How is it that a small group taken from 15 individuals on the Texas SBOE with a majority of NON-historians, all but one, is given the almost omnipotent power to determine changes to history textbooks for public education throughout the state and which also influences the modifications to history textbooks throughout the entire U.S.?
Send your comments and news tips to roundup.editor@gmail.com, to Mr. Stern at pstern@austin.rr.com, or click on the "comments" button at the bottom of the story
Read the complete story at the Lone Star Iconoclast web site.
By Peter Stern
Guest Commentary
Texas is in the national news again. Unfortunately, it is not on 'America's Dumbest' television program. I mean no blatant disrespect to anyone in particular, but I am going to be brutally honest in my comments.There is a strong movement in Texas and throughout the nation by individuals and groups who seem to be committed to push through religious and/or ultra conservative thinking into our public education process. It is occurring with a focus on curriculum, teaching views and textbooks modification and procurement.
There is an additional determination to promote Republican ideology, ideas and direction in the classrooms and textbooks. We are being told that Republicanism was more prevalent throughout American history and textbooks should pursue that direction.
Literally, the founding fathers were NOT yet Republicans, as this party was created long after the writing and signing of Declaration of Independence. The Republican Party initialized long after the American Revolution. The same is true of the Democrats.
In fact, according to Wikipedia:
"The Republican Party was first organized in 1854, growing out of a coalition of anti-slavery Whigs and Free Soil Democrats who mobilized in opposition to Stephen Douglas's January 1854 introduction of the Kansas-Nebraska Act into Congress, a bill which repealed the 1820 Missouri Compromise prohibition on slavery north of latitude 36° 30' in the old Louisiana purchase territories, and so was viewed as an aggressive expansionist pro-slavery maneuver by many. Besides opposition to slavery, the new party put forward a radical vision of modernizing the United States—emphasizing higher education, banking, railroads, industry and cities, while promising free homesteads to farmers. They vigorously argued that free-market labor was superior to slavery and the very foundation of civic virtue and true American values—this is the "Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men" ideology explored by historian Eric Foner.____________
Peter Stern, a former director of information services, university professor and public school administrator, is a disabled Vietnam veteran who lives in Driftwood, TX.
2 comments:
Peter Stern is at it again. He once again is being the spoil sport and thinking and acting like a real conservative, not the abortive current versions who hate government but will unabashedly use goverment to force people to think how they want.
At least Peter Stern is not a certifiable dysfunctional hypocrite like the rest of the new Republican Party.
So, HC, is that good or bad?
Are you complaining about Stern or complimenting him?
:)
He sounds on target to me.
Post a Comment