeting. Afterward we held a rally, just like old times but this time protesting the war in Iraq. One of people in our group taught high school at New Trier High School in Winnetka, again a wealthy and fairly Republican community. I asked him if was able to teach another view of history besides the one in the board-approved textbook, and I surprised and pleased to hear he used Howard Zinn's book alongside the board-approved text. He had no objections from the school administration - I'll bet he had some good discussions going in his classroom!
Thanks for the little bit of good news. I haven't at all followed what is taught in my local school district or in Pennsylvania in general. I do recall a local high school having to dis-invite Dr. Patch Adams in late 2001 due to his pacifist views, and later the same school district canceled it's participation in the "International Baccalaureate Program" because the name sounded "un-American and smacked of "one world government". But fortunately a more progressive new school board later re-instated it.
I can't resist jumping in again. Actually, I spent two high school years at the International School in Geneva. One of my teachers, Bob Leach, was the originator of the IB program. This was during the 50's, when McCarthyism was running rampant. He also initiated a Student United Nations Day where we role-played other countries, sometimes our own, or sometimes another nation.
I remember vividly the day when some of the French communist students were proudly holding up a newspaper with the headlines "Dien Bien Phu est tombe". (Need an accent aigu on that last e!) ie Dien Bien Phu has fallen. Ten years later we were repeating the folly. Downtown there were French, Russian, and American diplomats negotiating at the UN buildings. Quite a site to see all those flags at various hotels where they were staying.
I was very lucky to have that background. One of my fellow students, an American, introduced me to Kenneth Roberts' historical novels. One was titled "Oliver Wiswell", a whole different account of our Revolutionary War, from the Loyalist perspective. I read parts of it aloud to my US History class and some Americans in the class called me "un-American"! My basic lesson here was that, as Churchill said, "History belongs to those who write the books." Our revolution was not just the view we read about in typical textbooks.
I taught in an alternative high school for at risk kids. I often asked them for the nationality of our 'founding fathers'. They were surprised to discover that they were all Englishmen, and therefore traitors. I asked them of those guys were insurgents, or protesters, or patriots. I asked them if they would fight back if China invaded America. I asked them what the 'insurgents' in Iraq should be called. It is amazing how quickly even 'at risk' kids understand when you ask the right questions of them. One of my favorite quotes was one they liked also: Words are the color of blood, a whisper can bring on a war.
I hope you are still teaching?
I wish you'd jump in more.
Well, thanks, Prometheus! I make such comments not to brag, I hope everyone understands that. We were not of the wealthy international set I hasten to add. I was just plain lucky. My dad was part of a church group helping victims and refugees from WWII, and didn't make a lot of money at that work. It was a very rich time for our family.
Didn't think you were bragging at all.
I just think your friend is a real teacher and so were you. Giving students the facts and then pointing out the differing way from each side looked at it is how history should be taught.
And your mention of Oliver Wiswell by Kenneth Roberts really brought back good memories. My history teacher in the eighth grade assigned that as an adjunct read to our study of the Revolutionary War. He thought the novel would catch more attention. He was right. Thats why I looked up more about the Loyalists and where they went after the war.
And we were taught using the Socratic method, which seems to be what you guys were using. A system sadly missing from present education.
Actually, it turns out that some of my ancestors moved from Massachusetts to what is now New Brunswick. The Mass. people asked their northern friends to come down and help with the Revolution... but the folks in New Brunswick said no thanks, we're Loyalists now! One summer we drove up the New England coast into that province and I actually found members of the family still living there. They, it turn, had some of their family move to Montana in the late 1800's, where I now live.
What I basically learned from all this, from Kenneth Roberts and from Howard Zinn is that no matter what the labels or the causes, what we often end up with is the lower income people suffer at the hands of the rich and powerful. In our Revolution, the leaders here were in themselves rather aristocratic and riled up the "people" to do their fighting for them. Oversimplified I'm sure... but it does evolve as a pattern throughout history.
Fair enough. I've found few instances in history where poor people attacked poor people as a political decision.
Most of the standards are pretty awful, and aimed at uniformity. But the thread, I think, is that goshdarn liberty principle rearing its ugly head again, and the equality principle shackled and gagged in the closet. It wasn't a Civil War, it was a War Between the States--because it was a war over states' rights, wasn't it? I mean, gosh, that race thing--well, we all got over that, and "we're" awful sorry about what "our" cracker ancestors did to all "y'all's" folks. But that is history, y'know, history means it's over, don't it? I actually heard a dialogue similar to that outside a Starbucks last summer, with one of the guys there saying 'it was all about states' rights'.
One thing I can tell you about that feller: he never sat in my US History class.
As a retired California history teacher, I can't tell you how many history teachers I know who couldn't get to the Second World War let alone the history that came after, and who literally raced to the finish as is stated above.
And California, what a wonderful social studies curriculum--there is NO social studies curriculum for incoming high school freshmen, then they jump to world history from the French Revolution forward--because (get this America) they already taught that you know Old Stuff in the Fourth or Fifth Grade which is where they also got their Columbus, the American Revolution, and the Mexican-American War. Excuse me, but we live in a former Mexican state, Alta California, and most of its citizens do not know how that war started-- or as is mentioned above, it is used as an example of the generous spirit of Manifest Destiny. I believe this is what one German Chancellor referred to as 'lebensraum', nein?
So in California, two years of high school history supposedly covers the world from 1789 to the present; and, the following year, the US from the Civil War to the present. I love those last two, because I remember being in high school over forty years ago, and having the same time line, though in Illinois they were smart enough to teach Ancient and Modern World History over two years, followed by US History, and then Civics/Econ in the Senior year (California does the same in senior year, but econ does mention collective bargaining and civics the struggle for equality). What I have to laugh at is the teachers struggling to teach the same thing I learned in highschool with an intervening 40 years on top.
I remember teaching students from textbooks that ended with Reagan's election a quarter century after the fact. These were relatively new textbooks.
That Judeo-Christian hoohah that's in the World History is pretty enlightening, though. (It is the prologue before we get into the French Revolution.)It is in there in black and white: how our great civilization was based on a tribe from out of the Middle East who were so greatly concerned with social justice that they smote their barbaric neighbors with God's blessings. Well, it doesn't really say that, but it might as well, for all the bowing down it does to Yahweh and monotheism without a peep about Egypt. Uh-huh, that's right, in liberal California.
Then it's on to Athenian democracy, and how Athens was the first democracy in the world (I wish somebody would tell the many Native Americans and others like Iceland or those who lived at Teotihuacan that their democracies don't count --even though Franklin liked the idea of the bicameral legislature that he saw the Iroquois use), and how Rome is the Father of Our Laws. Rome was essential in laying down what a Republic is, and how No Man Is Above the Law, the textbooks would tell us. In no textbook do we learn that Caesar's assassination led to the death of the Republic, or that Wars and Empires are the Graveyards of Representative Government.
You'd think that is one valuable lesson students of history should know.
Well, that was always a point I needed to make in my class, because one of the big problems in history teaching is the Glaring Omission. As in this case the Glaring Omission is of such a magnitude that he must be one of those Irish clergy, you know--an O'Mission from God. War, Poverty, Ecological Imbalance, and Racism are glossed over momentarily before the guillotine falls, and never mentioned as THEMES again in the text. Hmm..must be a message in there somewhere.
And the other point, that character issue, is exactly on point. The city where I taught is on that bandwagon, so it got hooked up with the 'Character Matters' con-job. The most interesting point re the character traits that matter to them gives you a clue to what is wanted: subservience, humility, obedience. And then you know who wants this consciousness: employers, chambers of commerce, and so on. And then they would give these little bookmarks in the libraries and classrooms out to the kids with the flavor of the month and a quote on it:
Cleanliness is next to Godliness. With 'tidiness' as the character trait of the month, and so on.
Just in case you might worry that history might really matter, or that you might have your neighbor killed in the latest war, you need not worry. Rest assured that students won't make the connections between the events covered in the text and the war that rages outside, because the text is mostly about NOT making connections, which makes it mostly ANTI-History, don't you think?
Read your Orwell daily, as the clock strikes thirteen.
You taught history in California?
Mostly history, but all the teaching I did do was in the Bear Flag Republic.