'Originalism' pretends that the intent of the Framers can be divined and 'textualism' pretends that dictionaries are the last word on meanings. They are both lies, fabricated whole cloth to roll back progress on civil rights and government taxation to pay for social services. Lies in service racist populists and rapacious plutocrats.
'Originalism' pretends that the intent of the Framers can be divined and 'textualism' pretends that dictionaries are the last word on meanings. They are both lies, fabricated whole cloth to roll back progress on civil rights and government taxation to pay for social services. Lies in service racist populists and rapacious plutocrats.
There is no *letter of the law* there is only textual interpretation. And in every other field of textual interpretation, from Torah based Judaism to literary criticism, the always dubious notion of 'author's intent' was debunked long ago.
As Rabbi Hillel said, in the last days before the christian era, "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is interpretation; go and study." Hillel also said "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? And being only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?" This is an early expression of the ethic of reciprocity, the so called Golden Rule which the Founders translated into civic law by prioritizing the general welfare of the people.
As Jacques Derrida demonstrated, the meanings of words are not self sufficient units, they exist within a textual and linguistic context. In a social context. Words 'mean' in relation. Dictionaries do not fix words for all time, they trace the trajectory of meaning over social space. Please note, Derrida spent his life in social and political activism, including working on behalf of Nelson Mandela and in developing the South African archive to serve truth and reconciliation (which preceded similar American formulation of critical race theory.)
It is that Republicans prefer to interpret the Constitution to perpetuate the Founders' 'original sin' of legitimizing racism against Black people in the form of enslavement, now in the form of economic injustice. To do this, GOP Leader Mitch McConnell effectively opted out of the Constitution to pack the courts. Since Reagan, Republican racist right wing religious extremists, ably served by Federalist Society dark money kingpin and kingmaker Leonard Leo, kept their eye on the Supreme Court.
In 2016, left wing voters took their eyes off the prize, preferring to indulge in purity tests, pipe dreams, and pied pipers. In 2022 many are still at it - misinterpreting voting as a personal gesture in service of self expression, rather than a political strategy in service of social responsibility.
Right on lin! Any time someone can reference Derrida in this community is a good day for me! I'm not a huge Derrida fan, but the whole issue of the utter slipperiness of "meaning" and its reliance on context is absolutely important to any discussion of politics and theory. Alas, most people want these discussions to be simple at best and simplistic at worst (another language issue that has become really muddled in the USA). Educating people on the importance of critical thinking should be Mission Number 1 in schools, but appalling hanks-of-hair like the new governor of Virginia are determined to reduce everyone to the level of ignorance they enjoy.
With the caveat that when we speak of *fact* it is *established fact* arrived at by coming to consensus by reasoned debate of empirical evidence. The provisional truths of science and the contextual truths of history.
This is why the absolute truths of religion are an anathema to democracy. And why the 'politics of faith' - creed unmoored from observation and analysis - introduces irrationality into politics and government. (Why many *believe* Trump is capable of being president just as they believe he is a herald of Christ.)
A part of the problem is that religion and science are based of very different world views. Religion is based on belief and faith (and belief IN faith), while science is based on observed, measured, and objectively agreed upon facts. Resolving disputes between those models of the world is difficult and requires both an understanding of that difference as well as trust that the discussants will be (simply) honest with themselves and each other.
No. Quantum mechanics has a great deal of empirical confirmation. Like general relativity, it derives from theoretical foundations but survives in empirical evidence. Religion, on the other hand, is stuff people make up. Might provide helpful guidance or comfort in some cases but falls outside the realm of empirical confirmation.
The annual testing requirement and resultant punishment of “failing” schools required by No Child Left Behind upended good public education and increased the inequality between schools. Students in wealthier districts started school with a giant head start, having been read to and spoken to a lot more than their poorer counterparts, as well as exposed to other cultural knowledge with travel and visits to museums. In poorer districts, students entered kindergarten without basic skills such as knowing their alphabet, basic counting, etc., and often with a language barrier. Those students have been subjected to a focus on reading and math, because those are the subjects tested, resulting in a boring curriculum and the loss of history and science instruction that makes education interesting. When I first started teaching, pre-NCLB, elementary school lessons were incorporated in thematic units that could capture students’ interest. The first one I worked on was a 3rd grade study of oceans, that incorporated geography, science (tides, animals-biology, salt water- chemistry, etc.), as well as math, reading, and beginning research skills because they had to write a report about their chosen animal. They were enthusiastic about the project because something in it appealed to each of them.
At that time, testing took one week per year for 3rd, 4th, 5th and 8th grades. It was paper/pencil in the classrooms and the ready of the school continued normal instruction.
Now every grade is tested, K-8, and the tests have moved online. Few poorer schools have enough computers for each student, so testing grades 3-8 takes up to 3 weeks to cycle students through shared devices. With increasing requirements for testing accommodations for various students, classrooms are shuffled into testing cohorts per accommodation requirements. This, students who are not testing get no instruction time, because the classrooms are populated by students from different classes. Testing has become a very expensive logistical nightmare.
Meanwhile, students in wealthier districts who have already mastered the tested grade level skills reasonably well, allow their teachers to expand classroom instruction all year to include interesting subjects like science and history, and do integrated units. It’s a vicious circle that continues to shortchange and punish teachers and students in poorer districts.
That was a pernicious and successful attempt to damage public education under the banner of improving it by "making teachers and schools accountable", when the real problems were lack of resources, not lack of dedicated teachers.
As Republicans decimated the social safety net of essential and emergency government services, public schools were left to provide everything children need. While being obstructed by politically minded parents. In VA the odious Youngkin has expanded the GOP professor hit lists to include a 'target your kids' teacher' phone campaign.
A friend of mine suggested that we here in Virginia, flood the new governor’s tip line with glowing accounts of the wonderful teachers serving our children. Wouldn’t that be something?
Ellie Kona posted links on this yesterday just FYI. Here’s a copy and paste of her post: Ellie KonaJan 26·edited Jan 26
Morning, Lynell! Adding to the lighter side of the news...let's hear it for the young folks, TikTok crew, Virginia Teen Democrats, and John Legend! They campaigned for people to flood the CRT tip line set up by Virginia's new Gov. Youngkin--by sending messages of how great the teachers are doing!
(In regards to the decimation of social safety nets, let's not forget those many teachers who have covered expenses out of their own pockets that the school districts have not provided but should have.)
The first thing that came to mind when I read your comment was the phrase “dumbing down America”. Second, recent fossil findings and how challenging it is for religious extremes to reconcile their bibles to the facts that creatures wandered the earth long before their prophets.
Not at all. The fundamentalist adjustment is that the deity created the fossils during the week of creation.
Personally, I prefer acknowledging that we have no knowledge of how time works from a divine perspective, which is the perspective relevant for that story. Also, the 6 days of creation are plainly more metaphor than literal human time: the sun, which is a necessary part of human reckoning of a day, is not created until the fourth day of the story. It's actually easier to be religious without taking everything at its surface value... You can even credit science and vaccines as gifts from Gd.
Personally, I do not. “Perspective” “Story” “Metaphor” “Surface Value”
All having nothing to do with fact. Rather more to do with opinion. Or belief, which is nothing more than a set of thoughts regarded as truth. We can encourage someone by telling them we believe in them, we “know” they can achieve their goal. But, is that a fact? How did we know? Can we prove or disprove this feeling inside ourselves? No. We just “know” how strongly we feel they will succeed. And that emotion can transfer to them, join their feelings, and they may choose to feel empowered by it. The fact, or truth, of their success or failure in that effort will only be known, well, after the fact.
I agree with you that religion, and religious rituals and stories and faith, have nothing to do with facts (other than facts describing religious observances) or objective, verifiable truth. The same is true for love, beauty, art, music, and kindness.
That does not make any of them worthless in general, although any or all may be unimportant to a particular person. I would argue that kindness is the most important of the set listed, but that's a different discussion.
Being separate from objective, verifiable truth does make religious belief irrelevant to problems that can be solved by science. It also means that my religion, whatever it may be and however important it might be to me, must not be allowed to dictate your life, and vice versa.
Many, including Steve Bannon, misread Derrida's comments on language to infer a moral relativism in deconstruction. Derrida theorized about textual analysis. Derrida was also a left wing political activist his entire life.
Yes, I know. Most of the people on the fascist side of things make all kinds of stupid claims about postmodernist theories in general. But those of us who have actually read and discussed these ideas know that the claim that postmodernism and deconstruction mean that "anything is anything" are lying--and they know it. It is merely a way to demonize critical theory so that their Ayn Rand genuflecting will gain more traction. I just find Derrida needlessly opaque (I feel similarly about Julia Kristeva but that is a conversation for another time!). I was the director of a critical discourse studies program at my previous university and taught the intro course, which included other faculty members assigning readings and discussing the ideas. One of my colleagues insisted on assigning Positions (this was a 200-level class, mind you). When he asked what the students thought of the book, one of them threw her copy into the middle of the room (we were sitting in a circle) and said "That's what I think of this book!" The other students applauded. I thought it was hilarious, but my (male) colleague was not amused. He would have been far better received had he used something else--and a cheat sheet from the excellent "Derrida for Dummies."
Ok here's where I get clear that there are whole areas of erudition to which I have not been exposed in my education. It's fascinating and helpful to read, and moves me to search for practical application of the knowledge...while I look on Amazon for "Derrida for Dummies"!!
Derrida is a tough read. Even many professionals find his ideas difficult. Especially coming from a perspective unversed in analytical and philosophical texts. Many unfortunately feel it is necessary or hip to assign texts they really are not equipped to teach. And it is almost criminal to assign Derrida in an intro course.
Critiquing the foundational works of phenomenology and structuralism, will of necessity result in a dense and complex text.
I have not worked my way through Derrida's works, but I very much like his 'The Gift of Death' which I find very accessible. In the sense of Kierkegaard's meditations on the aesthetic, ethical, and religious stance.
And let us remember WHY cynical power grabbers support ignorance shrouded in the cloak of "freedom and patriotism." making their followers "only a pawn in their game." Bob Dylan explained it so well; I've posted before and will continue to post as needed. https://youtu.be/8X0UmfBwA_U
Thank you Lin. Your final paragraph is succinct and superb. Voting is most certainly "a political strategy in service of social responsibility." This is the key to helping our wavering, sometimes feckless youth get a clearer understanding of the importance of their vote.
I am heartened by young activists and young field organizers who, despite horrific school debt, are dedicated to political public service.
As someone who has spent over a decade phone banking, door knocking, and buttonholing potential voters, I can say with some empirical evidence that it is not only 'feckless youth' who follow the siren song of 'vote your gut.' Wizened old hippies and middle aged New Agers are just as blinkered, with less excuse.
Point taken Lin. But as a "wizened" old timer who knocked on several hundred doors for Bernie, I am keenly aware that half of our population was born after 1981. Many of the youth were bitterly disappointed with DNC's choice of Hilary
in 2016 and it is this group that may need the most coaxing to actually participate in our democracy. There has been a tug of war for several decades and the right wing has moved the center far far to the right. This is disheartening to the youth
and the necessarily pragmatic decisions we make when we vote are very hard for them.
But did the bitterly disappointed youths vote for Hillary, nonetheless? Apparently, not enough of them did. One of the problems of youth is a tendency to elevate principle over possibility.
They had a big social media push from the right wing and their Russian allies, flooding them with posts supposedly from the left, asserting voting for Hilary was a waste of time.
Working the polls recently I have seen a few of these youth. They are so valuable to our future democracy. I am elated when they ask for a Democrat ballot during the primary.
Most that vote don't have a clue what it means nor who they are voting for or what they are voting for in the end. Teachers in my community vote Republican mainly because of their current position on abortion. Now the Republicans are taking away what teachers should be doing. I am not sure they even realize what is happening!
Shout out to Public Education - New York City Public Schools through State University of New York. Oh and the same Hebrew School Ruth Bader (Ginsburg) attended - a bit later but same rabbi. The synagogue is now under fire from Jewish racist religious extremists for renting the school building to a charter school serving minority students.
I am in on supporting public education, not the least because schools like Harvard have produced so many low performing white men like BushII , Kavanaugh, Bush I.
If you want to find someone to do a good job you have to go to Champagne Urbana or College Station.
lin, the SUNY schools are indeed benchmark educational facilities that offer a wide range of good and "affordable" (not really) education.
My oversight for sure. I just picked two gigantic engineering schools locations because that was my world (I went to A&M, my best friend since college went to U of Illinois.
I am so humbled by the quality of thought and writing ability present in this community, of which this post is an example. Feel like a shade-tree mechanic in a jet engine factory.
This is a daily dose of classroom! A gifted interpretation of events (present and past) from the Professor, and open discussion from my fellow travelers on this journey.
Love!!!! these Letters! Thank you, Professor and your contibutive audience.
Thank you - I knew there was something wrong with originalism but I didn't know how to articulate it.
Your last sentence is so powerful. Please forgive me for turning it into a call to action:
"See your vote not as a personal gesture in service of self expression but rather as a political strategy in service of social responsibility. Determine what outcome you want, and join like-minded citizens in casting your vote for the candidates most likely to make it happen!"
Thank you for this analysis, Lin. It perfectly builds upon the professor's letter. One of her sentences poses the question that, at least for me, hovers over everything: "Should the federal government be able to protect equality before the law, or should state legislatures be able to do as they wish?"
It would appear to me that this current crop of SCOTUS Originalists have decided that the the Federal Supremacy Clause doesn't apply and shouldn't be enforced, as demonstrated by the ongoing efforts of RW majority state legislators doing everything they can to hurt their constituents. That's happening here in NH.
This is what voting citizens should do at the ballot box, and in campaigning leading up to elections.
It is NOT what Supreme Court justices are supposed to do in court. They are supposed to put more weight on the actual laws and precedents than on their own political goals. The current majority corruptly prioritizes their political faction's goals over the rule of law.
“ As Rabbi Hillel said, in the last days before the christian era, "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is interpretation; go and study." Hillel also said "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? And being only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?" This is an early expression of the ethic of reciprocity, the so called Golden Rule which the Founders translated into civic law by prioritizing the general welfare of the people.”
I don’t even want to think about if Roe V.Wade is overturned….
Yeah--I read about that case in the WaPo. "Christian" fascism is definitely on the rise--and it is targeting not only LGBTQ people and those of us who do not espouse an "organized" supernatural belief system.
That case in Tennessee is because a state funded adoption agency only places children with "people like them", which does not include Jews, no matter how religious the Jews might be. So the discrimination is against people of a different Abrahamic religion. They probably would not place kids with Catholics either.
There are too many people in this country who believe "freedom" means their freedom to impose their beliefs on everyone else, their freedom to mistreat other people however they like.
The six "apolitical" (that is meant as sarcasm) justices who will overturn Roe v. Wade have no idea how very political that decision will be come 2022. Ruling against 50% of this country will result in a pushback at the polls the likes of which they cannot fathom. The same can be said when the six rule against anything having to do with voting rights. Living robed and in a bubble might keep them feeling warm and fuzzy as they sip their bourbon, but the world that must live with their decisions is hovering just outside their protected environments. My prediction for today!
That is exactly what the right had done. They often use states’ rights in support of their discrimination. Usually when states’ rights are invoked, some people are going to be victims of discrimination.
"Since Reagan, Republican racist right wing religious extremists, ably served by Federalist Society dark money kingpin and kingmaker Leonard Leo, kept their eye on the Supreme Court."
Lin, correct, but, it looks like a winning approach now does it not?
Where were the Democrats while the Republicans were plowing the ground and planting the seed of our current Supreme Court?
Where were Democrats? A quick superficial reply. Sadly some following Clinton neoliberalism, drove a wedge in the Left. But any Clinton was still better than a post Reagan Republican. In Congress many Democrats have been faithful and righteous to progressive democracy, but you have to listen to CSpan to appreciate that it didn't start with Bernie Sanders, AOC and the Squad.
Right wing voters learned from Perot not to split their vote. Left wing voters took Nader as a green light to self righteously split their vote. Bingo - racist right wing religious extremist Supreme Court majority for decades to come.
Mike. Single issue voting has led us to where we are today. A candidate garnishing votes on a single issue displays tunnel vision and is selfish. Nader helped give us Bush. Stein helped give us Trump. I call these people vanity candidates. Ever notice how the Republicans coalesce around a single candidate without fail? Therein lies their not so secret weapon.
Ever notice how Green Party candidates repeatedly play a spoiler role to advance the radical right by splitting the center and left? Nader, Stein (who was at one of those dinners in Moscow), Sinema (who was in the Green Party before she became a Democrat).
Barbara, I guess I was thinking that if Perot was right on one issue, perhaps his thinking on other issues might prefer keeping jobs here in America.
Because, offshoring and outsourcing, by corporations, has decimated good jobs in America and exploits millions of near slave labor workers in China and other countries.
Honestly, to me, that is the single biggest reason we had Trump for President.
Thanks for your reply. I enjoy the back and forth in these comments. Unfortunately being right on one issue is all too often just that one issue. The voracious unions and the inept corruptions pushed jobs overseas. Technology was becoming more and more complex and workers weren't keeping up. Government regulations made it very expensive to build a new plant to retool for the increasingly complex and advanced manufacturing processes needed.
As per trump's election. I firmly believe he was elected because of racism.
They were trying to clean up other messes the R-haves created. Remember that Nixon and his “southern strategy” turned the Republican Party upside down. The Republicans of today are not the party who passed the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution, trying to level the playing field. Individual liberties, “freedom” is often just another way of saying “I want to do whatever I want. Too bad if what I wants hurts you.”
No. It’s far worse than that. What Republicans learned from Nixon is that the Southern strategy works. Nixon turned over the tapes. Today’s Republicans would burn them, as Pat Buchanan advised Nixon to do. Today’s Republicans learned from Goebbels, not from Nixon. Lie, lie, lie, and stick with it. The bigger the lie the better. Doesn’t matter whether you’re caught or not. Just keep the lie going.
You are 100% right, Hitler laid it all out in Mein Kampf, Goebbels was Hitler’s Murdoch, or vice versa I guess. Hate sure can get a toe hold, especially when it’s dressed up in the flag and brandishing a cross. Lewis was right
The Democrats invariably come into Office on the heels of another Republican mess they need to clean up. My view of most Democrats I see in White House Administrations are honest, hardworking Patriots.
I grow so weary of the portrayal of Democrats as being dim witted when it comes to Politics. Not one respects or gives power to any group when its own members tear it down. Republicans rarely do it in public.
Can we please please resist tearing down the Democratic Party?
Lin, My early Church, School and Home, we were taught that we could not say we hated a person, you could say you disliked something they did to you.You could say you Hated a object. And we were taught the “ Golden Rule “ as well. I was raised in a Catholic Home and School. Very early yrs. I had often wondered if it was because of the Holocaust as I was born after the horrors were known.Then,we moved South. I wasn’t out of Primary School. We stoped at a Gas Station/Diner along the way. There were signs. I had no idea who the “Whites “ were much less if I was one. My hometown was very small. We did have Black Ppl in the public pool and all Nationalities were respected. Lots of Jewish Ppl lived there. That also showed it’s ugly face in the South. We didn’t get to attend Catholic School in the South. But it didn’t change me. I married a Baptist, but I still taught my Children the teachings of my youth. I feel like now after reading you’re post it was from the Jewish Teachings ? Which clears up the the Catholic teaching of it if our Gov. foundation was based even on a limited general welfare of It’s people . At 12 I saw Judgement At Nuremberg in the early ‘60’s’. Between where I was living and what I had just seen I needed no more convincing that Hate was wrong.I think of my Grandmother, who until she married was really never considered a Citizen. She could only own a home if her Husband died. She never worked out of the home or drove a Car. And I wonder did she ever get to Vote ? She passed in mid ‘70’s so I hope so. I did read many yrs ago that it was in fact one of the Rockerfellers that was behind the Women’s Right To Work. His reason ? He stated; “ Might as well let them, pay them low wages and then Tax them. More for our Gov.”.Those who claim to be “ Originalist “ are like Crows wanting to peck at “ Roadkill “. Except for Clocks, nothing on our Planet goes “ Backwards “.
So - in layman’s terms, with all of the commentary balancing between theocratic vice secular based/driven politics, what I know between Reagan and Biden - is that legal systems were patriarchal from the drafting of the Constitution and establishment of our legal hierarchy, were religious driven, have been molded, bashed and remade depending upon which the powerful of political institutions is MORE powerful in any election cycle and that generally, the voting public is swayed by where the cash flows most, and most freely. And freethinking or dogma/constituency follow the money.
Do I understand the context of the discussion?
Please don’t scold me - I’m learning. I’m assimilating information as I can contextualize some mighty big terms and concepts (as I submitted in an earlier post where I posted nouns and their definitions) that I had to put my arms around to understand other respondent contributions.
'Originalism' pretends that the intent of the Framers can be divined and 'textualism' pretends that dictionaries are the last word on meanings. They are both lies, fabricated whole cloth to roll back progress on civil rights and government taxation to pay for social services. Lies in service racist populists and rapacious plutocrats.
There is no *letter of the law* there is only textual interpretation. And in every other field of textual interpretation, from Torah based Judaism to literary criticism, the always dubious notion of 'author's intent' was debunked long ago.
As Rabbi Hillel said, in the last days before the christian era, "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is interpretation; go and study." Hillel also said "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? And being only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?" This is an early expression of the ethic of reciprocity, the so called Golden Rule which the Founders translated into civic law by prioritizing the general welfare of the people.
As Jacques Derrida demonstrated, the meanings of words are not self sufficient units, they exist within a textual and linguistic context. In a social context. Words 'mean' in relation. Dictionaries do not fix words for all time, they trace the trajectory of meaning over social space. Please note, Derrida spent his life in social and political activism, including working on behalf of Nelson Mandela and in developing the South African archive to serve truth and reconciliation (which preceded similar American formulation of critical race theory.)
It is that Republicans prefer to interpret the Constitution to perpetuate the Founders' 'original sin' of legitimizing racism against Black people in the form of enslavement, now in the form of economic injustice. To do this, GOP Leader Mitch McConnell effectively opted out of the Constitution to pack the courts. Since Reagan, Republican racist right wing religious extremists, ably served by Federalist Society dark money kingpin and kingmaker Leonard Leo, kept their eye on the Supreme Court.
In 2016, left wing voters took their eyes off the prize, preferring to indulge in purity tests, pipe dreams, and pied pipers. In 2022 many are still at it - misinterpreting voting as a personal gesture in service of self expression, rather than a political strategy in service of social responsibility.
Right on lin! Any time someone can reference Derrida in this community is a good day for me! I'm not a huge Derrida fan, but the whole issue of the utter slipperiness of "meaning" and its reliance on context is absolutely important to any discussion of politics and theory. Alas, most people want these discussions to be simple at best and simplistic at worst (another language issue that has become really muddled in the USA). Educating people on the importance of critical thinking should be Mission Number 1 in schools, but appalling hanks-of-hair like the new governor of Virginia are determined to reduce everyone to the level of ignorance they enjoy.
And the first lesson in teaching critical thinking is the difference between fact and opinion.
With the caveat that when we speak of *fact* it is *established fact* arrived at by coming to consensus by reasoned debate of empirical evidence. The provisional truths of science and the contextual truths of history.
This is why the absolute truths of religion are an anathema to democracy. And why the 'politics of faith' - creed unmoored from observation and analysis - introduces irrationality into politics and government. (Why many *believe* Trump is capable of being president just as they believe he is a herald of Christ.)
A part of the problem is that religion and science are based of very different world views. Religion is based on belief and faith (and belief IN faith), while science is based on observed, measured, and objectively agreed upon facts. Resolving disputes between those models of the world is difficult and requires both an understanding of that difference as well as trust that the discussants will be (simply) honest with themselves and each other.
No. Quantum mechanics has a great deal of empirical confirmation. Like general relativity, it derives from theoretical foundations but survives in empirical evidence. Religion, on the other hand, is stuff people make up. Might provide helpful guidance or comfort in some cases but falls outside the realm of empirical confirmation.
Yes and where we currently find our nation is in part due to the failure of public education.
The annual testing requirement and resultant punishment of “failing” schools required by No Child Left Behind upended good public education and increased the inequality between schools. Students in wealthier districts started school with a giant head start, having been read to and spoken to a lot more than their poorer counterparts, as well as exposed to other cultural knowledge with travel and visits to museums. In poorer districts, students entered kindergarten without basic skills such as knowing their alphabet, basic counting, etc., and often with a language barrier. Those students have been subjected to a focus on reading and math, because those are the subjects tested, resulting in a boring curriculum and the loss of history and science instruction that makes education interesting. When I first started teaching, pre-NCLB, elementary school lessons were incorporated in thematic units that could capture students’ interest. The first one I worked on was a 3rd grade study of oceans, that incorporated geography, science (tides, animals-biology, salt water- chemistry, etc.), as well as math, reading, and beginning research skills because they had to write a report about their chosen animal. They were enthusiastic about the project because something in it appealed to each of them.
At that time, testing took one week per year for 3rd, 4th, 5th and 8th grades. It was paper/pencil in the classrooms and the ready of the school continued normal instruction.
Now every grade is tested, K-8, and the tests have moved online. Few poorer schools have enough computers for each student, so testing grades 3-8 takes up to 3 weeks to cycle students through shared devices. With increasing requirements for testing accommodations for various students, classrooms are shuffled into testing cohorts per accommodation requirements. This, students who are not testing get no instruction time, because the classrooms are populated by students from different classes. Testing has become a very expensive logistical nightmare.
Meanwhile, students in wealthier districts who have already mastered the tested grade level skills reasonably well, allow their teachers to expand classroom instruction all year to include interesting subjects like science and history, and do integrated units. It’s a vicious circle that continues to shortchange and punish teachers and students in poorer districts.
That was a pernicious and successful attempt to damage public education under the banner of improving it by "making teachers and schools accountable", when the real problems were lack of resources, not lack of dedicated teachers.
I was in the classroom when NCLB was passed. My principal referred to it as "No Teacher Left Standing".
As Republicans decimated the social safety net of essential and emergency government services, public schools were left to provide everything children need. While being obstructed by politically minded parents. In VA the odious Youngkin has expanded the GOP professor hit lists to include a 'target your kids' teacher' phone campaign.
A friend of mine suggested that we here in Virginia, flood the new governor’s tip line with glowing accounts of the wonderful teachers serving our children. Wouldn’t that be something?
Absolutely!!! Yes!!! I'm going to contact friends in VA about your idea!
Ellie Kona posted links on this yesterday just FYI. Here’s a copy and paste of her post: Ellie KonaJan 26·edited Jan 26
Morning, Lynell! Adding to the lighter side of the news...let's hear it for the young folks, TikTok crew, Virginia Teen Democrats, and John Legend! They campaigned for people to flood the CRT tip line set up by Virginia's new Gov. Youngkin--by sending messages of how great the teachers are doing!
https://twitter.com/CorceliusMusic/status/1486033463014793223?s=20
https://twitter.com/Out5p0ken/status/1486173242838638598?s=20
https://twitter.com/VATeenDems/status/1486025543363530758?s=20
https://twitter.com/SenLouiseLucas/status/1486165530658713609?s=20
(In regards to the decimation of social safety nets, let's not forget those many teachers who have covered expenses out of their own pockets that the school districts have not provided but should have.)
Something happened in regard to this with TikTok but I forgot what it was.
The first thing that came to mind when I read your comment was the phrase “dumbing down America”. Second, recent fossil findings and how challenging it is for religious extremes to reconcile their bibles to the facts that creatures wandered the earth long before their prophets.
Not at all. The fundamentalist adjustment is that the deity created the fossils during the week of creation.
Personally, I prefer acknowledging that we have no knowledge of how time works from a divine perspective, which is the perspective relevant for that story. Also, the 6 days of creation are plainly more metaphor than literal human time: the sun, which is a necessary part of human reckoning of a day, is not created until the fourth day of the story. It's actually easier to be religious without taking everything at its surface value... You can even credit science and vaccines as gifts from Gd.
Personally, I do not. “Perspective” “Story” “Metaphor” “Surface Value”
All having nothing to do with fact. Rather more to do with opinion. Or belief, which is nothing more than a set of thoughts regarded as truth. We can encourage someone by telling them we believe in them, we “know” they can achieve their goal. But, is that a fact? How did we know? Can we prove or disprove this feeling inside ourselves? No. We just “know” how strongly we feel they will succeed. And that emotion can transfer to them, join their feelings, and they may choose to feel empowered by it. The fact, or truth, of their success or failure in that effort will only be known, well, after the fact.
I agree with you that religion, and religious rituals and stories and faith, have nothing to do with facts (other than facts describing religious observances) or objective, verifiable truth. The same is true for love, beauty, art, music, and kindness.
That does not make any of them worthless in general, although any or all may be unimportant to a particular person. I would argue that kindness is the most important of the set listed, but that's a different discussion.
Being separate from objective, verifiable truth does make religious belief irrelevant to problems that can be solved by science. It also means that my religion, whatever it may be and however important it might be to me, must not be allowed to dictate your life, and vice versa.
Many, including Steve Bannon, misread Derrida's comments on language to infer a moral relativism in deconstruction. Derrida theorized about textual analysis. Derrida was also a left wing political activist his entire life.
Yes, I know. Most of the people on the fascist side of things make all kinds of stupid claims about postmodernist theories in general. But those of us who have actually read and discussed these ideas know that the claim that postmodernism and deconstruction mean that "anything is anything" are lying--and they know it. It is merely a way to demonize critical theory so that their Ayn Rand genuflecting will gain more traction. I just find Derrida needlessly opaque (I feel similarly about Julia Kristeva but that is a conversation for another time!). I was the director of a critical discourse studies program at my previous university and taught the intro course, which included other faculty members assigning readings and discussing the ideas. One of my colleagues insisted on assigning Positions (this was a 200-level class, mind you). When he asked what the students thought of the book, one of them threw her copy into the middle of the room (we were sitting in a circle) and said "That's what I think of this book!" The other students applauded. I thought it was hilarious, but my (male) colleague was not amused. He would have been far better received had he used something else--and a cheat sheet from the excellent "Derrida for Dummies."
Ok here's where I get clear that there are whole areas of erudition to which I have not been exposed in my education. It's fascinating and helpful to read, and moves me to search for practical application of the knowledge...while I look on Amazon for "Derrida for Dummies"!!
Derrida is a tough read. Even many professionals find his ideas difficult. Especially coming from a perspective unversed in analytical and philosophical texts. Many unfortunately feel it is necessary or hip to assign texts they really are not equipped to teach. And it is almost criminal to assign Derrida in an intro course.
Critiquing the foundational works of phenomenology and structuralism, will of necessity result in a dense and complex text.
I have not worked my way through Derrida's works, but I very much like his 'The Gift of Death' which I find very accessible. In the sense of Kierkegaard's meditations on the aesthetic, ethical, and religious stance.
And let us remember WHY cynical power grabbers support ignorance shrouded in the cloak of "freedom and patriotism." making their followers "only a pawn in their game." Bob Dylan explained it so well; I've posted before and will continue to post as needed. https://youtu.be/8X0UmfBwA_U
Yes.
Not to mention Rabbi Hillel!
Thank you Lin. Your final paragraph is succinct and superb. Voting is most certainly "a political strategy in service of social responsibility." This is the key to helping our wavering, sometimes feckless youth get a clearer understanding of the importance of their vote.
I am heartened by young activists and young field organizers who, despite horrific school debt, are dedicated to political public service.
As someone who has spent over a decade phone banking, door knocking, and buttonholing potential voters, I can say with some empirical evidence that it is not only 'feckless youth' who follow the siren song of 'vote your gut.' Wizened old hippies and middle aged New Agers are just as blinkered, with less excuse.
Point taken Lin. But as a "wizened" old timer who knocked on several hundred doors for Bernie, I am keenly aware that half of our population was born after 1981. Many of the youth were bitterly disappointed with DNC's choice of Hilary
in 2016 and it is this group that may need the most coaxing to actually participate in our democracy. There has been a tug of war for several decades and the right wing has moved the center far far to the right. This is disheartening to the youth
and the necessarily pragmatic decisions we make when we vote are very hard for them.
But did the bitterly disappointed youths vote for Hillary, nonetheless? Apparently, not enough of them did. One of the problems of youth is a tendency to elevate principle over possibility.
If the "bitterly disappointed youths" voted for Hilary Clinton I do not know.
But I do know that more than three million people MORE voted for her than for the Republican candidate, and still she lost.
This is inconceivable for Europeans (regardless of political orientation) Not much of a principle in this ....
They had a big social media push from the right wing and their Russian allies, flooding them with posts supposedly from the left, asserting voting for Hilary was a waste of time.
Or others that believe the "big lies"!
Working the polls recently I have seen a few of these youth. They are so valuable to our future democracy. I am elated when they ask for a Democrat ballot during the primary.
Most that vote don't have a clue what it means nor who they are voting for or what they are voting for in the end. Teachers in my community vote Republican mainly because of their current position on abortion. Now the Republicans are taking away what teachers should be doing. I am not sure they even realize what is happening!
Boy, lin, you are a superb writer!
Shout out to Public Education - New York City Public Schools through State University of New York. Oh and the same Hebrew School Ruth Bader (Ginsburg) attended - a bit later but same rabbi. The synagogue is now under fire from Jewish racist religious extremists for renting the school building to a charter school serving minority students.
I am in on supporting public education, not the least because schools like Harvard have produced so many low performing white men like BushII , Kavanaugh, Bush I.
If you want to find someone to do a good job you have to go to Champagne Urbana or College Station.
:-)
One would think you'd mention upstate NY, SUNY Binghamton. Alma Mater of Alexander Vindman, Hakeem Jeffries ... and a slew more.
lin, the SUNY schools are indeed benchmark educational facilities that offer a wide range of good and "affordable" (not really) education.
My oversight for sure. I just picked two gigantic engineering schools locations because that was my world (I went to A&M, my best friend since college went to U of Illinois.
I am so humbled by the quality of thought and writing ability present in this community, of which this post is an example. Feel like a shade-tree mechanic in a jet engine factory.
We all have our moments. Hurrah for the "shade-tree mechanic". What a beautiful phrase, image! ThankYou!
In two words what it took Longfellow a ballad to capture.
"Under the spreading chestnut tree the village smithy stands ...
Each morning sees some task begin,
Each evening sees it close
Something attempted, something done,
Has earned a night's repose.
Thanks, thanks to thee, my worthy friend,
For the lesson thou hast taught!
Thus at the flaming forge of life
Our fortunes must be wrought;
Thus on its sounding anvil shaped
Each burning deed and thought."
HW Longfellow
https://www.hwlongfellow.org/poems_poem.php?pid=38
Very nice! Thank you!
Yes! Me as well!
This is a daily dose of classroom! A gifted interpretation of events (present and past) from the Professor, and open discussion from my fellow travelers on this journey.
Love!!!! these Letters! Thank you, Professor and your contibutive audience.
The understanding so precisely and powerfully stated here is one of the reasons this group is so nourishing.
This.
Thank you - I knew there was something wrong with originalism but I didn't know how to articulate it.
Your last sentence is so powerful. Please forgive me for turning it into a call to action:
"See your vote not as a personal gesture in service of self expression but rather as a political strategy in service of social responsibility. Determine what outcome you want, and join like-minded citizens in casting your vote for the candidates most likely to make it happen!"
ThankYou. I write to be of use. Your wanting to use something I've written justifies my writing at all.
It is ironic and tragic that the right wing is united, while many on the left act as though the entire history of the labor movement never happened.
Thank you for this analysis, Lin. It perfectly builds upon the professor's letter. One of her sentences poses the question that, at least for me, hovers over everything: "Should the federal government be able to protect equality before the law, or should state legislatures be able to do as they wish?"
It would appear to me that this current crop of SCOTUS Originalists have decided that the the Federal Supremacy Clause doesn't apply and shouldn't be enforced, as demonstrated by the ongoing efforts of RW majority state legislators doing everything they can to hurt their constituents. That's happening here in NH.
That's what voting has always been for me, ever since I heard a John Bircher applaud the assassination of JFK
This is what voting citizens should do at the ballot box, and in campaigning leading up to elections.
It is NOT what Supreme Court justices are supposed to do in court. They are supposed to put more weight on the actual laws and precedents than on their own political goals. The current majority corruptly prioritizes their political faction's goals over the rule of law.
Yes!
This:
“ As Rabbi Hillel said, in the last days before the christian era, "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is interpretation; go and study." Hillel also said "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? And being only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?" This is an early expression of the ethic of reciprocity, the so called Golden Rule which the Founders translated into civic law by prioritizing the general welfare of the people.”
I don’t even want to think about if Roe V.Wade is overturned….
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/tennessee-couple-sues-state-denied-foster-services-jewish-faith-rcna12923
Yeah--I read about that case in the WaPo. "Christian" fascism is definitely on the rise--and it is targeting not only LGBTQ people and those of us who do not espouse an "organized" supernatural belief system.
That case in Tennessee is because a state funded adoption agency only places children with "people like them", which does not include Jews, no matter how religious the Jews might be. So the discrimination is against people of a different Abrahamic religion. They probably would not place kids with Catholics either.
There are too many people in this country who believe "freedom" means their freedom to impose their beliefs on everyone else, their freedom to mistreat other people however they like.
Exactly!
The six "apolitical" (that is meant as sarcasm) justices who will overturn Roe v. Wade have no idea how very political that decision will be come 2022. Ruling against 50% of this country will result in a pushback at the polls the likes of which they cannot fathom. The same can be said when the six rule against anything having to do with voting rights. Living robed and in a bubble might keep them feeling warm and fuzzy as they sip their bourbon, but the world that must live with their decisions is hovering just outside their protected environments. My prediction for today!
Wow Kathy, simply, unbelievably sad. They have audacity to cite freedom in support of their discrimination.
That is exactly what the right had done. They often use states’ rights in support of their discrimination. Usually when states’ rights are invoked, some people are going to be victims of discrimination.
Wow, appreciate your comments, so much I didn’t know, despite being an old “Golden Rule” gal.
Lin, you got my vote! I hope you are running for some office, somewhere!
"Since Reagan, Republican racist right wing religious extremists, ably served by Federalist Society dark money kingpin and kingmaker Leonard Leo, kept their eye on the Supreme Court."
Lin, correct, but, it looks like a winning approach now does it not?
Where were the Democrats while the Republicans were plowing the ground and planting the seed of our current Supreme Court?
Where were Democrats? A quick superficial reply. Sadly some following Clinton neoliberalism, drove a wedge in the Left. But any Clinton was still better than a post Reagan Republican. In Congress many Democrats have been faithful and righteous to progressive democracy, but you have to listen to CSpan to appreciate that it didn't start with Bernie Sanders, AOC and the Squad.
Right wing voters learned from Perot not to split their vote. Left wing voters took Nader as a green light to self righteously split their vote. Bingo - racist right wing religious extremist Supreme Court majority for decades to come.
Hey!! I voted for Ross Perot!. I can still remember that he was completely right about NAFTA and his opposition to it (which was a LIBERAL approach).
"THAT GIANT SUCKING SOUND YOU HEAR? THAT WILL BE GOOD JOBS HEADING TO MEXICO". (1991?)
A more accurate prediction of the future has never been made not even by Nostrodamas. :-)
Mike. Single issue voting has led us to where we are today. A candidate garnishing votes on a single issue displays tunnel vision and is selfish. Nader helped give us Bush. Stein helped give us Trump. I call these people vanity candidates. Ever notice how the Republicans coalesce around a single candidate without fail? Therein lies their not so secret weapon.
Ever notice how Green Party candidates repeatedly play a spoiler role to advance the radical right by splitting the center and left? Nader, Stein (who was at one of those dinners in Moscow), Sinema (who was in the Green Party before she became a Democrat).
I wonder why. What are your thoughts?
Barbara, I guess I was thinking that if Perot was right on one issue, perhaps his thinking on other issues might prefer keeping jobs here in America.
Because, offshoring and outsourcing, by corporations, has decimated good jobs in America and exploits millions of near slave labor workers in China and other countries.
Honestly, to me, that is the single biggest reason we had Trump for President.
Thanks for your reply. I enjoy the back and forth in these comments. Unfortunately being right on one issue is all too often just that one issue. The voracious unions and the inept corruptions pushed jobs overseas. Technology was becoming more and more complex and workers weren't keeping up. Government regulations made it very expensive to build a new plant to retool for the increasingly complex and advanced manufacturing processes needed.
As per trump's election. I firmly believe he was elected because of racism.
One issue voting is not the best strategy
Exactly
They were trying to clean up other messes the R-haves created. Remember that Nixon and his “southern strategy” turned the Republican Party upside down. The Republicans of today are not the party who passed the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution, trying to level the playing field. Individual liberties, “freedom” is often just another way of saying “I want to do whatever I want. Too bad if what I wants hurts you.”
Nixon just taught them not to get caught
No. It’s far worse than that. What Republicans learned from Nixon is that the Southern strategy works. Nixon turned over the tapes. Today’s Republicans would burn them, as Pat Buchanan advised Nixon to do. Today’s Republicans learned from Goebbels, not from Nixon. Lie, lie, lie, and stick with it. The bigger the lie the better. Doesn’t matter whether you’re caught or not. Just keep the lie going.
You are 100% right, Hitler laid it all out in Mein Kampf, Goebbels was Hitler’s Murdoch, or vice versa I guess. Hate sure can get a toe hold, especially when it’s dressed up in the flag and brandishing a cross. Lewis was right
Dems were pretending it was politics as usual
The Democrats invariably come into Office on the heels of another Republican mess they need to clean up. My view of most Democrats I see in White House Administrations are honest, hardworking Patriots.
I grow so weary of the portrayal of Democrats as being dim witted when it comes to Politics. Not one respects or gives power to any group when its own members tear it down. Republicans rarely do it in public.
Can we please please resist tearing down the Democratic Party?
Dems are not dimwitted, just try to take the high road when that is laughed at by the perps.
Excellent assessment!
Lin, My early Church, School and Home, we were taught that we could not say we hated a person, you could say you disliked something they did to you.You could say you Hated a object. And we were taught the “ Golden Rule “ as well. I was raised in a Catholic Home and School. Very early yrs. I had often wondered if it was because of the Holocaust as I was born after the horrors were known.Then,we moved South. I wasn’t out of Primary School. We stoped at a Gas Station/Diner along the way. There were signs. I had no idea who the “Whites “ were much less if I was one. My hometown was very small. We did have Black Ppl in the public pool and all Nationalities were respected. Lots of Jewish Ppl lived there. That also showed it’s ugly face in the South. We didn’t get to attend Catholic School in the South. But it didn’t change me. I married a Baptist, but I still taught my Children the teachings of my youth. I feel like now after reading you’re post it was from the Jewish Teachings ? Which clears up the the Catholic teaching of it if our Gov. foundation was based even on a limited general welfare of It’s people . At 12 I saw Judgement At Nuremberg in the early ‘60’s’. Between where I was living and what I had just seen I needed no more convincing that Hate was wrong.I think of my Grandmother, who until she married was really never considered a Citizen. She could only own a home if her Husband died. She never worked out of the home or drove a Car. And I wonder did she ever get to Vote ? She passed in mid ‘70’s so I hope so. I did read many yrs ago that it was in fact one of the Rockerfellers that was behind the Women’s Right To Work. His reason ? He stated; “ Might as well let them, pay them low wages and then Tax them. More for our Gov.”.Those who claim to be “ Originalist “ are like Crows wanting to peck at “ Roadkill “. Except for Clocks, nothing on our Planet goes “ Backwards “.
Great commentary. Love your last sentence and it speaks to Republicans as well.
So - in layman’s terms, with all of the commentary balancing between theocratic vice secular based/driven politics, what I know between Reagan and Biden - is that legal systems were patriarchal from the drafting of the Constitution and establishment of our legal hierarchy, were religious driven, have been molded, bashed and remade depending upon which the powerful of political institutions is MORE powerful in any election cycle and that generally, the voting public is swayed by where the cash flows most, and most freely. And freethinking or dogma/constituency follow the money.
Do I understand the context of the discussion?
Please don’t scold me - I’m learning. I’m assimilating information as I can contextualize some mighty big terms and concepts (as I submitted in an earlier post where I posted nouns and their definitions) that I had to put my arms around to understand other respondent contributions.
Well said!
Brilliant! Now onward to truly make a difference in history and the future.