The recent decision by the College Board to bow to pressures from reactionaries and revise the AP US History curriculum to include more about the founding fathers (read "old, rich white men") is hardly surprising. The College Board is part of the corporate education establishment (along with organizations like Pearson) which is increasing its domination of public education. As such, there is little they are willing to do to resist the right-wing attacks aimed at revising history so that it corresponds with their (and Fox News') worldview.
History can be a liberating force in our society, providing a basis for progressive and revolutionary movements. Or it can be a force which promotes the status quo and helps the rich and powerful maintain their dominance in society. In the past period, academic historians have moved decisively in the former direction. The American Historical Society is a good example. At the one convention I was able to attend, I was pleasantly surprised at the radical analysis which permeated the discussions. One particular workshop stands out in my mind. At this event, organized by the Society of Military Historians, the panelist discussed the Vietnam War. I found myself in agreement with almost everything they said. Howard Zinn would have undoubtedly have felt comfortable on the panel!
Hopefully the historians who teach our young people will not bow to corporate pressure and continue to teach the real history of the people of our country.
George Vlasits, July 31, 2015
Friday, July 31, 2015
Tuesday, July 28, 2015
Black Lives Matter
The following is a taken from a post by Democracy for America (DFA) and represents a clear statement of why progressive activists must prioritize the struggle against racial inequality at all levels, particularly in the criminal "justice" system. For all lives to matter in our society, we need to demand that black and brown lives matter, too.
At Netroots Nation this year, a team of black women affiliated with the Movement for Black Lives conducted an incredibly effective direct action during the Presidential Town Hall with Gov. Martin O'Malley and Sen. Bernie Sanders. The organizers called on both candidates to directly acknowledge the black women who have died in the custody of the police -- including Sandra Bland, who was found dead in a jail cell in Texas just days earlier. And they asked them to specifically lay out what they would do in office to disrupt and dismantle structural racism in our criminal justice system and beyond.
Both candidates disappointed the #BlackLivesMatter organizers with their answers. They disappointed me as well.
I want to be very clear here: I have respect for all our presidential candidates and plan to fight hard alongside all of them -- and you -- to advance a progressive platform this year and in the years to come. That said, I want to explain why I believe their answers were inadequate, and how important I think it is for us as a movement to start pushing ourselves -- and candidates for all offices -- for better answers when it comes to racial justice.
When Gov. O'Malley was pushed to acknowledge that black lives matter, he repeated a series of phrases several times:"Black lives matter. White lives matter. All lives matter." He subsequently apologized, admitting that he "did not understand the tremendous passion, commitment and depth of feeling that all of us should be attaching to this issue." However, when Jeb Bush was asked about the incident at Netroots Nation, Bush doubled down on "all lives matter" and said O'Malley should not have apologized.
With Jeb Bush and Republicans piling on, it's important that we set the record straight about "all lives matter" so Democrats across the country understand why it's an inappropriate response to the Movement for Black Lives. When people like Bush insist on saying "all lives matter" -- in the context of a discussion about racism in the criminal justice system -- they are willfully refusing to acknowledge that our society doesn't actually treat all lives like they have equal value.
No one -- absolutely no one -- questions the value of the lives of white people in our society. When white people are killed, the media pays attention. The criminal justice system takes action. The public demands answers. The same simply isn't true when it comes to black lives. It hasn't been true historically, and it isn't true now. When black people die at the hands of the police, for example, our society makes excuses for the officers, character assassinates the victims, or just looks the other way far, far too often.
That's why Jeb Bush's "all lives matter" stance is exactly the kind of "color blindness" that allows structural racism to continue to fester unopposed. And if we are going to live up to our progressive core values of equality and fairness, it's up to us to stop hiding behind "color blindness" and address racial inequalities head on. That is precisely the problem the Movement for Black Lives is working to address.
We also need to stop assuming that economic justice alone will miraculously lead to racial justice. The reality is that racial inequalities are foundational to economic inequalities -- and that income inequality can not be solved without dismantling structural, systemic racism and the rampant discrimination that flows from it.
Even in a world in which income inequality did not exist, structural, systemic racism would still take black and brown lives. When police officers profile and pull over black people, it doesn't matter to those officers where those individuals went to college or how much money they make. It only matters that they are black. That prejudice is real and pervasive, and we will never be able to really fix our economic problems without ending it and the long list of disadvantages that spring from it.
That's why the big challenge facing our movement -- and the candidates who seek to lead us -- is in fighting oppressive power wherever it exists, from the Wall Street banks that are rigging our economy and destroying lives to a criminal justice system that is brutalizing black and brown people.
While Democracy for America and many other progressive organizations with largely white memberships haven’t been silent in fighting against racial injustice, there’s no doubt we must do more. Real solidarity means not just speaking out against racial injustice, but doing everything we can to connect the fight against structural racism to every aspect of the work we do.
George Vlasits
July 28, 2015
At Netroots Nation this year, a team of black women affiliated with the Movement for Black Lives conducted an incredibly effective direct action during the Presidential Town Hall with Gov. Martin O'Malley and Sen. Bernie Sanders. The organizers called on both candidates to directly acknowledge the black women who have died in the custody of the police -- including Sandra Bland, who was found dead in a jail cell in Texas just days earlier. And they asked them to specifically lay out what they would do in office to disrupt and dismantle structural racism in our criminal justice system and beyond.
Both candidates disappointed the #BlackLivesMatter organizers with their answers. They disappointed me as well.
I want to be very clear here: I have respect for all our presidential candidates and plan to fight hard alongside all of them -- and you -- to advance a progressive platform this year and in the years to come. That said, I want to explain why I believe their answers were inadequate, and how important I think it is for us as a movement to start pushing ourselves -- and candidates for all offices -- for better answers when it comes to racial justice.
When Gov. O'Malley was pushed to acknowledge that black lives matter, he repeated a series of phrases several times:"Black lives matter. White lives matter. All lives matter." He subsequently apologized, admitting that he "did not understand the tremendous passion, commitment and depth of feeling that all of us should be attaching to this issue." However, when Jeb Bush was asked about the incident at Netroots Nation, Bush doubled down on "all lives matter" and said O'Malley should not have apologized.
With Jeb Bush and Republicans piling on, it's important that we set the record straight about "all lives matter" so Democrats across the country understand why it's an inappropriate response to the Movement for Black Lives. When people like Bush insist on saying "all lives matter" -- in the context of a discussion about racism in the criminal justice system -- they are willfully refusing to acknowledge that our society doesn't actually treat all lives like they have equal value.
No one -- absolutely no one -- questions the value of the lives of white people in our society. When white people are killed, the media pays attention. The criminal justice system takes action. The public demands answers. The same simply isn't true when it comes to black lives. It hasn't been true historically, and it isn't true now. When black people die at the hands of the police, for example, our society makes excuses for the officers, character assassinates the victims, or just looks the other way far, far too often.
That's why Jeb Bush's "all lives matter" stance is exactly the kind of "color blindness" that allows structural racism to continue to fester unopposed. And if we are going to live up to our progressive core values of equality and fairness, it's up to us to stop hiding behind "color blindness" and address racial inequalities head on. That is precisely the problem the Movement for Black Lives is working to address.
We also need to stop assuming that economic justice alone will miraculously lead to racial justice. The reality is that racial inequalities are foundational to economic inequalities -- and that income inequality can not be solved without dismantling structural, systemic racism and the rampant discrimination that flows from it.
Even in a world in which income inequality did not exist, structural, systemic racism would still take black and brown lives. When police officers profile and pull over black people, it doesn't matter to those officers where those individuals went to college or how much money they make. It only matters that they are black. That prejudice is real and pervasive, and we will never be able to really fix our economic problems without ending it and the long list of disadvantages that spring from it.
That's why the big challenge facing our movement -- and the candidates who seek to lead us -- is in fighting oppressive power wherever it exists, from the Wall Street banks that are rigging our economy and destroying lives to a criminal justice system that is brutalizing black and brown people.
While Democracy for America and many other progressive organizations with largely white memberships haven’t been silent in fighting against racial injustice, there’s no doubt we must do more. Real solidarity means not just speaking out against racial injustice, but doing everything we can to connect the fight against structural racism to every aspect of the work we do.
George Vlasits
July 28, 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)