Following in the footsteps of states like California and Oregon, my home state of Washington seeks to make ethnic studies a high school graduation requirement. After two years of deliberations and public communications, it isn’t yet clear what Washington’s governing bodies have in mind. According to some public communications, schools will be required to retool some courses in their existing curricula so that they can satisfy the ethnic studies requirement and a core subject area requirement at the same time. According to others, the requirement will not be a single course or course sequence, but a critical
And I do think this kind of approach to education is not going to end up necessarily being a muddle. I think it has a real potential in developing distorted and destructive thinking that doesn't promote a healthy psychological/spiritual mindset in young people or anyone else.
I agree and don’t share the author’s optimism on this point. I think similar content has already resulted in that kind of thinking. While it can be hard to ascertain how widespread and deep the impact, the effects seem to have manifested across the country and negatively influenced our discourse both on and off campus.
I think that refusing to teach Black and women’s history that has been largely erased by people like those on this thread is distorting, destructive and does not create psychologically and spiritually healthy minds, but let’s keep banning books and engaging in other forms of censorship so that no one ever has to feel bad about what happened in the past. Great reality check for our kids.
Chandra, I appreciate your comment and understand why you have your perspective, thinking as you do that people like me and others on this thread oppose teaching black and women's history, banning books and censorship. I can't speak for others on this thread, but I can tell you that description does not accurately reflect my views, concerns or motives, and that I believe similar allegations are often made against people who don't deserve to have their views, concerns or motives characterized in that way.
The following excerpts from the article resonated with me:
----------
"Ethnic and racial histories—the experiences and contributions of different ethnic and racial groups in the US, the rivalries among them, the especially egregious injustices inflicted on some of them, the struggles to overcome those injustices, and instances of injustice and racism today— are taught in schools throughout the country. The best version of these classes teach ethnic and racial histories through multiple lenses, giving students a rich understanding of how these histories are connected to different ideas today.
"Ethnic studies, on the other hand, is the lens....Pointing out the origins and political aims of ethnic studies doesn’t discredit its point of view. But it does remind us that it is a point of view. Despite proponents’ claims, ethnic studies does not promote the teaching of multiple perspectives. It applies a single perspective to teaching about multiple ethnic groups. It is not just social conservatives who object to it. The ethnic studies perspective is contested by reputable scholars in the humanities and social sciences, and rejected by many members of the ethnic and racial groups for whom ethnic studies claims to speak.
"Requiring the ethnic studies lens across K-12 learning standards is therefore akin to requiring a feminist or libertarian lens. Those ideologies and others should be taught somewhere in the school curriculum, but they should be taught as rival interpretive frameworks and objects of analysis. None should be enshrined in state learning standards or local curricula as settled doctrine."
----------
I am open to considering the perspectives of those who believe that the content of what we are teaching in black and women's history courses is insufficient. Indeed, I am curious to know how you would want to supplement the current content of such courses, and would be grateful if you shared your thoughts on that question. Whatever the right depth and breadth of content is, though, I agree with the author that teachers and students should consider that content through a range of perspectives.
Thank you for your willingness to engage in these important conversations. The historians have historically been white men, so that is the perspective and lens through which most students are consuming history.
While people on here will poo poo DEI, the purposes is to bring multiple perspectives to the table which is not just a moral imperative (that appeals to so few these days), but also a business imperative confirmed by research out of Harvard Business School. We do not have multiple perspectives in the classroom or the board room.
I’m not shy about one of my motives for teaching Black and women’s history (which is really just U.S. history) bring that it should have the effect of diversifying spaces. Society needs that. You cannot maximize talent and productivity without it. It starts by teaching about ALL of the figures that built this country, including the heroes and the villains and the stuff we don’t want to repeat.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We are in agreement that U.S. history needs to be taught, "warts and all," as is often said. In that regard, model curricula developed by FAIR and 1776 Unites attempt to contribute to such an outcome.
We are also in agreement that schools and other organizations benefit from a diversity of perspectives and thought, and I support efforts -- including those of FAIR, as well as others like FIRE and the Heterodox Academy -- to generate such outcomes. While there are DEI initiatives that encourage a diversity of perspectives and thought, one of my concerns -- which I believe is likely shared by others who have commented, as well as FAIR itself -- is that DEI programs often effect and even impose conformity of thought, which either results in self-censorship on the part of those who disagree, or material consequences for those who openly dissent or even just question. When that happens, the result mitigates against a diversity of perspectives, which is the point I understood the author of the article to be making.
I think one of the problems with the discourse in our country is that we often use the same words or terms and mean different things. In addition, we often assess people with opposing views based on caricatures created by people who are trying to divide us and/or don't understand the countervailing perspectives and how good, well-meaning people might come to have them. As a result, I believe conversations like the one we're having are critical, as such direct, good-faith communication can enable people with different perspectives to better understand each other, see the humanity in each other, and find common ground. So, thank you again for your willingness to engage.
In that regard, I hope you won't mind, if I can throw one more organization at you: Braver Angels (www.braverangels.org). Braver Angels is trying to bring Americans together across differences, not to change anyone's values or views, but to change how we treat those with whom we disagree, so that we can lower the temperature and toxicity in our discourse, bridge our political divide, work together to better understand and address our problems, and encourage elected officials to do the same. You might appreciate the heterodox engagement we have there, and you might also find it to have useful (and free) resources for you to leverage with your students. If you're interested in learning more, the website is full of information and I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Historians were certainly white men initially in the US. They have been far from that since the 60s in the West.
Also, teaching an incessant gripe story of black/female history does not produce balanced, healthy, informed, happy citizens. Its another form of biased history and I have little doubt it produces miserable illinformed p/t activists.
We have been teaching black and women's history for forty years now, in blue states more than any traditional history in fact. I have students who are sick of these fields. I myself studied this way more than any Eurocentric history.
In red states, different sure, but as a whole, its such a myth we don't teach these fields. High school teachers are so diverse, black and female that I doubt any student since 1999 has heard of Copernicus or Adam Smith.
This isn't about refusing to teach history, it's about putting everything under a lens to reimagine historical perspectives in a divisive and revisionist way, and for what? Where in the world has that worked out? Under Mao's China? Stalin's Russia, or the French Revolution, where these nations eradicated their historical past and re-created a new one? I'm all for teaching historical facts, as is this author. In fact the more, the better. What's at issue here, is how constructivist mannerisms and new age progressivism is hellbent on teaching history under a different lens, and that is destructive to kids when they don't first know their own history, first and foremost. How do you build on a foundation when nothing is there? A house of cards simply falls in the wind. I'd also say that when putting a reimagined history in front of teachers systemswide, does anyone have confidence it will be taught well?
Thank you for covering this. I have covered the dangers of ethnic studies on my Substack, with particular attention to its embrace of anti-Jewish tropes. The leading ES advocacy orgs in Washington openly state their vision of overturning enlightenment ideals in favor of intersectionality and oppressor/victim paradigms. They blame Jews (code name: “Zionists”) for ruining the first California curriculum, and one leader here has stated on the record that Jews claim “people of color status” and don’t recognize their white privilege, and they act as “barriers and gatekeepers to the work of people of color.”
These groups are actively doing professional development with school districts around Seattle and Olympia.
Of course it embraces anti-Jewish tropes. The whole thing is simply a careful rebranding of what the National Socialists and their predecessors were doing in the 1920s and beyond. Race essentialism is one of the core tenants of National Socialism...calling this stuff Marxist or whatever just gives it a veneer of possible academic respectability it doesn't deserve.
Jew here (of the Reform variety). Know your history, Steve.
“…..the Jewish press reacted to Black lynchings with outrage and Jewish community leader Henry Moskowitz notably helped found the NAACP in 1909. But some Jewish entertainers during this period also signaled identification with the White Protestant majority by donning blackface, and some Yiddish newspapers expressed ambivalence and anti-Black attitudes in their coverage of incidents such as the Tulsa Race Massacre (even as they drew parallels between the plight of African Americans in the US and Jews in Eastern Europe).”
“Once Nazism emerged, and then a Nazi look-alike movement in the United States emerged, it was quite clear that Jews were in trouble, too. So you see Jewish organizations and Jewish individuals joining efforts of the Black community to challenge racial discrimination.”
“The deepening allyship between the two groups came as the racial position of American Jews started to shift. With the Holocaust predicated on the idea that the Jews were an inferior race, it was no longer socially acceptable to think of Jews as racially distinct. Overt antisemitism also declined as the economic anxieties of the early 20th century gave way to the prosperity of the post-war boom. As the racial color line hardened, Ashkenazi Jews who presented as White were eventually subsumed into the White mainstream – for instance, Jewish veterans were able to take advantage of the GI Bill when their African American counterparts were not.”
“Many Jewish groups and individuals joined the fight against segregation and racial discrimination by pointing to their own experiences of persecution. Some prominent Jewish organizations filed amicus briefs in landmark civil rights cases. Jews also marched in Selma, Alabama, alongside Martin Luther King Jr. and risked their lives to register Black voters in the South. At the same time, many Jews had opportunities and advantages that Black people did not, which caused some tensions between the two groups.”
“From the point of view of most white people, Jews were way more engaged and they made the choice to ally themselves with another disadvantaged community in order to protect equality for everyone. From the African American side, that was great, but Jews also had this economic power – because they were white – that they were not using necessarily to help the cause.”
“As the rise of Black nationalism drew more attention to these economic imbalances, the so-called Black-Jewish alliance began to splinter. But in spite of some clashes between the two groups, Jewish political movements such as Zionism were also influenced by Black nationalist thinking and vice versa.”
I'd suggest you actually read and understand my comment. The DEI people are the ones reusing National Socialist methods and tropes...right down to the race essentialist labels and tactics. They also target educators quite effectively. Many like to forget National Socialism had strong proponents within the German university system (as did its precursors in the more pan-German nationalist movements). In fact, many of the mid- and upper-level leaders in the SD were professors and lawyers (many of whom were considered quite successful academically). Methods migrate, as do the targets of those methods.
This is a really good point. All hate groups share a persecution complex, victimhood mentality and complete self-assurance in their groups' own moral superiority. In this sense both the far left and far right are exactly the same, but the far left is doing even more to solidify in-group thinking and racialize our identities. I could just as easily imagine pogroms under the left as the right. Both groups are equally dangerous. Just look at The Terror of the French Revolution.
And that's why I like to stress that many of the tactics and methods being used by what's loosely considered the left these days are lifted from the National Socialist playbook almost verbatim. They also share the same obsession with race and identify as being immutable and easily generalized/stereotyped. And if you want left-wing pogroms, you don't need to look much further than Cambodia, China, or Stalin's USSR. Power-mad zealots all tend to be quite similar regardless of their ideological trappings.
That's a good point. How could I forget about the Pol Pot regime? I do think that socialism itself is not to blame, but rather the ignorant, militant interpretation of Marxism that inspired "critical theory." Inspired is the key word, because aside from vaguely Marxist-sounding terminology, CRT/CT has nothing in common with real socialism, nor does DEI. They just imitate some of the rhetoric to lend their own bunk arguments some badly-needed credibility. As DEI activists themselves are fond of pointing out, "equity" has nothing in common with equality. Rather than "leveling the playing field" (which is what I felt and hoped for back when I identified as a liberal), theirs is a robber baron mentality that's much more oriented towards vengeance, segregation and retaliation than "social justice." If anyone on the left still actually believed in equality, justice, democratic processes, or bridging differences, I would still be a liberal, but its devolved into pure narcissism and power grabs. They decided to become what they claimed to hate.
Can you even define those? A video of a right wing mother recently went viral when she couldn’t even define it despite her conservative activism.
Now professors and lawyers are the devil? What is with these right wing anti-intellectual movements that target ethnic studies as though fentanyl and guns aren’t a greater threat? Is this what you people are really focused on - banning ethnic studies, books and censorship? Quit the rhetoric on freedom then. Accept that you want authoritative, dictatorial government.
Clearly you lack the ability to understand historical comparisons. Can you even explain why you feel so strongly compelled to slap ideological labels on anyone with whom you might have a point of disagreement? Since rational discourse seems to elude you, I'll leave you to your rant.
Jew here (of the Reform variety). Extreme right wing Zionism is a problem......
“…..the Jewish press reacted to Black lynchings with outrage and Jewish community leader Henry Moskowitz notably helped found the NAACP in 1909. But some Jewish entertainers during this period also signaled identification with the White Protestant majority by donning blackface, and some Yiddish newspapers expressed ambivalence and anti-Black attitudes in their coverage of incidents such as the Tulsa Race Massacre (even as they drew parallels between the plight of African Americans in the US and Jews in Eastern Europe).”
“Once Nazism emerged, and then a Nazi look-alike movement in the United States emerged, it was quite clear that Jews were in trouble, too. So you see Jewish organizations and Jewish individuals joining efforts of the Black community to challenge racial discrimination.”
“The deepening allyship between the two groups came as the racial position of American Jews started to shift. With the Holocaust predicated on the idea that the Jews were an inferior race, it was no longer socially acceptable to think of Jews as racially distinct. Overt antisemitism also declined as the economic anxieties of the early 20th century gave way to the prosperity of the post-war boom. As the racial color line hardened, Ashkenazi Jews who presented as White were eventually subsumed into the White mainstream – for instance, Jewish veterans were able to take advantage of the GI Bill when their African American counterparts were not.”
“Many Jewish groups and individuals joined the fight against segregation and racial discrimination by pointing to their own experiences of persecution. Some prominent Jewish organizations filed amicus briefs in landmark civil rights cases. Jews also marched in Selma, Alabama, alongside Martin Luther King Jr. and risked their lives to register Black voters in the South. At the same time, many Jews had opportunities and advantages that Black people did not, which caused some tensions between the two groups.”
“From the point of view of most white people, Jews were way more engaged and they made the choice to ally themselves with another disadvantaged community in order to protect equality for everyone. From the African American side, that was great, but Jews also had this economic power – because they were white – that they were not using necessarily to help the cause.”
“As the rise of Black nationalism drew more attention to these economic imbalances, the so-called Black-Jewish alliance began to splinter. But in spite of some clashes between the two groups, Jewish political movements such as Zionism were also influenced by Black nationalist thinking and vice versa.”
Hey Chandra. Thanks for sharing this article. I think it does a pretty good job of showing how Jews are both white and non-white, depending on circumstances.
The reasons many of us here are critical of ethnic studies is because it's not what it sounds like. It is a political ideology rooted in the 1960s Third World Liberation Front (and it does share many characteristics with Marxism and Maoism, hence Steve's comment above). It's not about "teaching history accurately" - we actually all agree that schools should teach black history, native history, women's history. The thing is, they already mostly do this. We like this, because it's about our shared humanity as Americans and part of our national quest to form a more perfect union. Ethnic studies - specifically, Liberated Ethnic Studies - demonstrates that it wants the opposite of this. Its leaders here on the West Coast are basically training students to resent the system and become political adversaries. When someone says "race essentialist," that means that we are assigning characteristics (often stereotypes) to racial groups and pitting them against each other in a power complex rather than seeing our struggles and identities as intertwined as human Americans. There is also very little evidence ethnic studies as a lens will improve educational outcomes.
As for Jews, what I have uncovered is a flattening of our identities and a resurgence of tropes. Jews in this intersectional framework are almost always white - whiteness being power. And so when we push back on that narrative, we are called out for shutting down people of color. This is directly related to anti-Jewish tropes of the powerful Jew controlling the narrative (usually the media). We are stuck in a loop where we can't have any voice - as soon as we speak up, we are accused of controlling the conversation.
“training students to resent the system and become political adversaries. When someone says "race essentialist," that means that we are assigning characteristics (often stereotypes) to racial groups and pitting them against each other in a power complex rather than seeing our struggles and identities as intertwined as human Americans.”
You mean like the right wing, white supremacist, anti-democracy adversaries who stormed the Capitol on January 6, motivated by a now-indicted president? Those are the only “adversaries” I know. The rest of us just want some equity and justice. My mother was murdered. Does justice for victims of femicide also make me a communist?
In the late 1960’s, my Quaker maternal grandfather (I’m only Jewish on the paternal side) had their meetinghouse graffitied with spray paint and anti-communist messaging. This right wing anti-communist fear-mongering that you are engaging in has been going on for 100 years if you know your U.S. history. It had nothing whatsoever to do with ethnic studies. My grandfather took the family to Africa in the early 1950’s and returned during the Civil Rights movement which Jews were also engaged in. I suppose everyone seeking justice and equality in the world must be a communist. 🙄
“The reasons many of us here are critical of ethnic studies is because it's not what it sounds like. It is a political ideology rooted in the 1960s Third World Liberation Front (and it does share many characteristics with Marxism and Maoism, hence Steve's comment above).”
FAKE NEWS. My white grandfather was a Jim Crow era and beyond 1947 Yale graduate of African Studies. Hardly a Marxist and believed in equity and justice. Those two things can be synonymous. You right wingers really want to put civil rights activists, educators and humanitarians as communists. I come from Quaker roots. We were the early abolitionists. You want to brand even those people communists. It’s a dark, cynical ideology that seeks to brand in the other direction. It’s laughable that you think in a global economy that “ethnic studies” is the devil and not marketable or valuable. 15 years in a business school informs me otherwise. Astounding the right wing anti-intellectual sentiments.
I see you are not really interested in engaging with the conversation and documentation on this. Literally, these messages are on ES orgs' social media pages. It's easier to engage in character assassination I suppose.
Character assassination is the assumption that anyone in favor of what you refer to as “ethnic studies” is a communist. It is right wing fear-mongering like banning books. It is anti-intellectual rhetoric.
If you want credibility as a creator on Substack and as some sort of intellectual you shouldn't just straw man everyone you disagree with but actually engage with the arguments. My offer to continue on email stands.
This is an excellent piece, and well expressed, making crucial distinctions. Thank you. It is essential that we wake up to educational distortions and especially education being replaced by indoctrination which looks at everything through one particular (distorted) lens. As an educator, I want students to look at a wide variety of perspectives and opinions, and use their real critical thinking skills, not so-called "critical inquiry" or "critical analysis" (always on the basis of a whole political philosophy) which invariably winds up with the same buzz words or their equivalent in its findings. This is no way to educate children or anyone else.
I don’t need to wonder as an educator. It’s educational white flight. It’s the modern segregation because God forbid we teach any history that makes people feel bad about what happened in the past so that if doesn’t repeat (slavery, the Holocaust, etc). Unbelievable.
In NYC, there are 50k minority kids on charter school waiting lists because the public schools are failing to teach them how to read and write. What good is ethnic studies if you have no skills. Others don’t want their kids sexualized or even ‘groomed’ by school officials who are ‘way over their skis’ as they say. And if the public school system is not adequately preparing kids in basics (reading & writing) who needs ‘ethnic studies’ which are intended to demonize white children? The so-called 1619 Project which is being taught in thousands of schools has been called out for being historically inaccurate. And we know that these courses are very circumscribed as they probably don’t teach that slavery has existed throughout history and even today 2 million Uighers are enslaved in China. I’m betting that these courses won’t cover the fact that 2/3 of whites that arrived in the USA were indentured servants. Nor will it cover the fact that throughout the history of the formation of the USA most people fled to the USA because of persecution elsewhere- the Irish famine in the 19th century, wars & conflicts - and even my own family fled Latvia once their farm was confiscated by Russians in the early 1900’s - my husband’s family left The Levant area for the same reason. Today, Americans know these so-called ethnic studies courses are not being taught in a balanced fashion. That said, in general though, people are fleeing the public education system for a variety of reasons- because in their area, town or city has just failed to educate for whatever reason. It’s good to have a choice. Public education isn’t what it used to be.
Such a predictable response. Deflection and denialism is exactly the strategy of fearful conservative white parents who are behind the book bannings and censorship here in Florida.
I am so thankful for my public school education (K-Master’s) in a state that values education, not this fearful whitewashed version of U.S. history where we can’t mention civil rights icons as being Black. Data and facts still matter.
You love repeating the words "data and facts" as you insult everyone you disagree with, but these magic words don't lend credence (or coherence) to your arguments. Your pretense to defending intellectual rigor ring a bit hollow as your only response to those you disagree with is to hide behind words like "deflection" and "denialism." It must be a rather lonely life, shouting at everyone you meet, not listening to a word they say to you, instead opting to personally both those who agree and disagree with you. Phrases like "white flight" are not merely dismissive, they're racist, and it's just this sort of divisive garbage they teach in modern ethnic studies courses that render them toxic to both intellectual rigor, objectivity or constructive dialogue. It's a cult, plain and simple.
“White flight” isn’t a cutesy term like “woke” (which you have yet to define and I have no idea what it means since I don’t use it). Even conservatives who use it can’t define it.
It’s a migration pattern that began in the Jim Crow era. Know your US history:
Thanks Chandra, but unlike brilliant teachers like yourself, wikipedia is not my primary source for serious scholarship. But being such a busy teacher, with an actual teaching job and actual students and not just a lonely crank with nothing better to do with your life but troll people ceaselessly...you would know that. :)
Blacks think, like any adolescent that, it’s all about them. I can’t wait for the massive amounts of Latinos and Asians that the Biden Administration is encouraging to come across the border to create such a mass in inner cities that they’ll overwhelm dysfunctional black communities. New immigration is the only event that will cleanse the rot. That will be one for the Ethnic Studies classes.
It stands to reason that since you are an overt racist, you would of course do the cowardly thing and hide behind your initials rather than expose yourself for who you really are and take ownership. The dysfunction is all yours.
Because you likely never took a humanities or social science course or even understand anything about how a racial caste system created the inner city, you will remain woefully uneducated and ignorant about how white people created that over centuries. I pity the racist that you are referring to Black people as adolescents. It is a pathology that is driven by narcissism and psychopathy:
“Blacks think, like any adolescent that, it’s all about them.”
What is this - the 1950’s. How racist, intolerant and xenophobic are you trying to be under the umbrella of the Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism? This is yet another bigoted platform. The adolescent here is you. My teenage sons are far more open minded and accepting of differences. Fearful and fragile white people everywhere. It was a white mother who complained about little Ruby Bridges harassed by angry white mobs and here you are doing the same thing. The boogeyman still isn’t ethnic studies; it is white supremacy....
Thank you for this well-argued, cogent piece. This is a little beyond the scope of your piece, but I wonder why schools are opting to teach ethnic studies, whose focus is highly specific, and includes an ideological bent, instead of cultural anthropology. Anthropology has its own flaws, of course, but it at least aims at reaching broader and more generally applicable understandings of human behavior. And while aspects of cultural anthropology overlap with the humanities and other traditions, anthropologists are usually expected to at least try to adhere to norms for scientific methodology. In my mind, this puts anthropology head and shoulders above other disciplines seeking to understand human cultural diversity through an political ideological lens. Of course, mainstream anthropology has been tainted by the same social forces that seek to warp every corner of our society with an fixation on race. But at least, in principle, cultural anthropology represents a wider understanding of human nature than the dogmatism of ethic studies.
You are not any kind of teacher. You are a troll and a stalker who gets their jollies from harassing people you disagree with. I hope that you get the help you need. Of course you're "back." You never go away. You probably stayed up all night trolling.
One final note: my grandfather whom I obviously write about was a white man. I will be covering good white men over 400 years, so no need to be so fragile. Unfortunately, you will not be going down in history as one with the way that you treat an expressive woman on a literary platform. I’m embarrassed for you. I’m also the mother of white sons and love boys and men that don’t harm girls and women. That’s all for now. Have a great day!
Only a narcissist would think their empty comments on an obscure social media post who gets her "history lessons" from wikipedia and CNN would think there is a place for herself in the history books, lol. Your granddaddy was white? Good to know you hate yourself more than you do the rest of us. Good luck cultivating your victimhood. The Catholic Church loves martyrs. Maybe you should reach out to them and tell them your story.
Point to where I indicated that I seek to be anyone other than someone who writes about history and their personal family story. You can’t because I didn’t. I’m not here for the validation of hostile strangers. Now THAT would be insane.
Point to where I said I hate myself. You can’t because I didn’t. You do hate that so express myself and you hope to bully me off the platform.
See, this emotional meltdown you are having that causes you to impulsively respond is all projection. You are consumed by and obsessed with your own fear and hatred of someone you don‘t even know. You are a very irrational and dangerous person.
You are a cowardly, emotionally triggered and obviously self-hating man to be using the sort of violent communication you do.
You don’t know what a victim is to be calling me one. You are delusional and spiraling. But I’m here to watch the self-implosion just like with the indicted president with whom you clearly have so much in common.
Until you discover eugenicists and anthropologists who were mostly racist and sexist white men throughout history. Good luck with that approach. You are looking for an unbiased perspective that you will never find because academia itself is an institution dominated by a particularly biased and very powerful demographic.
I'm not looking for unbiased perspective. Any good student of social science knows it does not exist. Funny that "bias" is the worst possible thing to the woke. Thumping on anthro with the "all anthropologist are racist white men" stick is a trope, not a truth, even if you hate white men. In fact, it's a very old saw. And while, as in all disciplines and fields of study there were some jerks, there are also many good people doing good work. That I even need to say that reflects how low the maturity level has sunk in public discourse. To condemn an entire field because of its complex history or a few bad apples is a very woke approach to social change. It lacks nuance, subtly or practical application. Condemning others is also not constructive or productive, as many young SJW's like to think. It just adds more noise and detracts from the hard conversations that the adults need to have. I pray that by the end of my life this disease will have run its course and we can once again have intelligent conversations about complex topics.
Your name, personality and rhetoric are all boring. Book bannings and censorship by extreme right wingers is still wrong. Ethnic studies is still needed. None of that changes. Toodles!
I agree with you 100%. I took ethnic studies classes along with anthro coursework and benefited from both. They both have their place. But I do think anthropology should be taught more widely than ethnic studies for the valid reasons I've already articulated. Ethnic studies is one peoples' story; anthropology is better equipped to explore broader understandings of how we all fit together. That's an important distinction. We need those understandings if we are to transcend the entrenched tribalism that threatens to destroy us. Ethnic studies perpetuates (or at best, doesn't help people transcend) tribalism, and hence, it is not the appropriate vehicle for bridging misunderstandings and conflict between groups. From an intellectual standpoint, it's easy and lazy to condemn an entire field of study based on a few bad apples, particularly when no better alternative is being offered. While woke "historians" look backward through time, on an eternal quest to find and cancel everything that doesn't fit their victims and villains worldview, I look back to glean understand from both the failures and the successes of our forebears, who all had something to teach regardless of their imperfections.
“While woke "historians" look backward through time, on an eternal quest to find and cancel everything that doesn't fit their victims and villains worldview”
You do realize it’s the extreme right wing that is engaging in the cancel culture by way of book banning and other forms of censorship? It is primarily white people complaining about references to race for Rosa Parks and Ruby Bridges. They don’t want U.S. history told. So, you are simply wrong about who is seeking to cancel history.
The minimization, reductionist thinking that you refer to is so evident in your words. Heroes and villains come in all colors and genders and will be presented as such by this “historian.” I tell the truth that mostly white parents are seeking to erase in red states. And if you think it’s not racially motivated, you’re be dead wrong.
I don't understand why you feel the need to school me about what I've already said I agree with you on. I've already clearly stated that I agree with you about the right's destructive influence, so no need to belabor the point any further. But where we seem to part ways is in your binary thinking that right wing extremism does anything to justify left wing extremism (and racism). Both right and left wing ideologues are equally corrosive to the aims of an enlightened society. Both are equally detrimental to intelligent discourse. Both use bans, censorship and intimidation to force compliance with their equally paranoid and infantile view of people, race, gender and the world. Which one wins the contest for "worst" is not my concern, because they both use the same methods. You say "heroes and villains come in all colors..." I'm glad to hear you say so now, because it seems to contradict your earlier statements where you introduced those terms into multiple sets of comments. I am, merely responding to the false-dichotomy that you and so many others adhere to.
We don’t have to be a perfect amalgamation. We can accept one another’s differences and respect them. That is the first order of business. Many Black people tell me they don’t want their Blackness erased; they just don’t want to be discriminated against or fear the police. I similarly don’t need to pretend that there aren’t differences between me and someone who identifies as a man. Multiculturalism is NOT tribalism. I’m fine with differences. I’m NOT fine with institutions using those differences to break the law and discriminate. Let’s deal with the institutions that oppress before we try to hold hands and sing kumbaya. We have women literally losing their lives due to lack of medical options. But somehow ethnic studies is the devil. I’m not fooled. Anthropology vs. ethnic studies isn’t even the debate. It’s not the game changer and it never will be.
I don't know who you're having this discourse with, but it isn't me, but some imaginary foe. As I've already said ad nauseum: I. AGREE. WITH. YOU. And I've loudly and publicly voiced my support of teachers facing the right's ridiculously homophobic censorship and iron-fisted attempts to ban LGBTQ people and others from a place at the table. But as I also said, one think I hate about wokism is that it exists to call-out/tear down/destroy without offering any meaningful or intelligent alternative. That's all it knows how to do: destroy. And while you may be satisfied with taking easy shots at right wing bigots, I'd rather go a little further, and thus I won't be intimidated into not offering both critique of ethnic studies and a viable alternative that has a proven track-record of rising above tribalistic interpretations of human groups. Finding common ground has nothing to do with "singing kumbaya" but its easy for woke cynics to dismiss any attempt to forge intercultural common ground, because just like the right they don't want people to live in mutually respectful peaceful harmony. They only thrive in strife, anger and conflict, so they perpetuate the delusion that we are all oppressors or oppressed. They create jibberish, the product of irrational and paranoid "thinking." Phrases like "erasing blackness" deploy the exact same mentality of hate groups and how they create solidarity by crafting an ontology where a small group of the elect are under attack from invisible threatening forces. It's a great move for cult leaders or others seeking to create solidarity in order to control and inspire mobs to do their bidding. It's a chapter right out of the Jim Jones playbook (along with the GOP). Since the right has been at it a little longer, their verbiage is a bit more sophisticated than the left, but leftist ideologues are learning fast.
When you can define these words and acronyms in an attempt to label people while whining about sunken discourse, then we can have some intellectual dialogue.....
I am happy to oblige, even though you are obviously baiting me rather than attempting to have a dialogue, which is completely predictable. "Woke" is a perfect term to epitomize the irony behind demagoguery masquerading as enlightenment. "SJW" or social justice warrior refers to people whose pretenses toward making the world a better place are tempered by their abuse of power, which is limited to bullying, trolling, and ending conversations and careers. They are similar to the Catholic Church during The Inquisition, though they fancy themselves to be saviors wielding the sword of justice. They are not labels I created, but they certainly apply in some instances. Does these definitions help you, or will they just serve as inspiration for your next attack?
Did the proclaimed “contrarian” accuse me of “baiting?” 😉
What sort of abuse of power, bullying or political ideology leads the right wing to ban books, commit domestic terrorism, engage in censorship, refuse to protect children and vote for no exception for rape, incest or the life of the mother? All of those appear to be more of a pathology along the lines of psychopathy. Can we get our priorities straight and start there before we attack ethnic studies?
The truth hurts. White men throughout history used eugenics, sociology, psychology, medicine, etc to systematically oppress Black people over centuries. Data and facts still matter.
My research highlights the heroes and villains of all colors over 403+ years. I tell the truth. I come from an academic, business, humanities, social science and STEM background. 23 years in public higher education, the kind of education that right wing folks with degrees rail against in the most hypocritical fashion.
I do not understand anti-intellectualism on Substack of all places.
It's interesting to see you copying and reposting your comments in multiple places. Interesting as well that you choose to see the world as one full of heroes and victims. It strikes me as odd that a teacher decrying anti-intellectualism makes such anti-intellectual statements, and chooses broad, sweeping generalizations, moral absolutism and applies confirmation bias to her statements. I would expect this level of maturity from a student, not a professor. It's also a students' error to think that because they use words like "data" or "facts" that whatever follows is a valid claim. A teacher would know that decontextualized "facts" are meaningless. I'm sorry the truth hurts you; it strengthens me, including the complex and sometimes ugly truths of the history of anthropology. But condemning something (or someone) because of its flaws is not "truth." It is a great way to fail to understand what many aspects of life have to teach. In this sense, woke ideology is even more anti-intellectual than right wing Christian theology as applied to education. It fixates on race to the exclusion of all other ideas (and race IS an idea, a construct), filtering all information from history to math through a lens where only victims and villains dwell, where all phenomena are reduced to "colonization". Everyone else is a saint/martyr/victim (the closest woke has to actual heroic qualities). It's not only untrue, but it's a very depressing, disempowering narrative, and one that infantilizes black people. It's almost childlike in it's simplistic, one-dimensional understanding of human nature. Self-righteous ideologues make great proto-fascists. Their constant hang-wringing over perceived injustice is the ideological engine behind numerous hate groups, including Christian identity, the Klan and others. And indeed, when they rail against woke ideology is IS hypocritical, as is the reverse. The far right and the woke left are exactly the same. They're both wolves in (they think) sheep's clothing, pretending to be on a holy crusade in order to mask their real intensions to seize power for themselves.
You may have misread my comment, which is on CT, not CRT, which is only one of CT's children, or in this case, grandchildren, through CLS.
Unlike you, I don't know what you know and don't know, so I don't know if you know much about CT or anything at all. CT was the neo-Communism that gained intellectual predominance in the Left in my generation.
One suggestion: I understand the need some people have to feel superior and talk down to others, but it might be better if you'd try to talk with people instead.
We need courses that will teach critically ABOUT "Critical Theory": explain what it is, who developed it, how they developed it as an extension of Leninism with its theme of moving beyond the working class to achieve a more total social-cultural revolution, and its methods for cultural revolution in light of those used in Russia and China under the same name. Also, its points of continuity and contradiction to the methodological norm of true public education, which is critical thinking.
Only teaching honestly about this can stop the indoctrination. No ban can stop it.
In the absence of this teaching, the field is left to those who do not teach ABOUT Critical Theory, but instead preach Critical Theory as a form of indoctrination. They also teach its activism, often by providing a kind of training in CT methods of intolerance, abuse, silencing of disagreement, and instantiation of social hegemony for its adherents. Their ideological impetus is unimpeded by any objective learning.
Where are the scholars who will develop the honest courses that are needed?
You clearly don’t know much about CRT or its history. I would suggest starting there. There are plenty of honest scholars out there. You might need to read their work first. Just a thought.
You may have misread my comment, which is about CT, not CRT.
Unlike you, I don't know what you know and don't know, so I don't know if you know much about CT. For what it is worth CT was the neo-Communism that gained intellectual predominance in the Left in my generation. CRT is one of CT's children, or grandchildren, through CLS.
One suggestion: I understand the need some people have to feel superior and talk down to others, but it might be better if you'd try to talk with people as equals instead. Reading your comments, I don't get an impression of actual superiority in knowledge or thinking; the rudeness gives me an impression, instead, of overcompensation. But that's just my impression; only you, looking inside yourself, could possibly know whether that's there.
I think this person is unhinged and looking for a (or multiple) punching bag(s) to take out her frustrations on over being upset by living in Florida, lol. It's easier than listening or working towards constructive change and civil dialogue, I guess. Your comments are spot on.
Moments ago, you were posting in agreement (the comments are still there) and now I’m unhinged and everyone with the name Chandra is evil. There is nothing constructive or civil about your commentary.
Your lecture has been received. Thank you for "educating" us about morality, sexism, racism and the evils of white men (did I miss any "isms"?). You've won many hearts and minds with your sane arguments, concise claims and winning personality. I'm sure your students find you delightful, if you really have any... I get it. I would go nuts too if I lived in Florida, but that wasn't my choice (though I must admit, I'm glad you're there and I'm not...). Good luck with your holy crusade.
White men gain my respect when they stop picking on the low hanging fruit by bullying women and start addressing the racism and sexism of other white men:
It’s interesting that you deliberately ignore the racist white man referring to “Blacks” as adolescents, but you incessantly troll and mock me. You are not brave. No one needs to be on a “holy crusade” to just not be racist and sexist. Try it sometime. It’s really just a character issue until you made it a partisan issue. If you want to pathologize, start here with your kind: https://www.verywellmind.com/the-link-between-psychopathy-narcissism-and-racism-5114588
Thank you, Ira, for the psychoanalysis. Women are quite used to that from men. Very cliche. I will chalk your thinly veiled insult up to projection and the need to feel superior over me. That is historically the way it goes and women will also find it in the comments section on social media regularly. Since you acknowledge a connection between CT and CRT, which was birthed during the Civil Rights movement, I will simply provide a link as an educational reference. Anything to distract us from book bannings, censorship, guns, murdered children and more urgent and dangerous items clearly not on the conservative agenda. CT, CRT and all of the other acronyms don’t even come close to my concern about safety as a mother with school age children. But go ahead and belittle me as lacking knowledge....
Is it just poor word choice? You write "It is not just social conservatives who object to it. The ethnic studies perspective is contested by reputable scholars" - as if those two categories were mutually incompatible and mutually exclusive.
Does the author think we are all morons? Once the conduit is in place, the content will flow. The battle is to keep the camel's nose out of the tent in the first place. Amazing that an educated educationalist can't see this. Oh, and I love the "college ready" rationale (excuse) for infecting high schools with CRT. In short order (4 years, right?), you can expect to see "high school preparation" used to flood elementary and middle schools with this tripe. God save us all from being "educated."
to R Bicker: That's sadly realistic on your part. But the other reality is that the nose is already under the tent. Stuff inevitably filters in, and bans only make stuff more tempting. That makes it important to teach ABOUT it, honestly. If only so students won't be blindsided when other teachers "teach it" as dogma, and when still others train them to practice it methods, and use it as a way of establishing a superior position in an ideological social hierarchy.
“If only so students won't be blindsided when other teachers "teach it" as dogma, and when still others train them to practice it methods, and use it as a way of establishing a superior position in an ideological social hierarchy.”
You mean like the public education system has taught/upheld white supremacy? It is, after all, a white mother who complained about the Ruby Bridges movie here in Florida. White supremacy is the greatest domestic terrorist threat tracked by DHS, DOJ and the FBI. Thank goodness the AP African American Studies course goes global next year. I suppose the author would be against it since it’s “ethnic studies.”
Let me remind everyone here so fragile and triggered by “ethnic studies” that it never killed children, unlike fentanyl. Femicide and filicide are global public health crises, not books:
You are so obsessed with forcing everyone to love ethnic studies you're trolling everyone here! How do you have so much time on your hands if you are a teacher??? Why not try engaging with opposing views rather than shouting down and insulting every person who commented and copying and pasting your own comments ad nauseum? Is that what good teachers do?
Earning potential may not be ALL that matters but it is pretty darn important to anyone with tens of thousands of dollars of student loan debt. If they must work multiple jobs just to pay rent and pay off the loan then they won't have much time for literary pursuits - or even a family. These student loans cannot be shed by filing bankruptcy - they lock students into positions of "involuntary servitude" for their early adult and middle age years.
Higher Ed has known this for decades and yet they still churn out bachelor's in social sciences when there are virtually no jobs for social scientists without Ph.D.s - the same goes for most of the Liberal Arts degrees: their primary value is as a stepping stone to post-graduate studies (more school & more debt). Even the old excuse that they learn to write better is suspect because students in these majors learn to write in academese - which is only useful in Academia.
When Higher Ed only served the scions of privilege issuing degrees with low market value was fine - in fact, having a useless education was a sign of status. However, now that Colleges & Universities market themselves as a way out of poverty they should be more upfront about how well each degree serves that purpose. This is especially important when you look at how much student loan debt is accrued by underserved students compared with middle class students.
Some keep parroting vague lines about the value of Higher Ed without seeing that lifting people out of poverty with college degrees is a sales pitch.
Where did I say anything about higher education being a guarantee of being lifted out of poverty. There are very gainfully and happily employed humanities and social science majors, both within the field and outside of it. Philosophy majors are some of the highest paid. Your use of the term “academese” has nothing to do with the average college graduate. I suppose now you don’t want academics to be academic. I’m very perplexed by the anti-intellectual attitudes of those with degrees. My graduates work in satisfying and lucrative careers and aren’t whining at all. The easiest to place were the ones who studied liberal arts, were well rounded and recruited by top employers. They can carry a conversation, write well and have many of the qualities that the business world seeks.
These ethnic studies programs are just make-work for students who were duped into majoring in ethnic studies and then discovered that such degrees provide a marginal boost in earning potential over a solid High School diploma. (Plus, having a degree in a 'Social Activism Major' may send up a red flag for prospective employers who do not want to have zealot-induced drama in the workplace).
It is amusing they want to educate humans into being better angels - they think some book-learnin' will change human nature. It would be funny if it were not so wasteful.
As though there are no right wing zealots. As though all we need to make the world go round are engineers. “And they think some book-learnin' will change human nature.” It has throughout history when there is an open mind which is obviously not yours, so it stands to reason that you would devalue literature, on a platform designed for it, no less. The disturbing irony so evident only to me.
Right, because earning potential is all that matters in a hyper capitalistic society. I mean, who needs social scientists and humanities/literary people such a waste. Everyone who is anti public education here has been indoctrinated and can’t see it. Laughable.
It’s so disappointing to come to Substack and see Faux News right wing rhetoric and terms such as “woke” being used on what I thought was a learned and literary community. I must have been confused and thought this was LinkedIn.
Whose reality am I ignoring? I’m on here addressing right wing book bannings and censorship which is the antithesis of the freedom-lovers that conservatives claim to be. That’s not burying my head in the sand; it’s acknowledging a very dark and dangerous reality of the current regime. If is censorship at its finest. I welcome you to define “wokeness.” A hilarious video went viral of a conservative activist attempting to do so and ultimately failing. Worry about murdered children. Identify and address the real threat first.
A brave and courageous white woman educator who taught her students character and empathy that is so obviously lacking in the racist and sexist commentary here. Many of you clearly lacked teachers like Jane Elliott and yet were obviously in desperate need of her teachings:
You cannot teach resilience to children without teaching about a variety of people who overcame struggle and the facts surrounding that. Period. Call it ethnic studies. I call it U.S. history.
Speaking of “ethnic studies” (which is really just U.S. history, folks), Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated on this day 55 years ago. Is that too communist of a thing to mention for the right wingers on here? He started to talk about economic racism prior to being murdered. RIP, patriot....
And I do think this kind of approach to education is not going to end up necessarily being a muddle. I think it has a real potential in developing distorted and destructive thinking that doesn't promote a healthy psychological/spiritual mindset in young people or anyone else.
I agree and don’t share the author’s optimism on this point. I think similar content has already resulted in that kind of thinking. While it can be hard to ascertain how widespread and deep the impact, the effects seem to have manifested across the country and negatively influenced our discourse both on and off campus.
Kathy I completely agree.
I think that refusing to teach Black and women’s history that has been largely erased by people like those on this thread is distorting, destructive and does not create psychologically and spiritually healthy minds, but let’s keep banning books and engaging in other forms of censorship so that no one ever has to feel bad about what happened in the past. Great reality check for our kids.
Chandra, I appreciate your comment and understand why you have your perspective, thinking as you do that people like me and others on this thread oppose teaching black and women's history, banning books and censorship. I can't speak for others on this thread, but I can tell you that description does not accurately reflect my views, concerns or motives, and that I believe similar allegations are often made against people who don't deserve to have their views, concerns or motives characterized in that way.
The following excerpts from the article resonated with me:
----------
"Ethnic and racial histories—the experiences and contributions of different ethnic and racial groups in the US, the rivalries among them, the especially egregious injustices inflicted on some of them, the struggles to overcome those injustices, and instances of injustice and racism today— are taught in schools throughout the country. The best version of these classes teach ethnic and racial histories through multiple lenses, giving students a rich understanding of how these histories are connected to different ideas today.
"Ethnic studies, on the other hand, is the lens....Pointing out the origins and political aims of ethnic studies doesn’t discredit its point of view. But it does remind us that it is a point of view. Despite proponents’ claims, ethnic studies does not promote the teaching of multiple perspectives. It applies a single perspective to teaching about multiple ethnic groups. It is not just social conservatives who object to it. The ethnic studies perspective is contested by reputable scholars in the humanities and social sciences, and rejected by many members of the ethnic and racial groups for whom ethnic studies claims to speak.
"Requiring the ethnic studies lens across K-12 learning standards is therefore akin to requiring a feminist or libertarian lens. Those ideologies and others should be taught somewhere in the school curriculum, but they should be taught as rival interpretive frameworks and objects of analysis. None should be enshrined in state learning standards or local curricula as settled doctrine."
----------
I am open to considering the perspectives of those who believe that the content of what we are teaching in black and women's history courses is insufficient. Indeed, I am curious to know how you would want to supplement the current content of such courses, and would be grateful if you shared your thoughts on that question. Whatever the right depth and breadth of content is, though, I agree with the author that teachers and students should consider that content through a range of perspectives.
Thank you for your consideration of this comment.
Rick
Rick,
Thank you for your willingness to engage in these important conversations. The historians have historically been white men, so that is the perspective and lens through which most students are consuming history.
While people on here will poo poo DEI, the purposes is to bring multiple perspectives to the table which is not just a moral imperative (that appeals to so few these days), but also a business imperative confirmed by research out of Harvard Business School. We do not have multiple perspectives in the classroom or the board room.
I’m not shy about one of my motives for teaching Black and women’s history (which is really just U.S. history) bring that it should have the effect of diversifying spaces. Society needs that. You cannot maximize talent and productivity without it. It starts by teaching about ALL of the figures that built this country, including the heroes and the villains and the stuff we don’t want to repeat.
Chandra
Chandra,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We are in agreement that U.S. history needs to be taught, "warts and all," as is often said. In that regard, model curricula developed by FAIR and 1776 Unites attempt to contribute to such an outcome.
We are also in agreement that schools and other organizations benefit from a diversity of perspectives and thought, and I support efforts -- including those of FAIR, as well as others like FIRE and the Heterodox Academy -- to generate such outcomes. While there are DEI initiatives that encourage a diversity of perspectives and thought, one of my concerns -- which I believe is likely shared by others who have commented, as well as FAIR itself -- is that DEI programs often effect and even impose conformity of thought, which either results in self-censorship on the part of those who disagree, or material consequences for those who openly dissent or even just question. When that happens, the result mitigates against a diversity of perspectives, which is the point I understood the author of the article to be making.
I think one of the problems with the discourse in our country is that we often use the same words or terms and mean different things. In addition, we often assess people with opposing views based on caricatures created by people who are trying to divide us and/or don't understand the countervailing perspectives and how good, well-meaning people might come to have them. As a result, I believe conversations like the one we're having are critical, as such direct, good-faith communication can enable people with different perspectives to better understand each other, see the humanity in each other, and find common ground. So, thank you again for your willingness to engage.
In that regard, I hope you won't mind, if I can throw one more organization at you: Braver Angels (www.braverangels.org). Braver Angels is trying to bring Americans together across differences, not to change anyone's values or views, but to change how we treat those with whom we disagree, so that we can lower the temperature and toxicity in our discourse, bridge our political divide, work together to better understand and address our problems, and encourage elected officials to do the same. You might appreciate the heterodox engagement we have there, and you might also find it to have useful (and free) resources for you to leverage with your students. If you're interested in learning more, the website is full of information and I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Best,
Rick
Historians were certainly white men initially in the US. They have been far from that since the 60s in the West.
Also, teaching an incessant gripe story of black/female history does not produce balanced, healthy, informed, happy citizens. Its another form of biased history and I have little doubt it produces miserable illinformed p/t activists.
Right on! My sentiments exactly
We have been teaching black and women's history for forty years now, in blue states more than any traditional history in fact. I have students who are sick of these fields. I myself studied this way more than any Eurocentric history.
In red states, different sure, but as a whole, its such a myth we don't teach these fields. High school teachers are so diverse, black and female that I doubt any student since 1999 has heard of Copernicus or Adam Smith.
This isn't about refusing to teach history, it's about putting everything under a lens to reimagine historical perspectives in a divisive and revisionist way, and for what? Where in the world has that worked out? Under Mao's China? Stalin's Russia, or the French Revolution, where these nations eradicated their historical past and re-created a new one? I'm all for teaching historical facts, as is this author. In fact the more, the better. What's at issue here, is how constructivist mannerisms and new age progressivism is hellbent on teaching history under a different lens, and that is destructive to kids when they don't first know their own history, first and foremost. How do you build on a foundation when nothing is there? A house of cards simply falls in the wind. I'd also say that when putting a reimagined history in front of teachers systemswide, does anyone have confidence it will be taught well?
Thank you for covering this. I have covered the dangers of ethnic studies on my Substack, with particular attention to its embrace of anti-Jewish tropes. The leading ES advocacy orgs in Washington openly state their vision of overturning enlightenment ideals in favor of intersectionality and oppressor/victim paradigms. They blame Jews (code name: “Zionists”) for ruining the first California curriculum, and one leader here has stated on the record that Jews claim “people of color status” and don’t recognize their white privilege, and they act as “barriers and gatekeepers to the work of people of color.”
These groups are actively doing professional development with school districts around Seattle and Olympia.
Of course it embraces anti-Jewish tropes. The whole thing is simply a careful rebranding of what the National Socialists and their predecessors were doing in the 1920s and beyond. Race essentialism is one of the core tenants of National Socialism...calling this stuff Marxist or whatever just gives it a veneer of possible academic respectability it doesn't deserve.
Jew here (of the Reform variety). Know your history, Steve.
“…..the Jewish press reacted to Black lynchings with outrage and Jewish community leader Henry Moskowitz notably helped found the NAACP in 1909. But some Jewish entertainers during this period also signaled identification with the White Protestant majority by donning blackface, and some Yiddish newspapers expressed ambivalence and anti-Black attitudes in their coverage of incidents such as the Tulsa Race Massacre (even as they drew parallels between the plight of African Americans in the US and Jews in Eastern Europe).”
“Once Nazism emerged, and then a Nazi look-alike movement in the United States emerged, it was quite clear that Jews were in trouble, too. So you see Jewish organizations and Jewish individuals joining efforts of the Black community to challenge racial discrimination.”
“The deepening allyship between the two groups came as the racial position of American Jews started to shift. With the Holocaust predicated on the idea that the Jews were an inferior race, it was no longer socially acceptable to think of Jews as racially distinct. Overt antisemitism also declined as the economic anxieties of the early 20th century gave way to the prosperity of the post-war boom. As the racial color line hardened, Ashkenazi Jews who presented as White were eventually subsumed into the White mainstream – for instance, Jewish veterans were able to take advantage of the GI Bill when their African American counterparts were not.”
“Many Jewish groups and individuals joined the fight against segregation and racial discrimination by pointing to their own experiences of persecution. Some prominent Jewish organizations filed amicus briefs in landmark civil rights cases. Jews also marched in Selma, Alabama, alongside Martin Luther King Jr. and risked their lives to register Black voters in the South. At the same time, many Jews had opportunities and advantages that Black people did not, which caused some tensions between the two groups.”
“From the point of view of most white people, Jews were way more engaged and they made the choice to ally themselves with another disadvantaged community in order to protect equality for everyone. From the African American side, that was great, but Jews also had this economic power – because they were white – that they were not using necessarily to help the cause.”
“As the rise of Black nationalism drew more attention to these economic imbalances, the so-called Black-Jewish alliance began to splinter. But in spite of some clashes between the two groups, Jewish political movements such as Zionism were also influenced by Black nationalist thinking and vice versa.”
https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/04/us/us-jewish-racial-identity-religion-explained-cec?fbclid=IwAR3BFRqjSzGE2q46KjrV2xfTN4pkfIPRb4Qqn7PbOHYkQNwv5ZceOhqyx10&mibextid=Zxz2cZ
I'd suggest you actually read and understand my comment. The DEI people are the ones reusing National Socialist methods and tropes...right down to the race essentialist labels and tactics. They also target educators quite effectively. Many like to forget National Socialism had strong proponents within the German university system (as did its precursors in the more pan-German nationalist movements). In fact, many of the mid- and upper-level leaders in the SD were professors and lawyers (many of whom were considered quite successful academically). Methods migrate, as do the targets of those methods.
This is a really good point. All hate groups share a persecution complex, victimhood mentality and complete self-assurance in their groups' own moral superiority. In this sense both the far left and far right are exactly the same, but the far left is doing even more to solidify in-group thinking and racialize our identities. I could just as easily imagine pogroms under the left as the right. Both groups are equally dangerous. Just look at The Terror of the French Revolution.
And that's why I like to stress that many of the tactics and methods being used by what's loosely considered the left these days are lifted from the National Socialist playbook almost verbatim. They also share the same obsession with race and identify as being immutable and easily generalized/stereotyped. And if you want left-wing pogroms, you don't need to look much further than Cambodia, China, or Stalin's USSR. Power-mad zealots all tend to be quite similar regardless of their ideological trappings.
That's a good point. How could I forget about the Pol Pot regime? I do think that socialism itself is not to blame, but rather the ignorant, militant interpretation of Marxism that inspired "critical theory." Inspired is the key word, because aside from vaguely Marxist-sounding terminology, CRT/CT has nothing in common with real socialism, nor does DEI. They just imitate some of the rhetoric to lend their own bunk arguments some badly-needed credibility. As DEI activists themselves are fond of pointing out, "equity" has nothing in common with equality. Rather than "leveling the playing field" (which is what I felt and hoped for back when I identified as a liberal), theirs is a robber baron mentality that's much more oriented towards vengeance, segregation and retaliation than "social justice." If anyone on the left still actually believed in equality, justice, democratic processes, or bridging differences, I would still be a liberal, but its devolved into pure narcissism and power grabs. They decided to become what they claimed to hate.
Getting back to labels and tactics, you operate with many....
“DEI people”
“Race essentialist”
Can you even define those? A video of a right wing mother recently went viral when she couldn’t even define it despite her conservative activism.
Now professors and lawyers are the devil? What is with these right wing anti-intellectual movements that target ethnic studies as though fentanyl and guns aren’t a greater threat? Is this what you people are really focused on - banning ethnic studies, books and censorship? Quit the rhetoric on freedom then. Accept that you want authoritative, dictatorial government.
Clearly you lack the ability to understand historical comparisons. Can you even explain why you feel so strongly compelled to slap ideological labels on anyone with whom you might have a point of disagreement? Since rational discourse seems to elude you, I'll leave you to your rant.
“Can you even explain why you feel so strongly compelled to slap ideological labels on anyone with whom you might have a point of disagreement?
“DEI people”
“Race essentialist”
The labels were all yours from the beginning. It was what I was responding to. The irony is lost on you. Be well.
Jew here (of the Reform variety). Extreme right wing Zionism is a problem......
“…..the Jewish press reacted to Black lynchings with outrage and Jewish community leader Henry Moskowitz notably helped found the NAACP in 1909. But some Jewish entertainers during this period also signaled identification with the White Protestant majority by donning blackface, and some Yiddish newspapers expressed ambivalence and anti-Black attitudes in their coverage of incidents such as the Tulsa Race Massacre (even as they drew parallels between the plight of African Americans in the US and Jews in Eastern Europe).”
“Once Nazism emerged, and then a Nazi look-alike movement in the United States emerged, it was quite clear that Jews were in trouble, too. So you see Jewish organizations and Jewish individuals joining efforts of the Black community to challenge racial discrimination.”
“The deepening allyship between the two groups came as the racial position of American Jews started to shift. With the Holocaust predicated on the idea that the Jews were an inferior race, it was no longer socially acceptable to think of Jews as racially distinct. Overt antisemitism also declined as the economic anxieties of the early 20th century gave way to the prosperity of the post-war boom. As the racial color line hardened, Ashkenazi Jews who presented as White were eventually subsumed into the White mainstream – for instance, Jewish veterans were able to take advantage of the GI Bill when their African American counterparts were not.”
“Many Jewish groups and individuals joined the fight against segregation and racial discrimination by pointing to their own experiences of persecution. Some prominent Jewish organizations filed amicus briefs in landmark civil rights cases. Jews also marched in Selma, Alabama, alongside Martin Luther King Jr. and risked their lives to register Black voters in the South. At the same time, many Jews had opportunities and advantages that Black people did not, which caused some tensions between the two groups.”
“From the point of view of most white people, Jews were way more engaged and they made the choice to ally themselves with another disadvantaged community in order to protect equality for everyone. From the African American side, that was great, but Jews also had this economic power – because they were white – that they were not using necessarily to help the cause.”
“As the rise of Black nationalism drew more attention to these economic imbalances, the so-called Black-Jewish alliance began to splinter. But in spite of some clashes between the two groups, Jewish political movements such as Zionism were also influenced by Black nationalist thinking and vice versa.”
https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/04/us/us-jewish-racial-identity-religion-explained-cec?fbclid=IwAR3BFRqjSzGE2q46KjrV2xfTN4pkfIPRb4Qqn7PbOHYkQNwv5ZceOhqyx10&mibextid=Zxz2cZ
Hey Chandra. Thanks for sharing this article. I think it does a pretty good job of showing how Jews are both white and non-white, depending on circumstances.
The reasons many of us here are critical of ethnic studies is because it's not what it sounds like. It is a political ideology rooted in the 1960s Third World Liberation Front (and it does share many characteristics with Marxism and Maoism, hence Steve's comment above). It's not about "teaching history accurately" - we actually all agree that schools should teach black history, native history, women's history. The thing is, they already mostly do this. We like this, because it's about our shared humanity as Americans and part of our national quest to form a more perfect union. Ethnic studies - specifically, Liberated Ethnic Studies - demonstrates that it wants the opposite of this. Its leaders here on the West Coast are basically training students to resent the system and become political adversaries. When someone says "race essentialist," that means that we are assigning characteristics (often stereotypes) to racial groups and pitting them against each other in a power complex rather than seeing our struggles and identities as intertwined as human Americans. There is also very little evidence ethnic studies as a lens will improve educational outcomes.
As for Jews, what I have uncovered is a flattening of our identities and a resurgence of tropes. Jews in this intersectional framework are almost always white - whiteness being power. And so when we push back on that narrative, we are called out for shutting down people of color. This is directly related to anti-Jewish tropes of the powerful Jew controlling the narrative (usually the media). We are stuck in a loop where we can't have any voice - as soon as we speak up, we are accused of controlling the conversation.
I want to put myself out there for conversation if you'd like - my email is thecholentseattle@gmail.com.
“training students to resent the system and become political adversaries. When someone says "race essentialist," that means that we are assigning characteristics (often stereotypes) to racial groups and pitting them against each other in a power complex rather than seeing our struggles and identities as intertwined as human Americans.”
You mean like the right wing, white supremacist, anti-democracy adversaries who stormed the Capitol on January 6, motivated by a now-indicted president? Those are the only “adversaries” I know. The rest of us just want some equity and justice. My mother was murdered. Does justice for victims of femicide also make me a communist?
In the late 1960’s, my Quaker maternal grandfather (I’m only Jewish on the paternal side) had their meetinghouse graffitied with spray paint and anti-communist messaging. This right wing anti-communist fear-mongering that you are engaging in has been going on for 100 years if you know your U.S. history. It had nothing whatsoever to do with ethnic studies. My grandfather took the family to Africa in the early 1950’s and returned during the Civil Rights movement which Jews were also engaged in. I suppose everyone seeking justice and equality in the world must be a communist. 🙄
“The reasons many of us here are critical of ethnic studies is because it's not what it sounds like. It is a political ideology rooted in the 1960s Third World Liberation Front (and it does share many characteristics with Marxism and Maoism, hence Steve's comment above).”
FAKE NEWS. My white grandfather was a Jim Crow era and beyond 1947 Yale graduate of African Studies. Hardly a Marxist and believed in equity and justice. Those two things can be synonymous. You right wingers really want to put civil rights activists, educators and humanitarians as communists. I come from Quaker roots. We were the early abolitionists. You want to brand even those people communists. It’s a dark, cynical ideology that seeks to brand in the other direction. It’s laughable that you think in a global economy that “ethnic studies” is the devil and not marketable or valuable. 15 years in a business school informs me otherwise. Astounding the right wing anti-intellectual sentiments.
I see you are not really interested in engaging with the conversation and documentation on this. Literally, these messages are on ES orgs' social media pages. It's easier to engage in character assassination I suppose.
Character assassination is the assumption that anyone in favor of what you refer to as “ethnic studies” is a communist. It is right wing fear-mongering like banning books. It is anti-intellectual rhetoric.
If you want credibility as a creator on Substack and as some sort of intellectual you shouldn't just straw man everyone you disagree with but actually engage with the arguments. My offer to continue on email stands.
This is an excellent piece, and well expressed, making crucial distinctions. Thank you. It is essential that we wake up to educational distortions and especially education being replaced by indoctrination which looks at everything through one particular (distorted) lens. As an educator, I want students to look at a wide variety of perspectives and opinions, and use their real critical thinking skills, not so-called "critical inquiry" or "critical analysis" (always on the basis of a whole political philosophy) which invariably winds up with the same buzz words or their equivalent in its findings. This is no way to educate children or anyone else.
Book bannings and censorship also no way to educate children. Those are the issues we are dealing with here in Florida.
And you might wonder why homeschooling and the charter school movements are booming....
I don’t need to wonder as an educator. It’s educational white flight. It’s the modern segregation because God forbid we teach any history that makes people feel bad about what happened in the past so that if doesn’t repeat (slavery, the Holocaust, etc). Unbelievable.
In NYC, there are 50k minority kids on charter school waiting lists because the public schools are failing to teach them how to read and write. What good is ethnic studies if you have no skills. Others don’t want their kids sexualized or even ‘groomed’ by school officials who are ‘way over their skis’ as they say. And if the public school system is not adequately preparing kids in basics (reading & writing) who needs ‘ethnic studies’ which are intended to demonize white children? The so-called 1619 Project which is being taught in thousands of schools has been called out for being historically inaccurate. And we know that these courses are very circumscribed as they probably don’t teach that slavery has existed throughout history and even today 2 million Uighers are enslaved in China. I’m betting that these courses won’t cover the fact that 2/3 of whites that arrived in the USA were indentured servants. Nor will it cover the fact that throughout the history of the formation of the USA most people fled to the USA because of persecution elsewhere- the Irish famine in the 19th century, wars & conflicts - and even my own family fled Latvia once their farm was confiscated by Russians in the early 1900’s - my husband’s family left The Levant area for the same reason. Today, Americans know these so-called ethnic studies courses are not being taught in a balanced fashion. That said, in general though, people are fleeing the public education system for a variety of reasons- because in their area, town or city has just failed to educate for whatever reason. It’s good to have a choice. Public education isn’t what it used to be.
Such a predictable response. Deflection and denialism is exactly the strategy of fearful conservative white parents who are behind the book bannings and censorship here in Florida.
I am so thankful for my public school education (K-Master’s) in a state that values education, not this fearful whitewashed version of U.S. history where we can’t mention civil rights icons as being Black. Data and facts still matter.
You love repeating the words "data and facts" as you insult everyone you disagree with, but these magic words don't lend credence (or coherence) to your arguments. Your pretense to defending intellectual rigor ring a bit hollow as your only response to those you disagree with is to hide behind words like "deflection" and "denialism." It must be a rather lonely life, shouting at everyone you meet, not listening to a word they say to you, instead opting to personally both those who agree and disagree with you. Phrases like "white flight" are not merely dismissive, they're racist, and it's just this sort of divisive garbage they teach in modern ethnic studies courses that render them toxic to both intellectual rigor, objectivity or constructive dialogue. It's a cult, plain and simple.
“White flight” isn’t a cutesy term like “woke” (which you have yet to define and I have no idea what it means since I don’t use it). Even conservatives who use it can’t define it.
It’s a migration pattern that began in the Jim Crow era. Know your US history:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_flight
Thanks Chandra, but unlike brilliant teachers like yourself, wikipedia is not my primary source for serious scholarship. But being such a busy teacher, with an actual teaching job and actual students and not just a lonely crank with nothing better to do with your life but troll people ceaselessly...you would know that. :)
Blacks think, like any adolescent that, it’s all about them. I can’t wait for the massive amounts of Latinos and Asians that the Biden Administration is encouraging to come across the border to create such a mass in inner cities that they’ll overwhelm dysfunctional black communities. New immigration is the only event that will cleanse the rot. That will be one for the Ethnic Studies classes.
It stands to reason that since you are an overt racist, you would of course do the cowardly thing and hide behind your initials rather than expose yourself for who you really are and take ownership. The dysfunction is all yours.
Chandra, do yourself a favor and give it a rest.
Because you likely never took a humanities or social science course or even understand anything about how a racial caste system created the inner city, you will remain woefully uneducated and ignorant about how white people created that over centuries. I pity the racist that you are referring to Black people as adolescents. It is a pathology that is driven by narcissism and psychopathy:
https://www.verywellmind.com/the-link-between-psychopathy-narcissism-and-racism-5114588
“Blacks think, like any adolescent that, it’s all about them.”
What is this - the 1950’s. How racist, intolerant and xenophobic are you trying to be under the umbrella of the Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism? This is yet another bigoted platform. The adolescent here is you. My teenage sons are far more open minded and accepting of differences. Fearful and fragile white people everywhere. It was a white mother who complained about little Ruby Bridges harassed by angry white mobs and here you are doing the same thing. The boogeyman still isn’t ethnic studies; it is white supremacy....
https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/04/us/ruby-bridges-movie-review-pinellas-florida
Thank you for this well-argued, cogent piece. This is a little beyond the scope of your piece, but I wonder why schools are opting to teach ethnic studies, whose focus is highly specific, and includes an ideological bent, instead of cultural anthropology. Anthropology has its own flaws, of course, but it at least aims at reaching broader and more generally applicable understandings of human behavior. And while aspects of cultural anthropology overlap with the humanities and other traditions, anthropologists are usually expected to at least try to adhere to norms for scientific methodology. In my mind, this puts anthropology head and shoulders above other disciplines seeking to understand human cultural diversity through an political ideological lens. Of course, mainstream anthropology has been tainted by the same social forces that seek to warp every corner of our society with an fixation on race. But at least, in principle, cultural anthropology represents a wider understanding of human nature than the dogmatism of ethic studies.
Sorry, I couldn’t help but return and let the provocateur know that someone wrote a piece about him published this morning. 😉
https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/05/opinions/woke-weaponized-racism-gaslighting-cane-ctpr
You are not any kind of teacher. You are a troll and a stalker who gets their jollies from harassing people you disagree with. I hope that you get the help you need. Of course you're "back." You never go away. You probably stayed up all night trolling.
“You are a troll and a stalker who gets their jollies from harassing people you disagree with. I hope that you get the help you need.”
More projection
One final note: my grandfather whom I obviously write about was a white man. I will be covering good white men over 400 years, so no need to be so fragile. Unfortunately, you will not be going down in history as one with the way that you treat an expressive woman on a literary platform. I’m embarrassed for you. I’m also the mother of white sons and love boys and men that don’t harm girls and women. That’s all for now. Have a great day!
Only a narcissist would think their empty comments on an obscure social media post who gets her "history lessons" from wikipedia and CNN would think there is a place for herself in the history books, lol. Your granddaddy was white? Good to know you hate yourself more than you do the rest of us. Good luck cultivating your victimhood. The Catholic Church loves martyrs. Maybe you should reach out to them and tell them your story.
Lmao.
Point to where I indicated that I seek to be anyone other than someone who writes about history and their personal family story. You can’t because I didn’t. I’m not here for the validation of hostile strangers. Now THAT would be insane.
Point to where I said I hate myself. You can’t because I didn’t. You do hate that so express myself and you hope to bully me off the platform.
See, this emotional meltdown you are having that causes you to impulsively respond is all projection. You are consumed by and obsessed with your own fear and hatred of someone you don‘t even know. You are a very irrational and dangerous person.
You are a cowardly, emotionally triggered and obviously self-hating man to be using the sort of violent communication you do.
You don’t know what a victim is to be calling me one. You are delusional and spiraling. But I’m here to watch the self-implosion just like with the indicted president with whom you clearly have so much in common.
Until you discover eugenicists and anthropologists who were mostly racist and sexist white men throughout history. Good luck with that approach. You are looking for an unbiased perspective that you will never find because academia itself is an institution dominated by a particularly biased and very powerful demographic.
I'm not looking for unbiased perspective. Any good student of social science knows it does not exist. Funny that "bias" is the worst possible thing to the woke. Thumping on anthro with the "all anthropologist are racist white men" stick is a trope, not a truth, even if you hate white men. In fact, it's a very old saw. And while, as in all disciplines and fields of study there were some jerks, there are also many good people doing good work. That I even need to say that reflects how low the maturity level has sunk in public discourse. To condemn an entire field because of its complex history or a few bad apples is a very woke approach to social change. It lacks nuance, subtly or practical application. Condemning others is also not constructive or productive, as many young SJW's like to think. It just adds more noise and detracts from the hard conversations that the adults need to have. I pray that by the end of my life this disease will have run its course and we can once again have intelligent conversations about complex topics.
Your name, personality and rhetoric are all boring. Book bannings and censorship by extreme right wingers is still wrong. Ethnic studies is still needed. None of that changes. Toodles!
Better to be "boring" than a jerk, Chandy. But I know trolls like you often disagree on that! Good luck winning friends with your winning personality.
“Ethnic studies” or just U.S. history? He was, after all, an American who probably didn’t want his Blackness erased...
https://www.cnn.com/style/article/kwame-brathwaite-obituary-tan
And the “disease” is anti-intellectualism, book bannings and censorship, not ethnic studies.
I agree with you 100%. I took ethnic studies classes along with anthro coursework and benefited from both. They both have their place. But I do think anthropology should be taught more widely than ethnic studies for the valid reasons I've already articulated. Ethnic studies is one peoples' story; anthropology is better equipped to explore broader understandings of how we all fit together. That's an important distinction. We need those understandings if we are to transcend the entrenched tribalism that threatens to destroy us. Ethnic studies perpetuates (or at best, doesn't help people transcend) tribalism, and hence, it is not the appropriate vehicle for bridging misunderstandings and conflict between groups. From an intellectual standpoint, it's easy and lazy to condemn an entire field of study based on a few bad apples, particularly when no better alternative is being offered. While woke "historians" look backward through time, on an eternal quest to find and cancel everything that doesn't fit their victims and villains worldview, I look back to glean understand from both the failures and the successes of our forebears, who all had something to teach regardless of their imperfections.
“While woke "historians" look backward through time, on an eternal quest to find and cancel everything that doesn't fit their victims and villains worldview”
You do realize it’s the extreme right wing that is engaging in the cancel culture by way of book banning and other forms of censorship? It is primarily white people complaining about references to race for Rosa Parks and Ruby Bridges. They don’t want U.S. history told. So, you are simply wrong about who is seeking to cancel history.
The minimization, reductionist thinking that you refer to is so evident in your words. Heroes and villains come in all colors and genders and will be presented as such by this “historian.” I tell the truth that mostly white parents are seeking to erase in red states. And if you think it’s not racially motivated, you’re be dead wrong.
I don't understand why you feel the need to school me about what I've already said I agree with you on. I've already clearly stated that I agree with you about the right's destructive influence, so no need to belabor the point any further. But where we seem to part ways is in your binary thinking that right wing extremism does anything to justify left wing extremism (and racism). Both right and left wing ideologues are equally corrosive to the aims of an enlightened society. Both are equally detrimental to intelligent discourse. Both use bans, censorship and intimidation to force compliance with their equally paranoid and infantile view of people, race, gender and the world. Which one wins the contest for "worst" is not my concern, because they both use the same methods. You say "heroes and villains come in all colors..." I'm glad to hear you say so now, because it seems to contradict your earlier statements where you introduced those terms into multiple sets of comments. I am, merely responding to the false-dichotomy that you and so many others adhere to.
We don’t have to be a perfect amalgamation. We can accept one another’s differences and respect them. That is the first order of business. Many Black people tell me they don’t want their Blackness erased; they just don’t want to be discriminated against or fear the police. I similarly don’t need to pretend that there aren’t differences between me and someone who identifies as a man. Multiculturalism is NOT tribalism. I’m fine with differences. I’m NOT fine with institutions using those differences to break the law and discriminate. Let’s deal with the institutions that oppress before we try to hold hands and sing kumbaya. We have women literally losing their lives due to lack of medical options. But somehow ethnic studies is the devil. I’m not fooled. Anthropology vs. ethnic studies isn’t even the debate. It’s not the game changer and it never will be.
I don't know who you're having this discourse with, but it isn't me, but some imaginary foe. As I've already said ad nauseum: I. AGREE. WITH. YOU. And I've loudly and publicly voiced my support of teachers facing the right's ridiculously homophobic censorship and iron-fisted attempts to ban LGBTQ people and others from a place at the table. But as I also said, one think I hate about wokism is that it exists to call-out/tear down/destroy without offering any meaningful or intelligent alternative. That's all it knows how to do: destroy. And while you may be satisfied with taking easy shots at right wing bigots, I'd rather go a little further, and thus I won't be intimidated into not offering both critique of ethnic studies and a viable alternative that has a proven track-record of rising above tribalistic interpretations of human groups. Finding common ground has nothing to do with "singing kumbaya" but its easy for woke cynics to dismiss any attempt to forge intercultural common ground, because just like the right they don't want people to live in mutually respectful peaceful harmony. They only thrive in strife, anger and conflict, so they perpetuate the delusion that we are all oppressors or oppressed. They create jibberish, the product of irrational and paranoid "thinking." Phrases like "erasing blackness" deploy the exact same mentality of hate groups and how they create solidarity by crafting an ontology where a small group of the elect are under attack from invisible threatening forces. It's a great move for cult leaders or others seeking to create solidarity in order to control and inspire mobs to do their bidding. It's a chapter right out of the Jim Jones playbook (along with the GOP). Since the right has been at it a little longer, their verbiage is a bit more sophisticated than the left, but leftist ideologues are learning fast.
“woke”
“SJW”
When you can define these words and acronyms in an attempt to label people while whining about sunken discourse, then we can have some intellectual dialogue.....
I am happy to oblige, even though you are obviously baiting me rather than attempting to have a dialogue, which is completely predictable. "Woke" is a perfect term to epitomize the irony behind demagoguery masquerading as enlightenment. "SJW" or social justice warrior refers to people whose pretenses toward making the world a better place are tempered by their abuse of power, which is limited to bullying, trolling, and ending conversations and careers. They are similar to the Catholic Church during The Inquisition, though they fancy themselves to be saviors wielding the sword of justice. They are not labels I created, but they certainly apply in some instances. Does these definitions help you, or will they just serve as inspiration for your next attack?
Did the proclaimed “contrarian” accuse me of “baiting?” 😉
What sort of abuse of power, bullying or political ideology leads the right wing to ban books, commit domestic terrorism, engage in censorship, refuse to protect children and vote for no exception for rape, incest or the life of the mother? All of those appear to be more of a pathology along the lines of psychopathy. Can we get our priorities straight and start there before we attack ethnic studies?
The truth hurts. White men throughout history used eugenics, sociology, psychology, medicine, etc to systematically oppress Black people over centuries. Data and facts still matter.
My research highlights the heroes and villains of all colors over 403+ years. I tell the truth. I come from an academic, business, humanities, social science and STEM background. 23 years in public higher education, the kind of education that right wing folks with degrees rail against in the most hypocritical fashion.
I do not understand anti-intellectualism on Substack of all places.
It's interesting to see you copying and reposting your comments in multiple places. Interesting as well that you choose to see the world as one full of heroes and victims. It strikes me as odd that a teacher decrying anti-intellectualism makes such anti-intellectual statements, and chooses broad, sweeping generalizations, moral absolutism and applies confirmation bias to her statements. I would expect this level of maturity from a student, not a professor. It's also a students' error to think that because they use words like "data" or "facts" that whatever follows is a valid claim. A teacher would know that decontextualized "facts" are meaningless. I'm sorry the truth hurts you; it strengthens me, including the complex and sometimes ugly truths of the history of anthropology. But condemning something (or someone) because of its flaws is not "truth." It is a great way to fail to understand what many aspects of life have to teach. In this sense, woke ideology is even more anti-intellectual than right wing Christian theology as applied to education. It fixates on race to the exclusion of all other ideas (and race IS an idea, a construct), filtering all information from history to math through a lens where only victims and villains dwell, where all phenomena are reduced to "colonization". Everyone else is a saint/martyr/victim (the closest woke has to actual heroic qualities). It's not only untrue, but it's a very depressing, disempowering narrative, and one that infantilizes black people. It's almost childlike in it's simplistic, one-dimensional understanding of human nature. Self-righteous ideologues make great proto-fascists. Their constant hang-wringing over perceived injustice is the ideological engine behind numerous hate groups, including Christian identity, the Klan and others. And indeed, when they rail against woke ideology is IS hypocritical, as is the reverse. The far right and the woke left are exactly the same. They're both wolves in (they think) sheep's clothing, pretending to be on a holy crusade in order to mask their real intensions to seize power for themselves.
You may have misread my comment, which is on CT, not CRT, which is only one of CT's children, or in this case, grandchildren, through CLS.
Unlike you, I don't know what you know and don't know, so I don't know if you know much about CT or anything at all. CT was the neo-Communism that gained intellectual predominance in the Left in my generation.
One suggestion: I understand the need some people have to feel superior and talk down to others, but it might be better if you'd try to talk with people instead.
We need courses that will teach critically ABOUT "Critical Theory": explain what it is, who developed it, how they developed it as an extension of Leninism with its theme of moving beyond the working class to achieve a more total social-cultural revolution, and its methods for cultural revolution in light of those used in Russia and China under the same name. Also, its points of continuity and contradiction to the methodological norm of true public education, which is critical thinking.
Only teaching honestly about this can stop the indoctrination. No ban can stop it.
In the absence of this teaching, the field is left to those who do not teach ABOUT Critical Theory, but instead preach Critical Theory as a form of indoctrination. They also teach its activism, often by providing a kind of training in CT methods of intolerance, abuse, silencing of disagreement, and instantiation of social hegemony for its adherents. Their ideological impetus is unimpeded by any objective learning.
Where are the scholars who will develop the honest courses that are needed?
You clearly don’t know much about CRT or its history. I would suggest starting there. There are plenty of honest scholars out there. You might need to read their work first. Just a thought.
You may have misread my comment, which is about CT, not CRT.
Unlike you, I don't know what you know and don't know, so I don't know if you know much about CT. For what it is worth CT was the neo-Communism that gained intellectual predominance in the Left in my generation. CRT is one of CT's children, or grandchildren, through CLS.
One suggestion: I understand the need some people have to feel superior and talk down to others, but it might be better if you'd try to talk with people as equals instead. Reading your comments, I don't get an impression of actual superiority in knowledge or thinking; the rudeness gives me an impression, instead, of overcompensation. But that's just my impression; only you, looking inside yourself, could possibly know whether that's there.
I think this person is unhinged and looking for a (or multiple) punching bag(s) to take out her frustrations on over being upset by living in Florida, lol. It's easier than listening or working towards constructive change and civil dialogue, I guess. Your comments are spot on.
Moments ago, you were posting in agreement (the comments are still there) and now I’m unhinged and everyone with the name Chandra is evil. There is nothing constructive or civil about your commentary.
Your lecture has been received. Thank you for "educating" us about morality, sexism, racism and the evils of white men (did I miss any "isms"?). You've won many hearts and minds with your sane arguments, concise claims and winning personality. I'm sure your students find you delightful, if you really have any... I get it. I would go nuts too if I lived in Florida, but that wasn't my choice (though I must admit, I'm glad you're there and I'm not...). Good luck with your holy crusade.
White men gain my respect when they stop picking on the low hanging fruit by bullying women and start addressing the racism and sexism of other white men:
https://medium.com/humungus/white-men-tend-to-only-listen-to-other-white-men-39f5d23ad495
It’s interesting that you deliberately ignore the racist white man referring to “Blacks” as adolescents, but you incessantly troll and mock me. You are not brave. No one needs to be on a “holy crusade” to just not be racist and sexist. Try it sometime. It’s really just a character issue until you made it a partisan issue. If you want to pathologize, start here with your kind: https://www.verywellmind.com/the-link-between-psychopathy-narcissism-and-racism-5114588
Thank you, Ira, for the psychoanalysis. Women are quite used to that from men. Very cliche. I will chalk your thinly veiled insult up to projection and the need to feel superior over me. That is historically the way it goes and women will also find it in the comments section on social media regularly. Since you acknowledge a connection between CT and CRT, which was birthed during the Civil Rights movement, I will simply provide a link as an educational reference. Anything to distract us from book bannings, censorship, guns, murdered children and more urgent and dangerous items clearly not on the conservative agenda. CT, CRT and all of the other acronyms don’t even come close to my concern about safety as a mother with school age children. But go ahead and belittle me as lacking knowledge....
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory
No point to go on trying to talk with you. Intelligent readers can draw their own conclusions.
It's the three Ds in action.
Is it just poor word choice? You write "It is not just social conservatives who object to it. The ethnic studies perspective is contested by reputable scholars" - as if those two categories were mutually incompatible and mutually exclusive.
Does the author think we are all morons? Once the conduit is in place, the content will flow. The battle is to keep the camel's nose out of the tent in the first place. Amazing that an educated educationalist can't see this. Oh, and I love the "college ready" rationale (excuse) for infecting high schools with CRT. In short order (4 years, right?), you can expect to see "high school preparation" used to flood elementary and middle schools with this tripe. God save us all from being "educated."
to R Bicker: That's sadly realistic on your part. But the other reality is that the nose is already under the tent. Stuff inevitably filters in, and bans only make stuff more tempting. That makes it important to teach ABOUT it, honestly. If only so students won't be blindsided when other teachers "teach it" as dogma, and when still others train them to practice it methods, and use it as a way of establishing a superior position in an ideological social hierarchy.
Good points, and well-taken.
“If only so students won't be blindsided when other teachers "teach it" as dogma, and when still others train them to practice it methods, and use it as a way of establishing a superior position in an ideological social hierarchy.”
You mean like the public education system has taught/upheld white supremacy? It is, after all, a white mother who complained about the Ruby Bridges movie here in Florida. White supremacy is the greatest domestic terrorist threat tracked by DHS, DOJ and the FBI. Thank goodness the AP African American Studies course goes global next year. I suppose the author would be against it since it’s “ethnic studies.”
Yes, because education is the real problem in this country, not presidential indictments. 🙄
Let me remind everyone here so fragile and triggered by “ethnic studies” that it never killed children, unlike fentanyl. Femicide and filicide are global public health crises, not books:
https://nypost.com/2023/03/30/san-jose-police-association-office-manager-arrested-for-importing-fentanyl/?fbclid=IwAR30XxbHeSr1LXSTn5voxpIn0vFpTzkwJfxig2Z-SYwSFhUKcA4HogzIF1U&mibextid=Zxz2cZ
You are so obsessed with forcing everyone to love ethnic studies you're trolling everyone here! How do you have so much time on your hands if you are a teacher??? Why not try engaging with opposing views rather than shouting down and insulting every person who commented and copying and pasting your own comments ad nauseum? Is that what good teachers do?
It's the three Ds in action: Disparage, Deflect, Deny.
Earning potential may not be ALL that matters but it is pretty darn important to anyone with tens of thousands of dollars of student loan debt. If they must work multiple jobs just to pay rent and pay off the loan then they won't have much time for literary pursuits - or even a family. These student loans cannot be shed by filing bankruptcy - they lock students into positions of "involuntary servitude" for their early adult and middle age years.
Higher Ed has known this for decades and yet they still churn out bachelor's in social sciences when there are virtually no jobs for social scientists without Ph.D.s - the same goes for most of the Liberal Arts degrees: their primary value is as a stepping stone to post-graduate studies (more school & more debt). Even the old excuse that they learn to write better is suspect because students in these majors learn to write in academese - which is only useful in Academia.
When Higher Ed only served the scions of privilege issuing degrees with low market value was fine - in fact, having a useless education was a sign of status. However, now that Colleges & Universities market themselves as a way out of poverty they should be more upfront about how well each degree serves that purpose. This is especially important when you look at how much student loan debt is accrued by underserved students compared with middle class students.
Some keep parroting vague lines about the value of Higher Ed without seeing that lifting people out of poverty with college degrees is a sales pitch.
Tragic.
Where did I say anything about higher education being a guarantee of being lifted out of poverty. There are very gainfully and happily employed humanities and social science majors, both within the field and outside of it. Philosophy majors are some of the highest paid. Your use of the term “academese” has nothing to do with the average college graduate. I suppose now you don’t want academics to be academic. I’m very perplexed by the anti-intellectual attitudes of those with degrees. My graduates work in satisfying and lucrative careers and aren’t whining at all. The easiest to place were the ones who studied liberal arts, were well rounded and recruited by top employers. They can carry a conversation, write well and have many of the qualities that the business world seeks.
These ethnic studies programs are just make-work for students who were duped into majoring in ethnic studies and then discovered that such degrees provide a marginal boost in earning potential over a solid High School diploma. (Plus, having a degree in a 'Social Activism Major' may send up a red flag for prospective employers who do not want to have zealot-induced drama in the workplace).
It is amusing they want to educate humans into being better angels - they think some book-learnin' will change human nature. It would be funny if it were not so wasteful.
As though there are no right wing zealots. As though all we need to make the world go round are engineers. “And they think some book-learnin' will change human nature.” It has throughout history when there is an open mind which is obviously not yours, so it stands to reason that you would devalue literature, on a platform designed for it, no less. The disturbing irony so evident only to me.
Right, because earning potential is all that matters in a hyper capitalistic society. I mean, who needs social scientists and humanities/literary people such a waste. Everyone who is anti public education here has been indoctrinated and can’t see it. Laughable.
Huge waste of money, time and effort. But that's woke education.
It’s so disappointing to come to Substack and see Faux News right wing rhetoric and terms such as “woke” being used on what I thought was a learned and literary community. I must have been confused and thought this was LinkedIn.
It's so disappointing seeing people ignoring reality and behaving like ostriches with their head in the sand.
Whose reality am I ignoring? I’m on here addressing right wing book bannings and censorship which is the antithesis of the freedom-lovers that conservatives claim to be. That’s not burying my head in the sand; it’s acknowledging a very dark and dangerous reality of the current regime. If is censorship at its finest. I welcome you to define “wokeness.” A hilarious video went viral of a conservative activist attempting to do so and ultimately failing. Worry about murdered children. Identify and address the real threat first.
You're ignoring all the huge number of woke cancelations and censorings.
Murdered children? That's incoherent.
When you can define “woke,” I might listen.
What do you not understand about “murdered children” on the heels of yet another school shooting? But “ethic studies” is the real boogeyman. 🙄
When you recognize reality, you might hear better.
A brave and courageous white woman educator who taught her students character and empathy that is so obviously lacking in the racist and sexist commentary here. Many of you clearly lacked teachers like Jane Elliott and yet were obviously in desperate need of her teachings:
https://youtu.be/dLAi78hluFc
You cannot teach resilience to children without teaching about a variety of people who overcame struggle and the facts surrounding that. Period. Call it ethnic studies. I call it U.S. history.
Speaking of “ethnic studies” (which is really just U.S. history, folks), Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated on this day 55 years ago. Is that too communist of a thing to mention for the right wingers on here? He started to talk about economic racism prior to being murdered. RIP, patriot....
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King_Jr.
https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/2023/04/03/disney-pinellas-county-schools-parent-challenge/?outputType=amp