Censorship and the Jefferson County student protests
Censor
1. an official who examines books, plays, news reports, motion pictures, radio and television programs, letters, cablegrams, etc., for the purpose of suppressing parts deemed objectionable on moral, political, military, or other grounds.
2. any person who supervises the manners or morality of others.
3. an adverse critic; faultfinder.
The quote that started it all
“Materials should promote citizenship, patriotism, essentials and benefits of the free enterprise system, respect for authority and respect for individual rights. Materials should not encourage or condone civil disorder, social strife or disregard of the law.” Julie Williams, Board of Education member, Jefferson County, Colorado
Whoever controls the narrative, controls history
“The history of a nation is, unfortunately, too easily written as the history of its dominant class.” Kwame Nkrumah said. He was a socialist, in early 20th century Africa, distressed that the local culture was being destroyed by the British colonialists’ educational efforts – particularly the matter-of-fact assumption that the local culture was not worth maintaining in the face of what the British thought was clearly superior British philosophy. Censorship, in other words, is the enemy of peaceful and progressive multiculturalism. So who, in this case, is being repressive or censorious?
The issue
This week in Colorado, we have 700 students in JeffCo “rebelling against censorship” by marching out of class. They’ve attracted worldwide attention and support, which is great – except they are not protesting censorship. They’re protesting the recommendation by one person, board member Julie Williams – who, perhaps, is not blessed with eloquence – that the local school district has the right to review the AP history curriculum. So, the students are “rebelling” by protesting her awkward wording (“I don’t think we should encourage our kids to be little rebels.”) Really? Because I encourage my son to think critically, and that means he will, occasionally-to-frequently in his lifetime, rebel. As I have. As his father has. As anyone has, who is dissatisfied with the status quo. As Julie Williams has, against the College Board.
The entrenched
The College Board supports the students. Of course they do. They are the central authority, and they are delighted to see students support their viewpoint. It does not hurt that their viewpoint is informed by lessons learned by protesters in the 60s, although “don’t trust anyone under 30” is noticeably absent these days. But the absurdity is that both sides of the political debate support peaceful protest and some level of civil disobedience. Neither supports an excess. Yet the College Board does not support Julie Williams’ peaceful-yet-rebellious suggestion that the local board of education appoint a committee to review the proposed curriculum.
The irony
The College Board does support the dissension the students voice against Ms. Williams. They apparently do not support the concept that a local, elected advocate like Ms. Williams can question their national mandate – not put to any vote, of course – on what students will learn about history. It’s a shame we are letting ourselves become so polarized that agreeing to discuss this substantial curriculum change is viewed as somehow truncating free speech or disrespecting the expertise of the College Board. So, free speech-wise, some individuals’ dissension is more equal than others’ dissension, and George Orwell is proven right again.
Ms. Williams is also dissatisfied with the status quo. She is protesting the powerful, national, un-elected monopoly the College Board has on what all U.S. students in advanced placement history courses will learn. Her rebellion, rightly executed within the role she was elected to serve, has been entirely overwhelmed by the public outcry. The narrative presented by the news outlets inaccurately yet repeatedly portrays this as an attempt by local bigots to impose censorship on our children. That determined slant is alarming.
Something to ponder
The students are protesting censorship over what they learn…by supporting the censorship inherent in the idea that no (small) local authority has the right to contest how a (small) national committee decides history is to be taught to all U.S. students. Ms. Williams has been called a fascist. Perhaps we should redefine fascism as not just “an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization” but a “local, belligerent (yet not rebellious, because rebellion is admirable, not problematic) entity or individual who presumes to question the overarching authority of an appointed national board.” Samuel Adams springs to mind.
If you’ve studied history…
A student movement rebelling by supporting centralized authority on anything is disconcerting, at least to me. (See World War II for how well that turned out for everyone involved.) If we study world history, youth movements that supported centralized national governments were typically not viewed as independent thinkers breaking any kind of new ground. But, perhaps, I am missing something.
My view
As for the history curriculum, I’ve seen the sample tests. And, as a largely apolitical libertarian, and the parent of a history-loving junior who is going to take this course, I think evaluating the curriculum is a worthwhile endeavor. Incidentally, my son’s history teacher may be the best teacher he has had thus far. I trust his stewardship of this framework. But that does not remove my right to discuss and critique it.
Balance
There’s a balance here. Our children should learn about what we’ve historically done well in these United States of ours, so they can replicate and improve upon it. Some parts of our history are unique and admirable. Our emphasis on the meritocracy, the opportunity presented to individual excellence, is unique in the world, even today.
There is also, indisputably, value in learning about where we’ve erred to a painful degree…and thus, what we need to change in the future. I don’t find most people are too far apart in what they want to see in the curriculum. Yet, there are those who seize a moment to make a political point…and here we are.
Freedom is…
Real freedom is creative, proactive, and will take me into new territories. I am not free if my freedom is predicated on reacting to my past.
Kenny Loggins
Students, if you are reacting, protesting, rather than making your own path, you are still letting the forces you rail against control you. That’s not rebellion, that’s reaction. Figure out what you want to change and make it happen. It’s the best way to lead your life rather than let someone lead it for you.
Parents, teachers, and other interested bystanders…if you’re publicizing this latest kerfuffle for any reason other than to ensure a dialogue between administrators, teachers, parents, and students regarding the best possible education for our Colorado students, please don’t ever carp about political garbage again, because you have intentionally chosen to be part of that problem, not the solution. We are better than that, all of us.