Ethnic Studies Now Banned in Arizona

[The Straight Story]

Ethnic Studies Now Banned in Arizona

School board officials in Tucson are standing by their Mexican American Studies program in the face of a new law that seeks to ban all ethnic studies in public schools.

The new law, which took effect January 1, prohibits classes that “promote resentment toward a race or class of people; are designed primarily for students of a particular ethnic group; advocate ethnic solidarity instead of treatment of pupils as individuals.”

For the third time in four months, the Tucson Unified School District’s governing board adopted a resolution stating that the Mexican American Studies program does not violate state law.

According to the latest resolution, the school district recognizes “that the inclusion of historical oppression…within the curriculum does not inherently promote the resentment of a particular group of people nor does it promote anti-American sentiments.”

Tom Horne, state superintendent for public instruction, disagrees. Horne insists Mexican American Studies promotes ethnic chauvinism, and he has threatened to cut off state funding to Tucson public schools unless the program is terminated. Tucson schools could lose up to $3 million a month.

In an open letter to the school board, Horne criticized controversial statements from textbooks used in the program, including one that says that “Texans had never come to grips with the fact that Mexicans had won at the Alamo.” Another, referring to “Aztlan,” the states taken from Mexico in 1848 (Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and California), states “Apparently the U.S. is having as little success in keeping the Mexicans out of Aztlan as Mexico had when they tried to keep the North Americans out of Texas in 1830.”

http://www.allgov.com/Controversies/ViewNews/Ethnic_Studies_Now_Banned_in_Arizona_110104

[blondeatlast]

1. They'll be teaching our students that our amazing system of canals leading from the wintered areas

of northern Arizona to the parched deserts of central and southern (that is, including Phoenix and Tucson) were built by the Army corp of Engineers, I suppose.

*They were actually built by the ancient Pima and Anasazi Indians--without bulldozers, ditch diggers, and cement mixers--thousands of years ago and we use those EXACT same canals today. I used to live 20 feet away from one and would look out and marvel at what it took to construct.

[JoePhilly]

2. Does this also include "Woman's stidies?" nt

[polmaven]

3. I didn't realize

that "female" is an ethnicity! Hmm...ya learn something new every day. :wow:

[JoePhilly]

4. Read this quote from the OP .... then get back to me.

"The new law, which took effect January 1, prohibits classes that “promote resentment toward a race or class of people; are designed primarily for students of a particular ethnic group; advocate ethnic solidarity instead of treatment of pupils as individuals.”

Notice the reference to "a class of people" which EXPANDS the focus BEYOND ethnicity....

Therefore, it is not a stretch to conclude that some on the right wing see classes in "Woman's studies" as an attack on a "class" of people ... namely, men.

You missed that?

Now you learned something else.

[Igel]

6. Women's studies obligatorily

have to promote resentment?

There's wiggle room in there. If data and experiences are presented one way, this is the inevitable result; if another way, it is not the inevitable result.

One possible assumption seems to be that women's studies (and ethnic studies) must inevitably promote resentment, collective solidarity through consolidating and highlighting group boundaries, or be designed specifically and primarily for women (ethnic minorities). I don't share that assumption.

Another is that anything dubbed "women's studies" (or "ethnic studies") will be seen as achieving these goals, regardless of actual student outcomes. I don't see that in the babble accompanying the legislation, not without "understanding" a lot of coded speech that many of the supporters don't see and which it's unlikely the courts will see.

[JoePhilly]

10. Ummm, no.

If you READ what I wrote closely, you and I agree ... it is not hard to extend the GOP position on this to INCLUDE women's studies as resentful by there very existence.

I personally do not see women's studies as any more "resentful" as are studies of "Mexican American history" or "African American History".

That is the point. from what I can tell, the legislation does NOTHING to define what aspects of such educations are "resentful".

[polmaven]

8. OK, so women

are either an "ethnicity" or a "class" of people. Gotcha!

[JoePhilly]

11. Are you this dense on purpose??

Clearly, women are not an "ethnic group" ... but ... women, men, gays, can be considered as a "class". The term "class" in legislation such as this is AMBIGUOUS. Do they mean rich and poor referring to economic class? Or maybe they mean white collar versus blue collar when they use the term "class"?

Rather than play games ... maybe YOU can define the term "CLASS" for us, so that we know why the authors of this bill decided that they needed it. I mean after all, if ETNICITY was enough, they would not have needed to include the word "class" at all. Why include that term if it adds nothing.

Well?

So go ahead ... defend the GOP ... explain why they needed to add the word "class", when the word ethnicity already covered the topic.

Just explain who they are referring to. I think there use of that AMBIGUOUS word, potential includes women.

You seem to think it refers to some other group .... so who is that exactly???

[polmaven]

14. The problem with your explanation

is that was YOU who decided that it was "not a stretch" to say that women's studies would be included based on the word "class"......! The only "class" that describes women is Human Being. You may find that odd, but most women would not.

[ceile]

5. Next will be womens' studies and black history month?

History's a bitch, Mr. Horne. Suck it up.

[JoePhilly]

12. My view as well, see the odd thread under post #2 above

[jtown1123]

7. These xenophobes disgust me. If they ever sat in a class that expanded their minds a bit, they might

learn something about treating everyone like human beings...even if they have a different color of skin. Gasp! Learn something? Never!

[MichaelHarris]

9. In other words

Arizona will no longer teach American History.

[Ptah]

13. Free Baja Arizona!

http://www.bandersnatch.com/bajaz.htm






An enormous mistake was made on December 30, 1853 when the Gadsden Treaty was
signed between the United States and Mexico. The northern part of the Mexican
state of Sonora, an area located south of the Gila River, was purchased by the
United States, and tacked into what became the State of Arizona.

The people of the Gadsden Purchase have increasingly chafed under the domination
of an enormous population in an around Phoenix (Maricopa County). In order to end
the domination of Phoenix, the people of the Gadsden Purchase are seeking statehood.
Proclaiming themselves as Baja Arizona, a "state of mind" is acknowledged to exist.

The primary differences between Baja Arizona and the remainder of Arizona are of
attitude and tolerance. The people of Baja Arizona are known throughout the southwest
for their enlightened view of the world. This is obviously not the case with the
passage of SB 1070 making it illegal to be an illegal in Arizona.

In Baja Arizona people fight for civil rights. In Maricopa County they are jailing immigrants.