Authoritarian Right Is Using School Children As Pawns

School board meeting are becoming chaotic and violent. And board members, school officials, and teachers are being threatened and attacked. This is the new tactic by right-wingers who don't want real history (or real science) taught, and don't want school children protected from COVID-19 by masks or vaccines. In short, they are using school children as pawns to achieve their authoritarian dream.

Here is part of how Ruth Ben-Ghiat describes it at CNN.com:

The authoritarian-style party discipline Trump imposed during his time in office remains in place. Lawmakers who criticize Trump, like Liz Cheney, are viewed as disloyal and ostracized by the GOP establishment. And questioning the leader cult can be downright dangerous. . . .

Now this authoritarian culture, which sees those who hold different views as enemies, has reached the personal and local levels. Schools, and school boards, are the latest front of a Republican crusade to "take back America" through violent verbiage. For instance, Steve Lynch, the Republican nominee for Northampton County executive in Pennsylvania, advocates the use of intimidation at school board meetings to deal with parents who support mask mandates. "I'm going in with 20 strong men....I'm going to give [the school board] an option: They can leave or they can be removed," he declared. . . .

Centering the anti-mask and anti-vaccine fight on schools may seem an illogical move by Republicans: What parent wouldn't want to keep their children safe by complying with best public health practices? Yet right-wing propaganda has effectively convinced many parents that masks are "muzzles" of freedom and vaccine mandates tyrannical, spawning new waves of activists imbued with an intolerant "us vs. them" mentality little in keeping with democratic models of civic life.

This translates into public bullying of parents who want to protect their children from Covid-19. In Los Angeles, anti-vaccine mandate protesters harassed parents at school drop-off. They claimedthat masking is child abuse and subjecting children to vaccines a form of "rape." In Grand Rapids, Michigan, "Moms for America" activists pressured parents to pull their children out of schools that mandate face coverings. "We have had enough of the forced mandates, knee-jerk reactions, and government overreach," said the group's founder, Kimberly Fletcher. "We will not co-parent with the government."

Here the supposed advocates of education "freedom" show their hand. Arguments like those repeated by Fletcher have little to do with child welfare. But they have everything to do with right-wing efforts to discredit the Biden administration by depicting it as bringing socialist tyranny to America, and by labeling Democrats as degenerates who exploit children (the latter belief is also a central tenet of QAnon conspiracy theories).

Concern for children in this context is just a smoke screen for right-wing activists with far greater ambitions. Calls by Fletcher and many others for a mass exodus from public schools, with the excuse of opposing vaccine and mask mandates, align with the ideal of divesting from the civic space of democracy altogether. They also further the cause of privatizing American education -- a pet project of Trump's Education Secretary Betsy DeVos.

Moreover, the idea of "parental rights" in schools, advocated by anti-vaccine militants and their White Christian Evangelical allies, also becomes another way to justify censorship of ideas you don't like, such as the centrality of slavery in America's development and the costs of institutionalized racism.

It's not surprising that former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo wants the private realm to take control of public school curricula. "I think parents should decide what their children are taught in schools," he tweeted, his stance also reinforcing the right's disdain for expertise.

Nor is it unexpected that Glenn Youngkin, who is running for Virginia governor against Democrat Terry McAuliffe, cites parental rights, along with opposition to critical race theory and "transgender ideology," as part of his ideals for school reform. If Youngkin truly cared about public schools, his campaign wouldn't be pushing for parents to pull their kids out of them; and if he truly cared about child health and safety, he wouldn't be opposing mask and vaccine mandates.

When illiberal forces are on the march, the education system is always in their sights. The brutal rejection by activist parents of differences of opinion, and the spread of practices of harassment meant to frighten others into silence, models the kind of authoritarian culture the right is trying to install, town by town, school board by school board.

A Denial Of Racism Doesn't Mean You're Not A Racist

The picture above was posted on Facebook. Making it even worse, it was the Facebook page of an elected official -- Chris Harris, who is on the Hooks Independent School Board in Hooks, Texas. Harris was shocked to receive negative feedback from the picture's posting.

He has removed the picture, and issued an apology of sorts. He said the picture was just a joke, and was taken out of context. Look at the picture. Is there any way it could be "taken out of context"? Isn't the context inherent, obvious, and blatantly racist?

Harris also says he is definitely not a racist. I would have to disagree with that. Anyone who speaks in a racist manner or takes a racist action is a racist -- and posting that picture on a social media site is both racist speech and action. And a simple denial that he is a racist is not nearly enough. He needs to repent and take action -- and his first action should have been to resign from the school board (since his fairness toward minority children and parents is definitely now in question).

But he didn't resign, and his belief that the picture was just a "joke" taken out of context makes me doubt the sincerity of his apology. According to the school board president, it will be up to the other members of the board to decide whether Harris must resign or not -- since the board governs itself.

Hooks lies deep in East Texas (see red dot on the map below), probably the most racist area of Texas (which still has a problem with racism statewide). I'm certainly not going to hold my breath until he is forced to resign, because I seriously doubt the other members will ask him to do so. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if he was re-elected.

Let this be a lesson to those foolish people who thought the election of President Obama meant we were in a post-racial America. Racism is alive and well in Texas (and in the country as a whole).

School Board Bans Literary Masterpiece

I must admit that I have never understood why anyone would ever want to ban or burn a book -- any kind of book. The simple act of banning or burning a book shows fear -- a fear of the ideas that book contains. It also shows a lack of faith in human beings to be exposed to an idea, and either follow or reject that idea based upon its merit.

The very concept of a democracy is that the people are intelligent enough to rule themselves, if educated and made aware of all the facts. This is why the Founding Fathers added the First Amendment to the Constitution. They believed in the free flow of information and ideas, and the judgement of an educated people. And they understood that the survival of our democracy depended upon this belief.

But there are many Americans today who do not seem to have this belief in the power of education and information. And some of those people are on the School Board in Republic, Missouri (a suburb of Springfield with slightly more than 14,000 inhabitants). That school board voted 4-0 to ban two books from the district's high school library -- Twenty Boy Summer by Sarah Ockler and the literary masterpiece Slaughterhouse Five by the great American novelist Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.

And why were these books banned? It seems there were a few people in that community who believed the books "teach principles that are contrary to the Bible." I had thought our schools were created and sustained to provide a well-rounded education to students -- not to teach biblical principles. Religious principles should be taught in churches, synagogues, temples, and mosques -- not public schools. But evidently the people, and the school board, of Republic think differently. Making matters even more idiotic it seems that only one of the four school board members had read both books (and a third which had survived the banning).

It makes me wonder just where the fear of these books comes from. Are the nearly-adult children of these people so weak-minded that a book would cause them irreparable harm? I find that hard to believe. I cannot speak to the Ockler book because I am not familiar with it, but I bought my daughter a copy of Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle while she was in high school. She loved it and bought and read on her own all of his other books, including Slaughterhouse Five. They not only didn't harm her, but they opened her mind to new ways of thinking about the world. This was a good thing, and teaching any child to think for themselves is always a good thing.

Perhaps their fear of these books says something about their religion or faith. Is their faith or religion so weak that it can be defeated by the ideas contained in a book. If so, is it a religion worth following or a faith worth keeping? Is their god so weak he can be defeated by a mere book?

Books are not things to be feared -- even bad books with ridiculous ideas. Anyone who believes in the efficacy of democracy must also believe in the ability of people to recognize flawed or bad ideas and reject them. Democracy and freedom are threatened far more by the burning or banning of books than by allowing the reading of books with disagreeable ideas or content. And the banning of a recognized literary masterpiece makes no sense at all.

The Very Definition Of "Homophobe"

Sometimes there are elected officials that do far more harm than good because they either can't control, or don't wish to control, their own bigotry.   A school board member in Arkansas named Clint McChance is one of those elected officials.   He has decided that his own bigotry and homophobia is more important than acting in the best interest of ALL the students he was elected to help (by overseeing their education and well-being).

Their have been several instances of school bullying (on both a secondary and higher education level) of homosexual students that resulted in these students taking their own lives.   This tragedy has resulted in good people all over the country coming together to try and fight the problem of bullying.   One of the ways this has happened is a "wear purple" day, where people wore the color purple to show solidarity with the victims of bullying.

Unfortunately, some right-wing fundamentalists have decided to show their bigotry in response to this.   McChance took this even a step further by making homophobic and bigoted remarks on his FaceBook page celebrating the death of gays.   Here are some of the remarks he made on FaceBook (which whether he realizes it or not is a public forum):

“Seriously they want me to wear purple because five queers killed themselves. The only way im wearin it for them is if they all commit suicide. I cant believe the people of this world have gotten this stupid. We are honoring the fact that they sinned and killed thereselves because of their sin. REALLY PEOPLE.”


“No because being a fag doesn’t give you the right to ruin the rest of our lives. If you get easily offended by being called a fag then dont tell anyone you are a fag. Keep that shit to yourself. I dont care how people decide to live their lives. They dont bother me if they keep it to thereselves. It pisses me off though that we make a special purple fag day for them. I like that fags cant procreate. I also enjoy the fact that they often give each other aids and die. If you arent against it, you might as well be for it.”


“I would disown my kids they were gay. They will not be welcome at my home or in my vicinity. I will absolutely run them off. Of course my kids will know better. My kids will have solid christian beliefs. See it infects everyone.”

Sadly, as an elected public official, McChance cannot be fired by the school district.   If he had any common decency, he would resign.   But after reading his remarks, I seriously doubt that will happen.   He seems to be proud of his bigotry.   Hopefully, the good people in Arkansas will take care of this in the next school board election (or in a recall election).

Fortunately for the students of the school district, other school officials were not amused by McChance's bigoted remarks.   Here is the public statement released by the superintendent of the Midland School District:

The Midland School District, Board of Directors, administration, faculty, and staff do not support or condone the comments Mr. Clint McCance posted on his personal social networking page. Mr. McCance was not acting as an agent of the school board, but as a private citizen when this comment was posted. This post does not reflect the thoughts of the board or administration of the Midland School District.

The district strives to foster an environment that discourages all forms of bullying and an environment that encourages a safe and productive educational climate of all of our students. The district is very diligent in pursuing and addressing bullying of any variety on our campuses.

Sincerely

Dean Stanley, Superintendent
Midland School District

School Board Cancels Prom Over Same-Sex Couple

The right-wing fundamentalists have shown us once again that they cannot stand the idea that someone might actually have fun and display their own individualism. They clutch their Bibles and freak out if anyone refuses to stay within their own narrow bounds of propriety. Take for instance the Itawamba County School Board in Mississippi.

This school board exceeded their authority by passing out rules for the school prom. One of those rules was that there could be no same-sex couples at the prom. After all, that could make some students "uncomfortable". Good Grief! These are students about to graduate and enter the big bad world. I would think it's about time they grew up and learned how to deal with an "uncomfortable" situation like adults (and I don't mean the pseudo-adults on the school board).

One student at the Itawamba County Agricultural High School did not think the school board's rules were fair. Constance McMillen, an 18 year-old lesbian student, asked that she be allowed to bring her girlfriend to the prom as her date, and that she be allowed to wear a tuxedo to the prom. She was denied that right, and contacted the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

The ACLU contacted the school board and notified them of Miss McMillen's rights -- which they were violating. They told the board that not allowing same-sex couples violated student rights and not allowing McMillen to wear a tuxedo violated her right of free expression. Oh, the horror!

So what did the school board do? They did the unimaginable. To keep one same-sex couple from coming to the prom, they punished ALL the students by canceling the April 2nd prom completely. There will be no prom, but at least the school board's archaic sensibilities will not be offended and no student will be "uncomfortable" at the sight of a lesbian couple.

They probably think they are protecting some kind of "value", but in reality they are teaching that discrimination and bigotry are acceptable values in their community. This reaction could probably have been predicted. Look at their non-discrimination policy:

"The Itawamba County School District does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age or disability in the provision of educational programs and services or employment opportunities and benefits."

Notice anything missing from that policy -- like sexual orientation. I guess they don't feel any obligation to provide an education or services to a student with a different sexual orientation than their own. Judging from their actions, that comes as no surprise.

Glen Rose ISD Violating The Constitution

Thanks to the United States Constitution and its Bill of Rights, the people of this country are supposed to be guaranteed religious freedom. Some people think "religious freedom" means they have the right to force their own religion on everyone else, but that's not what it means at all. Religious freedom means every citizen has the right to worship whatever god(s) in whatever religion they wish, or the right to have no religion at all.

To insure this religious freedom, the Constitution demands that government must not establish an official religion, or show favoritism toward any religion (which amounts to the same thing). All government entities, whether national, state or local must follow this rule to protect the rights of all the citizens they serve. And in this multi-cultural country, even a local government organization can be guaranteed to be representing people of many different religions and people with no religion.

To the consternation of many fundamentalists, the Supreme Court has said this even covers the prayers used to open government meetings. A government entity (such as a school board) can open a meeting with a prayer, but according to court decisions the prayers "must not advance a particular faith or belief, because to do so would have the effect of affiliating the government with that particular faith or belief in violation of the Establishment Clause."

So I have to wonder why the board of the Glen Rose Independent School District (GRISD) violates the Constitution at the opening of every one of their meetings. Every meeting is opened with a prayer "in Jesus name". There is only one religion these prayers could possibly represent -- the christian religion. These prayers affiliate this local government entity with the christian religion -- to the exclusion of all others (not to mention those with no religion).

Making matters even worse, they are the only government entity in Somervell county that does this. All the other government entities (county commission, city council, water district, etc.), in an effort to be fair and respectful of all citizens, have dispensed with an opening prayer altogether. And GRISD cannot claim ignorance of the law. They have been informed that they are in violation of the Constitution, and requested to cease those violations. So far, they have refused to comply.

The way I see it, the school board has three choices to bring themselves into compliance with the Constitution. They can stop praying before meetings, they can water down the prayer so it doesn't mention any god(s) including Jesus and could be applicable to all religions (including no religion), or they could allow all religions to offer prayers on a rotating basis (including atheists and minor religions such as Wicca). The easiest choice by far (and probably the least provocative) would be to just stop the prayers.

I hope they will willingly decide to comply with the Constitution. Refusing to do so will only eventually result in a lawsuit they cannot win. And I'm sure there are much better ways for taxpayer money to be spent than in defending an unwinnable lawsuit.

The school board is an elected government body. They do not get to choose whether they will obey the Constitution or not. Like it or not, it is a requirement.

Texas School Suspends "A" Student

Kerens is a small Texas town in Navarro County of about 1700 people. But while much of Texas has moved into the 21st century, it seems like the school board in this town is still trying to fight the battles of the 1970's.

While most school districts are trying to figure out how to improve test scores, grades and graduation rates for their students, the Kerens school board is more interested in hair styles. They have an archaic rule that male students cannot wear their hair past their shirt collar, lower than their eyebrows or more than a half-inch over their ears.

Right before the Christmas break, four students were warned not to come back to school with long hair. They were told that if they did, they would face being sent to an alternative school (created for students with discipline problems). They also face suspension from extracurricular activities and the possibility of not being able to graduate.

When the students returned to school, they were suspended. One of the students had got his hair cut above his collar in an effort to co-operate with the school's silly rule. However, they said it was more than a half-inch over his ears and suspended him anyway.

The students have now been told they have three days to cut their hair or be assigned to the alternative school.

The student pictured above, Matthew Lopez-Widish, says he will not cut his hair. There is no reason why he should be forced to do so. He is an "A" student. Why would the school interfere with the education of one of their better students academically?

The school has the right to ask a student to attend regularly, be on time, not pose a discipline problem and put forth their best effort in their classes. That is all they have the right to demand. These are not slaves -- they are independent human beings trying to get an education. Just because they are under 21 does not mean they have to give up their right to be different.

Matthew has put forth an effort to get a good education, and now the school wants to deny him that opportunity. He says he does not want to attend the alternative school, and is considering transferring to another school district.

I cannot believe they would kick out an "A" student for such a ridiculous reason. They should be ashamed. They are there to educate students -- not to force them into any fashion or cultural trend.

Another School Board Over Reacts

Once again, a Texas school board is over-reacting. The school board is in the West Texas town of Tuscola, and they are trying to engage in the time-honored practice of book banning. They want to treat a book as though it was poisonous, and the very touch of the book would cause children to become mindless murdering perverts.

The book is Child of God, written by pulitzer prize-winning author Cormac McCarthy in 1974. It is a novel of an outsider falsely accused of rape, who begins killing people and winds up living in a cave with the decomposing corpses.

The book was on a list compiled by Tuscola's English teachers for a pre-Advanced Placement class. But naturally, some parent complained and now the school board has banned the book and suspended one of the teachers. It doesn't seem to matter that most people in the town don't think the teacher did anything wrong, and want him re-instated.

School boards seem to cater to the lowest common denominator these days. They seem to want to protect our kids from the world, rather than educate them about it. They should be acting like educators, not nannies.

It's not like these were first graders. These are high school students, and whether their parents want to admit it or not, they are capable of reading about the harsh realities of our world and rationally discussing them. The world is not always a nice place, and these high school students have probably read worse in the newspapers or seen it on TV or in the movies.

Books are not the problem, no matter what their content. The problem is people who think everyone must share their own limited view of the world. The problem is those who would deny freedom of speech and thought.