Many years ago I was talking with a veteran local TV political reporter. It was the Newt Gingrich era. You know, “balanced budgets” and “term limits” and all that other transparently cynical “revolutionary” bullshit.
My question was, “Why are you taking this seriously? Why even give it respectful attention?”
His answer was, “At least there are some ideas there”, avoiding any acknowledgment that the Gingrich PR machinery was “the hot issue” at the moment and, in straight pendulum terms it was time for the press to shift balance after a couple years of mostly favorable Bill Clinton coverage.
The overwhelming scent of bad faith politics, of the “loyal opposition” doing nothing other than throwing gravel in the gearworks of government was, you know, a “speculative” judgment. Reacting to manufactured topicality was a better position, journalistically speaking.
This comes to mind with the latest “revolutionary” proposal from Minnesota’s anything-but-loyal opposition. Namely, the transparently cynical proposal by top Republicans, including gubernatorial candidate Paul (Cotton Mather) Gazelka, to require the state’s teachers to “share” curriculum with parents — and should parents object to heretical texts like, oh I don’t know, “To Kill a Mockingbird” — offer “alternatives”, like, who knows? “The Selected Sermons of Jerry Falwell Jr.”
With Tim Walz still in office and Democrats controlling the House, this latest exercise in shameless pandering — dubbed the “Minnesota Parents’ Bill of Rights” — isn’t likely to go anywhere. But, still, there it is.
After two years of throwing up nothing but impediments to combating an international pandemic, and dismissing the impacts of police violence, this naked appeal to Critical Race Theory racists … (there, I said it) … is what Republicans are selling as a fresh idea. Something that truly improves the safety, prosperity and happiness of all concerned.
I have several teachers and ex-teachers among my family and circle of friends and it’s safe to describe them as universally disgusted. On top of Republicans regularly deriding the work of public school teachers for decades, (because as a group they tend to read a lot of books, have a union and vote Democrat they are a threat to Trump-era conservative ambitions), this latest brainstorm would add hours … and hours … of uncompensated time to every teacher’s workload. (Feel free to suspect that this “fresh idea” was handed down to Minnesota’s deep-thinking Republicans by some ALEC-like dark money cabal which is simultaneously sliding cash to their campaign funds.)
My problem, on the beat reporter/editor level, is declining to aggressively confront the naked pandering of this and other even more cynical positions taken up by 2022 conservatives.
Like, for example, the “fraudulent 2020 election” claims pushed by Trumpists and widely-to-unanimously accepted (publicly) by Minnesota Republicans.
Post January 6 there was a brief moment when a truly revolutionary idea kicked around professional journalism circles. Namely, every interview with any politician would begin with the simple question, “Did Joe Biden win the 2020 election fair and square?”
Any answer other than, “Of course he did”, meant the interview was over and the politician, self-revealed to be a pathetic toady for a corrupt reality TV performer, would have to get his free publicity from some other outlet. (Working reporters could hand him business cards for Joe Rogan.)
That moment dissipated an instant later. Which means we have returned to treating cynical nonsense like “sharing curriculum”, (more accurately described as “censoring” or “canceling curriculum”) as though it is a good faith proposal to improve the academic outcomes of Minnesota students.
So I ask again, does this crowd have even one constructive idea?
Don’t everyone answer at once.
I think there is a lot of confusion around what Critical Race Theory is. Its original iteration was a legal theory, but much of what is being taught in the schools right now (the Ibram X Kendi/Robin DiAngelo version) is very different from the original, and is problematic in many ways.
Not everyone who disagrees with how race is being taught in many of our nations schools is a racist — in fact, many opponents are people of color. I come from a bi-racial Jamaican family, and my issue with CRT is that it doesn’t deal with nuance very well: it divides people into discrete categories, which simply doesn’t reflect reality. I have an African American relative by marriage who thinks it infantalizes and disempowers Black people.
I agree that some opponents of “CRT” are indeed racist. But if the people pushing “CRT” in the schools would listen and respond to some of the reasonable critiques being directed at the more extreme teachings, we could actually improve upon it. Unfortunately that can’t happen right now when the media is labelling everyone who disagrees with the current form of anti-racist training as a racist. Again, this is dividing people into discrete camps, and it is in these divisions that nuance goes missing.
I concede all your points, and only argue that in the current, largely knowledge-free “debate”over CRT it is clear — certainly to me — that the right-wing base is most concerned about reeducating school children in the oppression of blacks at the hands of whites. Example aftrer exampke shows those people have no — as in zero — idea what CRT is or where it came from or how broadly it might be applied.
So it would be constructive for the parties involve to have a discussion which is not “knowledge-free.” It’s something that needs working out, and I think both sides need to concede some ground. Maybe some nice, responsible media “organ” could promote such a discussion, but I don’t see that in the cards.
Go back to square one. Start every interview with question of fact about the 2020 election. This is what not only journalists should be doing, but all legislators. We’ve got to start using the S-word: subversion, the F-word, fascism, and the T-word, treason, every day in every necessary way. By “we” I mean every American who wants to save our democracy. Biden and his out-of-touch anonymous and invisible administration manifestly aren’t up to the job. Could it really have been true that he was the best candidate for the Dems in 2020? I found that hard to swallow then and it’s even more puzzling now as the Trump treason party is off to such a roaring start on its way to recapturing Congress, wrecking state election systems, and causing accelerating irreversible climate catastrophe and heartbreaking historical demise of American democracy. Seriously, what can be done when the flat-earthers have all the guns and the ammo, as well? Have you read that profile in the New Yorker of the new creep who’s stepped into Rush Limbaugh’s position of dominance in the fascist propaganda apparatus? It’s chilling. What can be done? How do people shake off denial? What strategy and tactics would be possible, even if people came out of the mental state of denial, to fend off fascism at this point? We’re at the disintegrating Weimar stage–can that be disputed? Only there’s no USA, British empire, or USSR to even potentially poise a counter-weight . . . .
Most Minnesotans would be happy if schools succeeded at teaching the Three Rs, in preparation for careers outside of social work, activism and government. Instead, Big Education focuses on social engineering. Meanwhile test scores continue to plummet. This is what has parents upset. Sorry to dump cold water on everyone.
I hope that works out real good for you and Jean and Scotty!