I recently read a piece of legislative hubris from Arizona that purports to ban ethnic studies in public schools. More disturbing than outlawing instruction in the histories, philosophies, literatures, and accomplishments of nonwhite peoples is the alarming effect the Arizona legislation has had on the news media—which has the social power to define reality for others and compel them to believe it.
The legislation I am referring to is HB 2281. Now law, it prohibits four kinds of courses: those that promote the overthrow of the United States government, those that promote resentment toward a race or class of people, those designated primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group, and those that advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals. Nowhere does the legislation mention ethnic studies.
But ethnic studies is, indeed, anchored in the histories, traditions, literatures, and philosophies of American people of color and their diaspora. The field also supports social justice and equality for all. Thus the law indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of the history, development, and role of ethnic studies. It is not, and has never been, about pitting "us against them."
Moreover, nowhere does the Arizona legislation exclude what is too often not considered ethnic studies: white studies, the courses and classes anchored in the histories, traditions, literatures, and philosophies of white America and its diaspora. While recent scholarly work examining the social construction of whiteness has explored notions of how it has been conceived, imposed, and expressed in different eras, traditional school courses have often implicitly or explicitly promoted the supremacy of white people over others and disparaged people of color. Those courses rarely teach social justice or equality as an explicit part of the curriculum.
Yet proponents of the law, some of whom admittedly have never taken an ethnic-studies course or ever learned about the field, told the news media that its description accurately reflects the nature of ethnic studies. The news media, in turn, accepted the inference, without question, that the characterization was correct. The intent to disparage ethnic studies was probably more unconscious than malicious, and therein lies the real power of institutional racism.
In this case, the Arizona law, like the revision of Texas's history textbooks, which many respected historians believe distorts history—to, for example, extol the Confederacy and diminish the civil-rights movement— is an act of racism at its most subversive. It focuses on groups of people by race or ethnicity and damages them by disallowing accurate teaching of their cultural and intellectual heritages, while allowing instruction that, paid for with public money, values white people and provides derogatory content about people of color. The Arizona law does that without ever naming its deed. It counts on inference to make clear its true meaning.
Understanding how that unconscious implication is evoked by political rhetoric is something we should all consider as other states, as seems possible, follow with their own attempts to cut back ethnic studies—at both the school and college level, where some programs have already been undermined by budget cuts. Perhaps we should also ask one question not anticipated by the news media, political pundits, or Arizona legislators: Is white studies in violation of HB 2281? Examining that possibility might quickly sober the debate.
Still, ethnic studies has succeeded in establishing itself and inspiring new voices in academe that have influenced the telling of a fuller American story. Women's studies, LGBTQ studies that focus on those people who do not identify normatively as heterosexuals, and disability studies similarly affirm and empower Americans who would otherwise remain disenfranchised. So-called people's histories or narratives, like those written by the historian Howard Zinn and the author Studs Terkel, provide the stories of America's working and underclass people, while cultural studies attempts to unpack whiteness, sometimes restoring the voices of European-Americans who are not descendants of Anglo-Saxons.
Ethnic studies has played a role in those scholarly changes despite relentless indoctrination that misrepresents its core values. Indeed, directly as a result of the challenge posed by ethnic studies, even the most elite and resistant Anglo-Saxon academic canon has gradually changed to include some references to other American voices. The shift in academe and in popular culture, imperfect and incomplete, has not eradicated racism, sexism, classism, heterosexism, and other forms of oppression—but it has minimized much of the most blatant and, yes, deadly forms as practiced a half-century ago, when the field was born.
Individuals, nations, even academic disciplines have not always lived up to their highest values, but ethnic studies and the multiethnic movement that gave it birth have challenged academe and society to do so. For those of us old enough to see the movement pass from the back of the bus up to and through the front door of the White House, we understand the fear that was generated when we demanded to enter America's great universities—we, the people of color, the women, the poor, the working-class white people. We again recognize the fear generated today by those who would continue to miseducate us.
Yet we have also seen America's ability to push through dark periods, both despite the challenge and because of it, to a period of greater enlightenment and a more perfect approximation of our most treasured values. Ethnic studies will remain a leader in that transformation. It gladly embraces the responsibility to foster hope in the face of adversity.
Comments
1. footbook - July 05, 2010 at 02:11 am
<Comment removed by moderator>
2. pmckechn - July 05, 2010 at 03:43 am
Quality commentary, I see.
3. supertatie - July 06, 2010 at 06:30 am
I'm sorry, but what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Academics invented "hate speech" two decades ago, and have cried for banning anything and everything that offends them - ESPECIALLY on college campuses.
The free speech libertarians among us warned you all along. As it always the case when Leftist academics want to suspend procedural protections in favor of a particular result you like, you didn't listen. Now that impulse is being turned on you; it sounds to me like HB 2281 simply bans teaching "hate" (at least, as you've defined it) under the guise of "ethnic studies."
If you don't like it, you'd better look a little closer to home than the Arizona legislature.
4. catherinearing - July 06, 2010 at 07:55 am
This is an excellent article, and it reminds us that we are all emigrants who have much to learn from each other. I absolutely agree that ethnic studies has helped lead America to a period of greater enlightenment, and will continue to do so.
5. johnnyever - July 06, 2010 at 09:54 am
<Comment removed by moderator>
6. pombavou - July 06, 2010 at 10:02 am
At my university, I teach "ethnic studies" --Caribbean, African, Turkish, and Latin American literatures translated into English when (in the case of the Caribbean) they are not originally written in English. Those who--as this article points out, are totally unfamiliar with my courses' actual content, purpose, and intellectual integrity--have a stunningly bald definition that points precisedly to the ill-conceived "thinking," if one can call it that, of persons who allowed these courses into the curriculum in the first place: "non-western," as they tag them, are defined as non-European (some also define Eastern Europe as non-Western,) and, when addressing folks in this hemisphere, from the "NON ANGLO SAXON Americas." I have privately wondered at the Klan-like language of this statement...
Monteiro's article hits the nail on the head: Arizona's HB 2281 is flat out racist and, revealing of the ignorance, poor education, and increasing (alas) ignorance of its legislature. However, it does not stop at Arizona's borders. I only wish, like a brush fire, it could be contained and then extinguished, but I suspect we have a long battle ahead of us.
Dr. Bronwyn Mills
7. honore - July 06, 2010 at 10:12 am
Dear Dr. Ken,
Without exception, "ethnic studies" at every institution (from Ivy to Big 10) that I have personally witnessed, are very little more than rabidly racist, hate-whitey, anti-hetero-sexist, anti-American sewers that get backed-up occasionally when news of America's rapidly shifting racial demographics sends seismic tremors through the otherwise predictable faculty meeting dynamics of said same.
At one Ivy, I personally witnessed the grotesque mobbing and bullying of an “ethnic studies” graduate student; himself, of an "Hispanic-culture" background.
He refused to identify himself with the "1-size-fits-no-one" label of "Latino". On numerous occasions, he reminded the department members that in the ENTIRE history of man, there has never been a "Latino" race. However, the bully departmental pulpit had long ago been commandeered (if only with passive consent of the larger home departments of American Studies, Creative Writing, Sociology, Law School and even the Medical School) by a "west coast Chicano poet/activist" whose only contribution to the department was that he could always be counted on to enter (late of course, in recognition of “latino” time) the faculty meetings with the latest Prada boots coordinated with his latest farmer's market purchase of authentic (made-in-Korea) "Peruvian" llama wool shoulder bags. His braided leather head bands were also very fetching, especially those with “authentic” plastic beads.
The graduate student who only cited the obvious was hounded, excluded, harassed and otherwise made the department pariah. When it became abundantly clear that he was not going to EVER be "tolerated" by these like-minded intellectually bankrupt buffoons of faux-egalitarian, fake-democratic, not-so-totally-rad, hardly-progressive politics, he was faced with the decision to stay (and NEVER be "accepted") or abandon all his work and keep his sanity, and his personal and academic integrity.
These personal and professional tenets were not of much value in the “ethnic” studies department that had long ago been hi-jacked by feel-good, nonsense “minority” politics of exclusion toward anyone who did not join the political fiction of “people of color” goose-step nor chirp the “diaspora” parrot-speak.
The student, a European-descended (white) doctoral student in Hemispheric Colonial Studies from the Caribbean continued to run up against the typical American gibberish of "latino/hispanic" as a "race" brainwash that had totally infested the “ethnic” studies department. Whenever he would be confronted with this special kind of cultural/historical/social mind-morph stupidity, he would AGAIN explain that in the history of man there has NEVER been a "latino/hispanic" race regardless of the popular stupidity of this ignorance is in the USA.
No appeal of his to their academic or dare I say “intellectual integrity” would change their “ethnic studies” mantra of color and he continued to be shunned by the majority AND minority-status faculty who REALLY did promote the offensive and ignorant rubric of the "latino/hispanic is a race” brainwash. And of course, the culturally prostituted "chicano" clowns in the department who spent most of their time complaining about their oppression from behind the tie-died gauze skirts of their blonde prom queen wives, continued to preach the accolades (self-designated) of their totally “inclusive” ethnic studies fraud.
At one point he proposed that the department include an undergraduate emphasis on Mennonites in Latin Latin America & Canada, Amish the USA and Basques in the Rocky Mountain region, but was shot down by the departmental vipers as "too white to be really ethnic", which we all knew was hypocrisy-speak for "we ain't goin' down that whitey road, no matter what you say".
Today, he is tenured faculty in a London-based and Iberian university-recognized, Euro-Caribbean Studies program focusing on Canary Island settlement in Pre-Louisiana Purchase Spanish/French colonial expansion in North America and Corsican & Mallorcan immigration to the new world colonies and the linguistic legacy of the Canary Islanders in Puerto Rico Spanish pronunciation.
To his credit, he kept his intellectual integrity, didn't drink the "latino/hispanic as a race" departmental love potion and lives a life of authenticity, academic success and recognition, unlike his American counterparts who fill their semesters racking up “room service” tabs at national conferences and waiting for their fat honorariums to arrive via (of course) Priority Mail.
UPDATE.... the department is still mired in its sad, cheap, predictable “latino as a race” politics and still swatting at the departmental pinata of “color” nonsense, without any acknowledgment fact that “hispanic/latino” has NEVER been a race and is not likely to become one outside of this incestuous post-adolescent romp they call a “department”.
And since when "ethnic" become a race?????
More stupid American cultural myopia served up as utopian, "we-gonna-get-whitey-now" ethnic studies clap-trap.
Really now don't we all deserve better than this tired, predictable, provincial racist crap?
And has anyone done a mitochondrial DNA analysis of Sotomayor or is she now a "colored" person because some moron in the CHE blog said so, who couldn't find Puerto Rico on a map without help from the dancing Chihuahua. Oh PLEASSSSSE, the stupidity is endless here!
Please be embarrassed for yourselves already. YOU are the laughing stock the world over with your precious ethnic studies ignorance and you just make it worse by the day.
Now scurry off to Starbucks and be sure to ask for the "ethnic" Malaysian cinnamon sprinkles picked by 10 year old virgins...I am sure it will make you feel better in your "oppression".
8. dank48 - July 06, 2010 at 10:29 am
Wait a second. The Arizona law prohibits classes that
Advocate overthrow of the U.S. government
Promote resentment of some class of people
Are primarily intended only for members of certain ethnic groups
Advocate ethnic solidarity rather than treatment of people as individuals
Assuming an ethnic-studies course does none of the above, what's the problem? I graduated before these courses became part of the curriculum, so I'm certainly no expert. Is anyone claiming that ethnic studies should advocate overthrowing the government, foster resentment of members of ethnic groups, exclude students because of ethnic background, promote pigeonholing people rather than treating them as individuals, or any combination thereof?
If an ethnic-studies course avoids these (I would think) obvious pitfalls, what's the problem? On the other hand, if a course--in whatever department--introduces racism by the back door, then it should be subject to scrutiny and, as appropriate, correction of the problem. That's how things work when things work: if it's not broken, don't fix it; if it is broken, fix what's broken and let it work.
I find one thing in the article very disturbing: "Moreover, nowhere does the Arizona legislation exclude what is too often not considered ethnic studies: white studies, the courses and classes anchored in the histories, traditions, literatures, and philosophies of white America and its diaspora." Does the writer mean "white studies" like mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc.? How is "white learning" different from any other? Or is Monteiro talking about "white studies" like French, Spanish, German, Italian, Russian, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, Hebrew, and other languages and literatures, not all of them particularly diverse, but--oddly enough--not all "white" either?
9. periwinkleblue - July 06, 2010 at 12:35 pm
Jewish/Judaic Studies and Irish Studies are becoming popular on college campuses; Asian Studies departments have continued to thrive - especially as China, Japan and India excel in the global front. So, when some people make comments about ethnic studies departments promoting "hate whitey" or "we gonna get whitey," I wonder whose voices they are mimicking. Has anyone ever heard the folks studying James Joyce or Anzia Yezierska say "we gonna get whitey"? Really? I mean, really. Clearly, some of the aforementioned comments (insert username here) are envisioning ethnic studies as ONLY focusing on particular populations, but that is their own racial bias creeping through.
The curriculum is NOT inclusive. The curriculum, as it stands, may plug in a microscopically small handful of nonwhites as window-dressing (Let's promote diversity! How about we throw in that one Asian, that Black guy and um, maybe a Latino, or is it Hispanic?). Those who label ethnic studies as “racist” must first define racism and try to see how it applies in these departments, which, ironically, were created as a result of institutional racism. (Oh this is the History Department. If you want to learn about Sitting Bull, the Trail of Tears or the Chippewa, you have to go over there. We focus on more, um, vetted and scholarly material in this department. Let them teach those courses.) Unless there are ethnic studies departments or faculty in those "mainstream" departments who focus on ethnic material, a significant amount of people and material will be further marginalized. As it is, ethnic studies departments tend to be ghettoized, like reservations where people are quietly removed and not taken seriously in their respective fields of study. (Asian Studies is SO cool! Did you see the new Jaden Smith film about kung-fu? Asians? Well, they're kinda white, right? Is anyone up for sushi or dim-sum for lunch?)
The myth that race and ethnicity does not matter is aimed at making the majority feel comfortable about themselves and the legacy they promote. Their race matters to THEM and so it should matter to nonwhites too, of course. As usual, most whites cannot fathom that nonwhites have narratives and histories that aren't based solely on white people, and so when a department focuses on a whole-istic view of an ethnicity, it must be racist and bigoted. (Our students must know we care about diversity! So other than these three folks, in-between let's talk only about this white person, that white person, the other white person, and more white people. I mean, white people are the ONLY ones who did anything in America that really matters.)
Americans want to believe the lie that we are in a post-race society, and that as individuals, we need not emphasize the "small" matters of race, ethnicity and culture. Of course, that ideology stems from being part of the majority class whose narratives and histories continue to be celebrated in the curriculum. Unless they find a way to diversify the curriculum, the ethnic studies departments will continue to be the bastions of promoting inclusivity within an institution.
10. anon1972 - July 06, 2010 at 12:37 pm
Supertatie, get a grip. There is a clear distinction between "hate speech" -- speech whose sole purpose is to denigrate others on the basis of class, color, gender, ethnicity, etc. -- and the academic study of non-white and/or non-Anglophone cultures, whose purpose is to learn about people, not denigrate them. Hate speech is certainly protected by the First Amendment, but does not need the additional figleaf of institutional protection or endorsement. It certainly does not constitute a valid subset of academic speech -- unless you think that standing in the classroom flinging around epithets is somehow educational. In contrast, the study of non-European philosophers, authors, etc., clearly falls within the purview of the academy.
11. emwhite - July 06, 2010 at 01:00 pm
Dr. Mills (6) makes good sense. The AZ legislature is dominated by uneducated and narrow-minded politicos; about one-third have college degrees or even passports. That is their excuse for their ignorance and unconscious racism. To see them meddling in academic matters they do not understand is indeed troubling. What is the excuse for the ignorance of ethnic studies and the bald racism so evident in some contributors to this thread, from people with presumably some education and knowledge of the world?
12. arthist030 - July 06, 2010 at 02:40 pm
Ethnic studies would be valuable if it amounted to anything more than 100% left-wing indoctrination. Ethnic studies, as practiced by politically neutral, disinterested students of human affairs, would be wonderful. In practice, ethnic studies is devoted entirely to grievance and resentment (of whites), cheerleading and flattery (of non-whites).
Sample question: why do Latinos drop out of school at twice the rate of blacks? Is it because of white oppression?
References:
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=16
Liam Julian, "Come Study La Raza"
http://article.nationalreview.com/362278/come-study-la-raza/liam-julian
opinion by Tucson Latino teacher John A. Ward, "Guest opinion: Raza studies gives rise to racial hostility"
cached:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:nak3-1dFw6EJ:www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/opinion/85853.php+site:tucsoncitizen.com+%22john-a-ward%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/opinion/85853.php
13. gfmohn - July 06, 2010 at 03:20 pm
"Moreover, nowhere does the Arizona legislation exclude what is too often not considered ethnic studies: white studies." The new Arizona statute certainly would exclude "white studies," at least the kind of "white studies" which are taught as a radical academic discipline at the university level.
Dean Monteiro seems to mean something else. He tries to broaden the definition of "white studies" to "the courses and classes anchored in the histories, traditions, literatures, and philosophies of white America and its diaspora," that is, to traditional high school social studies, history, and literature courses. This was certainly true in the past. If it unfortunately remains even partially true, the answer is revision of the traditional curricula. I see no reason why traditional curricula can not include "accurate teaching of their [ethnic minorities'] cultural and intellectual heritages." The difficulties of the revision of schoolbooks in Texas show the difficulties of this. However, by insisting on the necessity of countervailing ethnic studies courses, Dean Monteiro implies that such a successful revision is impossible.
The problem with using ethnic studies courses to compensate for the defects of traditional curricula is that it leaves to the students the difficult task of reconciling traditional curricula ("white studies", as Dean Monteiro calls them) and ethnic studies. Ethnic studies teachers are unlikely to introduce their subject by stating, "You've heard from your 'white studies' teachers, now you will hear from the victims of white people." Nonetheless, the implied conflict is still there. If adults can not agree on curricula, how are students to resolve this conflict? Worse, the conflict between ethnic studies and "white studies" (again as defined by Dean Monteiro) is implied to be inevitable and therefore unresolvable as long as ethnic differences exist.
Dean Monteiro might well agree with the above and prefer to leave students with their unresolved conflicts. In the long run, these are the subject of citizenship and of court cases. He might even be willing to leave to the students the resulting resentments. No one can remove the historical resentments of past discrimination or the current resentments of substandard wages and impure water. The traditional curricula should not shy away from these subjects. However, resentments resulting from student confusion should be avoided, where possible.
Any state has a valid interest in the reduction of conflict and resentment, both in the school system and in society as whole. As stated by Dean Monteiro, the second characteristic prohibited in HB 2281 is that a course does "promote resentment toward a race or class of people." It is unclear whether "promote" refers to intent or effect. I assume that it means the latter. This interpretation is consistent with generations of legal actions against alleged discriminatory effects of practices that were discrimination-free on their face. So, it does not matter whether, as Dean Monteiro puts it, "It [ethnic studies] is not, and has never been, about pitting "us against them." It is results that matter.
I hope I have made clear that I am opposed to avoiding conflict and resentment at the expense of concealing past and present discrimination or at the expense of promoting white supremacy and superior white virtue. The failure of the Protestant-dominated school systems of the 19th-Century to express anything but disdain for Catholics and Catholicism is revealed to this day in separate systems of parochial education. However, nothing is gained by institutionalizing a similar split within the walls of American high schools.
14. 22261984 - July 06, 2010 at 03:51 pm
Here's Linda Chavez's recent take on ethnic studies programs: http://www.ceousa.org/content/view/772/68/
15. raza_khan - July 06, 2010 at 04:08 pm
I do take an issue where a "select" ethnic studies is taught. Howe about, since USA is a "melting pot", teach a universal / global studies.
Raza
______________________
Raza Khan, Ph.D., P.D.
Carroll Community College
Westminster, MD
16. 7738373863 - July 06, 2010 at 04:15 pm
The problem is not so much with what the law prohibits as with the ethnic studies courses in question advocate overthrow of the U.S. government, promote resentment of some classes of people, are primarily intended only for members of certain ethnic groups, and
advocate ethnic solidarity rather than the just treatment of people as individuals, as with the assumption that ethnic studies classes are a hotbed of such subversive activities, and that other classes are some sort of safe zone from hatred based on ethnic difference.
Bullying in "mainstream" courses on both the high school and the college level is rampant, with the insistence, for example, that onne must speak only in English, even while on break or in other non-class-related contexts. Read and Tejano memoir of growing up on la frontera and see what sort of hell an English class could be. Like it or not, the plurality of this country will very soon consist of non-native speakers of English with backgrounds very different from what now passes for the norm. We cannot enforce the white world on anyone--least of all on whites willing to make a good-faith voyage of discovery to learn what other cultures are like.
17. 7738373863 - July 06, 2010 at 04:16 pm
should be "any Tejano memoir. . . ."
18. jhough1 - July 06, 2010 at 09:04 pm
I know nothing about the courses in Arizona. But there is a real problem in general in what is called ethnic studies. Diversity is defined very narrowly. No Protestants on the Supreme Court is not a lack of diversity; no Hispanic on the Court would be.
A good ethnic course should teach things never taught. "Race" in the North used to mean different European groups: English, Irish, Italian, German, etc. JFK spoke of the Irish race. An employment ad in the 1930s stated "No discrimination on the basis of race. Colored not hired." That was not inconsistent. The ad was claiming not to discriminate against Irish, Italians, Jews, Poles, and so forth. The phrase "race, creed, or color" also was making this distinction between race and color.
The trouble with the racism between Europeans is they identified with their own country in World War I and later just as Cuban-Americans do with Cuba. 50% of European-Americans were British, 25% were Germans, 10% were anti-English Irish, and a significant number. Even Britain, Germany, Italy, etc. went to war, it had disastrous consequences for 40 years that finally culminated in McCarthyism. We created "whites" and accepted the Southern definition of race based on color to solve this foreign policy problem. A lot of very good books have been published on this process. Indeed, affirmative action forced European races to call themselves white; multiculturalism created the myth of a Western culture for this purpose; the emphasis on white racism helped create the myths of whites. And, of course, categories like Latino, Hispanic, and especially Asian-American were important melting pot concepts trying to end conflicts among, say, Indians and Pakistani, Korean and Japanese.
B
19. jhough1 - July 06, 2010 at 09:12 pm
I accidentally submitted my comment too soon. I was just going to say that a course on these subjects can get good attendance, but try to get it included on a list of courses in an ethnic program. Try to suggest that it should be a small part of a general ethnics and policy course. I speak not of Arizona
20. prje8199 - July 07, 2010 at 11:22 am
I see only one problem here and that is the meaning of certain words. I love, admire, and always try to teach classes that discuss "diversity" (i.e. we are all on this planet together, often different but equally human). I shun any use of and do my best to stop most classes that take a "multicultural" (i.e. my kind are special and EVERYTHING we do must be admired as special because we are different than you) approach.
I have long believed that multiculturalism operates at the expense of humanity. Using diversity I can discuss slavery in America and note that that the primary purveyors of Africans in colnial times were other Africans who brought people from the interior to sell off to European traders (a true act of colonial and imperial control) who in turn sold them to Americans who in turn built so complex a political and moral system to support the system that it ultimately had to fail. Mutliculturalism would not allow me to "demean" others by reflecting them in a bad light.
Diversity allows me to note the magnificent human accomplishments (and failings) of people who cling to any race, creed, color, identity, or orientation while multiculturalism simply can not allow such a thing (for example modern Islamic "culture" will not allow the study of powerful women, and certainly not tolerate any who might cling to the ever-growing LGBTQ alphabet). In short, without a bad actor out there, a straw man, the hatred that multiculturalism needs to encite to survive can not exist.
So, can ethnic studies exist without multiculturalism? Of course, if they take an approach that uses diversity in their study of human beings.
I think, althought I have not read the entire law, this is what the Arizona law looks to avoid.
21. bjmathis - July 07, 2010 at 01:41 pm
Whenever articles start talking about laws I really wish they would post the link so the readers can read it for themselves first. Here is the link th HB2281: www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/hb2281s.pdf
It is only 5 pages, that I recommend you read. You may find it interesting what the law can not prohibit or restrict:
-Courses or classes for Native American pupils that are required to comply with federal law.
-The grouping of pupils according to academic performance, including capability in the English language, that may result in a disparate impact by ethnicity.
-Courses or classes that include the history of any ethnic group and that are open to all students, unless the course or class violates subsection A.
-Courses or classes that include the discussion of controversial aspects of history.
-Nothing in this section shall be construed to restrict or prohibit the instruction of the holocaust, any other instance of genocide, or the historical oppression of a particular group of people based on ethnicity, race, or class.
What I am still scratching my head is how actually this law would have altered my education.
One class I took was History of Southern and Eastern Africa. This course was not designed for pupils of a particular ethnic group, and as such had a diverse representation of various ethnicities.
Another class was Asian Culture Studies Post WWII. While, this class had a large population of Asian students, I and my friend who are not Asian and of different ethnicities from each other and we did not feel it was designed for Asian students nor felt disadvantaged in the class.
I also took a Women & Gender Studies class, and a large portion focussed on oppression of women in the US.
So my question is, how often are classes in higher education designed for pupils of a particular ethnic group? This law does not prohibit classes where the topic is a particular ethnic group, so I don't understand how it is about ethnic studies?
I would look forward to reading some real-life examples of what this law would restrict, so I appreciate readers insights.
Thanks!
22. mercuria - July 07, 2010 at 04:18 pm
I grew up in Texas, which as we all know was once a Mexican territory. But I never learned anything about Mexican Americans in my 1980s K-12 education (outside of the beast Santa Ana who I certainly didn't want to identify with).
So I did not grow up with role models who looked anything like me, to whom I could truly relate. Even after many generations in the U. S, as a Mexican kid, I had a weird ineffable sense of being invisible. Neutered. Non-existant.
I had to go to college and find ethnic studies courses in Mexican American culture/history to learn anything about people who shared my background. My American background.
It was only in college ethnic studies that I learned Mexican Americans had ever identified as a unified group; had ever fought for rights given freely to others. My parents were so assimilated I'd never heard of the Chicano movement. In fact, in 2nd grade, when I first learned I was a "Mexican," I was disappointed. Because I'd heard bad things about Mexicans from classmates, their parents and the larger culture.
Why were my parents so mum on our cultural distinctiveness? Because they lived on the white side of town in the late 60s, and attended a nearly all white high school. Despite four generations of Texanhood, my mother was spit upon, literally, and called dirty by her classmates. So my parents erased their cultural distinctiveness to spare us kids the same pain. They never taught us Spanish or even talked about "being Mexican" until I started asking questions in college.
So to me, ethnic studies filled in huge, critical gaps left by "regular" education. It filled an empty part of myself and self-worth. Other subjects in ethnic studies imparted to me an invaluable education of the less-heard voices in our society. Which are many.
Maybe that's what threatens the anti-ethnic studies crowd so much. At least that's a valid concern--how to weave the numerous human threads of the U. S. into something that makes a shit's bit of sense.
But no, it didn't teach me to resent white people, or overthrow the government. It did teach me history, which contained a chronology of racism endured by my forebears. How is that different than teaching the oppression of the British on the colonists?
So, to me, those opposed to ethnic studies also oppose spreading knowledge of the truth. I guess they know better than me: the truth hurts.
23. honore - July 08, 2010 at 09:59 am
mercuria, yours is a heartfelt story and one that is very common in the U.S. still today. And while some here would eliminate "ethnic studies" completely, that is really not an option for any American institution of higher learning that is also purporting to afford students an "education" in an American context that drips of "ethnicities".
However, I believe the majority of the comments here are merely pointing out that "ethnic studies" as they exist on most campuses are politically prostituted, intellectually compromised and academically stunted. In short, they reflect the WORST of racist, regionalistic and irrational pedagogical "focii".
When "ethnic studies" embrace ALL American ethnicities, of ALL racial and cultural contexts, THEN and ONLY then will "ethnic studies" gain the respect and recognition that they (I am assuming) want.
Right now, I would place more value on an "ethnic studies" journey any of us could have at the local animal shelter, while walking down the "for adoption" aisle: Chinese Sharpei's, Welsh Corgi's, Italian Greyhounds, Tibetan Terriers...
24. rippleview80 - July 08, 2010 at 01:44 pm
If we ban courses that "promote resentment toward a race or class of people" (HB 2281), then be must ban the teaching of American history since it promotes resentment among native Americans, African Americans, and Latinos toward the white population in the US. Face it, these Arizona bills reveal all the double standards and racism still prevalent in our society.
25. brianmacker - July 10, 2010 at 01:29 pm
<Comment removed by moderator>