Saturday, August 24, 2019

Teaching History, Science and Literature

As our politics become more polarized, both sides seek to immunize themselves from any exposure to the opinions of the other. I've spoken before about the self-reinforcing bubbles that many of us have created - echo chambers that ensure that we will only hear those things that agree with our philosophy. We want to be surrounded by folks who share our perspective. Unfortunately, this phenomenon has also influenced our attitudes about what constitutes a proper education for the generations who will succeed us.

As more and more parents are opting for home schooling or religious-based private schools, it is incumbent upon all of us to reflect on what we are teaching our children. Do we want to "protect" our children from being infected with, or influenced by, the other sides' ideas? Are we concerned with instilling and perpetuating our values? OR Are we trying to ensure that we are turning out mindless automatons - people who are only capable of programmed responses to different circumstances? Are we teaching children HOW to think? OR Are we teaching them WHAT to think?

In the United States, folks on the right want you to know about what great and Christian men Washington, Adams, Franklin and Jefferson were. Folks on the left want you to know that Washington and Jefferson owned slaves, and that Jefferson wrote his own version of the gospel story of Jesus Christ. Both sides want you to know about the Constitution, but they only want you to hear about their method for interpreting what it means! Folks on the right want to concentrate on the movers and shakers of history, while folks on the left want you to know about the downtrodden and the oppressed. It often never occurs to folks on either side that both perspectives might have value - that both perspectives might be important in truly understanding the forces/people that/who shaped our society/nation.

In the realm of science, the divide is even more starkly defined. Folks on the right want the biblical version of creation taught to their children, or something that allows that a literal understanding of their scriptures is at least plausible. Folks on the left point out that evolution is now accepted science and that any other perspective should be excluded from the classroom. Folks on the right want you to know about the dramatic swings in climate down through the different epochs of life on this planet, while folks on the left want you to know about all of the evidence that the human introduction of carbon into our atmosphere is rapidly warming our planet. Neither side seems willing to consider the possibility that both perspectives might have merit and should be actively considered by anyone who really wants to get to the truth of the matter!

Finally, there is the question of what we want our children reading. The right wants them to read the Bible, and the left wants them to read On the Origin of Species. Here's a novel idea: Let's have them read both! I'm not afraid of letting adolescents read Ayn Rand or George Will. Are you afraid of allowing them to read Marx, Hemingway or Faulkner?

There is a difference between education and indoctrination. They are not the same thing, and pretending that they are is dangerous. Children should be exposed to both the world as it is and the way that we would like it to be. The two are not mutually exclusive! It's natural for us to want to pass on our values and views to our progeny, but it is very unnatural to keep them from seeing what's on the other side of the fence. 

Monday, August 5, 2019

Trump's connection to what happened in El Paso

Sure, there are numerous quotes and references to the El Paso gunman's manifesto available to the public in the online media, but I had to hunt to find the actual document. Of course, the police are still investigating the crime, and it is understandable that folks would not want to give the gunman a platform to attempt to justify his hateful act or serve to further inflame racial passions within our country. Nevertheless, the suppression of public access to the gunman's remarks also serves to obscure the very central role of nativists, white supremacists and Donald Trump in what happened in El Paso.

In the interest of making this clearer, I have provided the following excerpts from the manifesto to demonstrate that document's affinity with the rhetoric of Trump, nativists and white supremacists:

Manifesto: "This attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas. They are the instigators, not me. I am simply defending my country from cultural and ethnic replacement brought on by an invasion." https://www.citizenfreepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/shooter-manifesto-elpaso.jpg

Donald J. Trump on Twitter 29 Oct 2018: "Many Gang Members and some very bad people are mixed into the Caravan heading to our Southern Border. Please go back, you will not be admitted into the United States unless you go through the legal process. This is an invasion of our Country and our Military is waiting for you!"

Manifesto: "Due to the death of the baby boomers, the increasingly anti-immigrant rhetoric of the right and the ever increasing Hispanic population, America will soon become a one party state. The Democrat party will own America and they know it. They have already begun the transition by pandering heavily to the Hispanic voting bloc in the 1st Democratic debate. They intend to use open borders, free healthcare for illegals, citizenship and more to enact a political coup by importing and then legalizing millions of new voters." https://www.citizenfreepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/shooter-manifesto-elpaso.jpg

Donald J. Trump at a rally of his supporters in Cincinnati, Ohio 1 Aug 2019: ""The greatest betrayal committed by the Democrats is their support for open borders...These open borders would overwhelm schools and hospitals, drain public services, and flood communities with poisonous drugs. It is tough enough...Democrat lawmakers care more about illegal aliens than they care about their own constituents. They put foreign citizens before American citizens." https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/08/01/trump_democrats_put_foreigners_before_americans_care_more_about_illegals_than_own_constituents.html

 Manifesto: After advocating dividing the U.S. into racial enclaves and declaring his opposition to "race mixing," the gunman wrote: "My ideology has not changed for several years. My opinions on automation, immigration and the rest predate Trump and his campaign for president. I <am> putting this here because some people will blame the President or certain presidential candidates for the attack. This is not the case. I know that the media will probably call me a white supremacist anyway and blame Trump's rhetoric. The media is infamous for fake news. Their reaction to this attack will likely confirm that." https://www.citizenfreepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/shooter-manifesto-elpaso.jpg

Well, at least the line about "fake news" was original! This is just one of many reasons why I (and others) have been saying that another four years of Trump in the White House is a very dangerous prospect for this republic.