Texas State board of Education Gets a New "champion" for Balance in Education

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE

Sometimes just getting up in the morning and checking your latest tweets can cause one to just stare at the computer and do a Daffy Duck eye socket pop out.  For those that have been following the Texas State Board of Education's venture into historical fiction, the champion standard bearer for "balance" in the historical and science curriculum, Don McLeroy had retired.  Cause for all to celebrate.  However, this is short lived, for a newly elected "Charlie" Garza R-El Paso has taken up the battle for "balance".  This is noted by the Texas Freedom Network's blog described here.

The latest quote from board member Garza states that "Last year my son came to me and started talking about global warming… and I showed him research that said that there is no clear consensus – either scholarly or otherwise – that suggested that even existed. But yet it was being taught as a basis of fact in the school. And when we have such a paradigm being introduced to children, then we have a problem on our hands."  Makes one think of the scene in Cool Hand Luke "What we have here is a failure to communicate.", or more to the point, failure to understand.

Garza was not put off by this comment he later stated that he was all for assessing balance in the curriculum stating "The real question this board should be dealing with is not so much what is clear or isn’t clear because you can’t define it, but rather, if there is opposing points of view, that both sides be presented in order to add a more balanced point of view about what’s happening in the classroom."  Apparently we should also have "balance" for the grammatically impaired.  Nevertheless, I think Garza has a point and we should all start making lists to start addressing balance in the field of history.  Here are some guidelines to start with.

1.  We need to focus more on the family values of important leaders.  Hence, I would suggest that in Modern European history we start focusing in on "Mussolini the Family Man".  Yes, never mind that the man cheated on his wife and slept around, or that many of his children would not speak to him, these are irrelevant.  Mussolini was the family man of Italy; just ask his mistress who was strung up next to him by her ankles.  And let's not forget his alliance with the Catholic Church.  Despite the fact the man did not attend church.  But we need to emphasize the family importance of this period.  And the values that he instilled in his Fasci troops.  One, be the first to blame your opponent of what you are doing.  That will confuse and confound the public.  Two, eliminate your opponents through legal and extra-legal methods to show that you have at least a 30% consensus.  Finally, spend loads of money on rebuilding "culture" so that the people don't have time to realize they are poor, illiterate, and exploited.

2.  Refocus our attention on the virtuous personal lives of other important leaders.  Hitler for example, we need to offer a balance between the evil that he has been shown to possess and the warm fuzzy personal side of megalomania.  Just because you kill over 11 million people for political reasons, one should show the moral and upright side of these "justified" policies.  After all, Hitler's intentions were fully spelled out in Mein Kampf and clearly illustrated his intentions of making the German people the superior people that they already were.  Let's talk about his home life, his compassion for his dogs and his strong work ethic.  He slept until noon did very little work and then stayed up till midnight partying at the expense of the nation, but all in the direct attempt to destroy . . . everyone else.  A worthy goal for "balance"

3.  What about colonial policies of the Portuguese and Spanish.  They not only intended to bring "civilization" to the new world, but also sought through conquest to instill "Christian" values.  A force conversion of the heathen races of Aztecs, Incas, and Mayas was all in an effort to bring Christ to a lost people.  Never mind the fact that these same groups were killed by foreign viruses that wiped out their populations, forced on to plantations to work until they died; and were forced to destroy at the hands of their captors their cultural and historical past.

4.  Let's not forget the forced importation of Africans to the Americas.  Should we, once again, justify slavery as Aristotle did to promote one race over another?? Heavens no!!!, But we must emphasize the natural order of life and the necessity of domestic harmony.  After all, the slaves were in a better position after they were forced to leave their land in Africa.  Who would want to live in such primitive conditions?  They were able to make better lives here on the Brazilian sugar plantations where they died of exhaustion. 

5.  Then, of course, the public policies of Joseph Stalin must be considered.  His fantastic planning to bring his country into the modern industrial age is illustrated through the importation of "surplus" German industrial machinery.  His population control objectives were stunning.  Throughout the 1930s and 1940s he single handedly manage to bring focus and direction to public policy defining new levels of state welfare.  From the happy work farms of the gulags to the industrial work towns behind the Ural Mountains, Stalin had vision. 

Colleagues, we all understand that as historians, the overwhelming existence of "facts" show that there are certain areas of history that one cannot be neutral about whether these facts are about the Holocaust, Hitler, or the Founding Fathers.  We know from overwhelming evidence of eyewitness testimony, pictures, and intimate friends, that Hitler's goal for the peoples of Eastern Europe was inhalation.  Just the same, we know from the evidence of their own diaries, letters, and documents, that Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and James Madison were influenced by the Enlightenment ideas of Rousseau, Hobbes, Locke, and Montesquieu.  Facts are funny things and no matter how often that one may argue to the contrary, they do not change.  Hence, we should not ignore the attempt of others to argue against established fact.