Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
This Whole Ethnic Studies Ban in Arizona...
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| Great! My Lithuanian -American mom should have learned Lithuanian language and culture in public school - but gosh, she didn't. I'm sure you'd approve public funds for a tutor for her now since she was cheated - I'm sure she'd love to brush up on the motherland. Oh, except she considers this her motherland, and Lithuania a wonderful heritage that she has maintained linguistic and cultural ties to primarily on her own time/ volition. |
Anonymous
Well, unfortunately you are one of those americans who do not know anything about Lithuania. If you had grown up there you would most definitely know, because even under the sovied education system, you would have been entitled to education in your language, and you would have learned the history of all the minorities that lived in the USSR. And as every other person who has heritage from outside America, you would think that the locals are really dumb and uneducated. But since you claim to have maintained your cultural ties, I am sure that have visited that beautiful part of the world many times? Have you heard about the singing revolution? Were you there when they had the human chain across Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia?? Were you part of it? Or more importantly, would you consider it non-american and unpatriotic to have been there then, or to have links to it? |
Anonymous
You aren't the only immigrant family. There is nothing wrong with maintaining your heritage and being a true, red-blooded American. Here in America we are happy to consider our immigrant past a part of our national character. My father was a red blooded American, decorated veteran of WWII along with his two veteran brothers, but his family remembers with sadness when the German schools were closed down by the U.S. government in an attempt to extinguish their culture. My Japanese friend's father was a decorated veteran who served with the Airborne Rangers. He's a red blooded American, but his family was not thrilled at being sent to internment camps in WWII. If you think that immigrants should hide or erase their culture to be "Americans", then you should take a hard look at the immigrant disaster that is France. That's what they do, and they are breeding hatred within their own population. And if you think these kids in Latino studies programs are failing to assimilate, you clearly have not met them. They are into all things American, to the point that you would complain about them the same way you would complain about high school kids anywhere. It's just that they also have their Latino identity as part of their character. Erase that and they will be not only less Latino but less American, too. |
Anonymous
|
Are you total idiots? Lithuanians were denied their language/culture/free will under the USSR - that's why they love this country where maintaining ties is an option. We don't even blink here at dual citizenship as many chauvinist nations do. I have never said don't have cultural studies in public ed, but for heavens sakes don't suggest to my husband that he should take an African studies class simply b/cause he's a black American or any thinking along those
ridiculous lines. When my mom was growing up in the slums She was more interested in learning French in public school - go figure - and as I said before was able to learn Lithuanian through private community groups set up by the immigrants themselves that played a huge role in the social fabric. What the az law outlaws makes sense. If people weren't doing it anyway, why are they so bothered? |
Anonymous
You seem to contradict yourself. In your earlier post, you mocked the notion of cultural studies in public school. Now you say that you are not against them. Which is it? As for the law, the problem is that it bans any studies primarily aimed at one ethnic group. It is hard to have ethnic studies programs of any sort that would be legal under this law. You seem to have missed this piece of the legislation. |
Anonymous
| Are you for real? It is hard to have any cultural studies with this law? It seems pretty specific about the narrow scope of what is outlawed, which most of you have said is not being done anyway - so what's the problem. I'm fine with cultral studies and I'm fine with this law. I don't see the contradiction since the pedagogy the law bans is repugnant . |
Anonymous
| And you're right - I mocked the notion that my mom would have had some specialized lithuanians studies program in her school in the fifties. She grew up in the Lithuanian ghetto the next block over was the german ghetto the next block over was the polish ghetto - they did not get taught their heritage language cultural except where it intersected with classes like American or European oR African world history. That is, a specialized program representative of their polyglot class wasn't develoed for them. She does not seemto feel cheated. A good teacher will acknowledge and appreciate children backgrounds and invite them to make andshare connections, if you have a large community of a certain ethnic group there is zero reason o not make language or history curricular choices based on what might be of interest, there are well designed two way immersion programs ( which by the way attract more people than just the heritage language speakers - look at yu Ying) but all of these are different from what the law proscribes -the law is very specific about public dollars not being spent to support some pretty heinous academic practices . Why is that not a good thing? |
jsteele
Site Admin Online
Site Admin Online
This is a factually incorrect statement. The Lithuanians were not denied their language. Indeed, Russian language was not even a compulsory class for school children until the late 1970s. I visited Estonia in 1982 and there were plenty of expressions of Estonian culture. I imagine that things were not that much different in Lithuania (which I was not able to visit until 1995). The suppression of the Lithuanian language did occur during the Russian Empire, but those restrictions were removed when Lithuania regained independence prior to WWII. At any rate, it appears that those to whom you were responding are not total idiots. |
Anonymous
Are you reading? The law does not simply ban pedagogy. It bans any course primarily targeted toward one ethnic group. And opening admission to non-latinos is not sufficient since it is currently true. That and that alone is sufficient to kill the latino studies program. If you fell for the part about outlawing courses that advocate overthrowing the government, you are a sucker and the superintendent, who is running for Attorney General, got you good. |
Anonymous
|
To clarify the discussion, here is what the actual bill says:
A SCHOOL DISTRICT OR CHARTER SCHOOL IN THIS STATE SHALL NOT INCLUDE IN ITS PROGRAM OF INSTRUCTION ANY COURSES OR CLASSES THAT INCLUDE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING: 1. PROMOTE THE OVERTHROW OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. 2. PROMOTE RESENTMENT TOWARD A RACE OR CLASS OF PEOPLE. 3. ARE DESIGNED PRIMARILY FOR PUPILS OF A PARTICULAR ETHNIC GROUP. 4. ADVOCATE ETHNIC SOLIDARITY INSTEAD OF THE TREATMENT OF PUPILS AS INDIVIDUALS. That's cut-and-past from the actual pdf, so please don't criticize me for the stilted English (that include ... promote the ...) or the implication that Arkansas schools have been advocating treason. |
Anonymous
|
I don't know why this is obvious to readers. Here it is in black and white:
http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/49leg/2R/laws/0311.htm (Underlines are mine)
1,2, and 4 are rhetoric that has nothing to do with what was really in the program. 3 is the single relevant ban. You can't teach a course aimed at Latinos - even if non-Latinos sometimes sign up for it. BTW there is a carve-out later on in the bill for Native Americans. Totally hypocritical. |
Anonymous
|
What would a program designed specifically for white kids look like? Latino kids? Are they being taught different stuff or in different ways due to some essentialist view on their 'differentness'? Why on earth would you design a course for Latinos? Does anyone here realize how diverse 'Latino' is? My Latino child would be horrified if he were pulled aside with the 'Latino' kids and shuttled into a Latino class. Ugh.
Regarding USSR language policy--please take off the rose colored glasses. In a brutally subjected occupied state like Lithuania--what do you think the lingua franca of higher education was? (Russian). What language did the influx of managers and 'rulers' speak? (Russian). What language would you need to secure a 'good' job? (Russian). Stop sniffing glue. |
Anonymous
Why I am a sucker? I am reading the law, not reading into the law--like you. |
Anonymous
|
I'll not call you an idiot again, but you are nothing short of breathtaking in your logic.... I visited Estonia in the 1970's...and imagine things were not that different in Lithuania though I was not able to visit until 1995. UM. Whatever.
"Russification" http://www.oxuscom.com/lang-policy.htm "Perhaps the primary area in which this encroachment of Russian upon the social functions of the non-Russian languages can be seen is the school system, the main vehicle for promoting facility in the Russian language among non-Russians. "At the request of the people," Russian was instituted as a compulsory subject for all non-Russian students in the USSR in 1938. Up until the early 1970's, there were two basic educational options available in Central Asia, as in the rest of the USSR. Parents could send their children either to native-language schools (where the language of instruction was the mother tongue, but Russian was taught as a subject) or to Russian-language schools (where all subjects were taught in Russian). Although they were free to choose either, it was generally understood that the latter option was the only logical choice for those who desired to see their children advance in the Soviet system. Certainly, it was preferable for any who intended to work in the area of science and technology." Coerced choice. Charming. It's almost funny to see you wax poetic for the halcyon days of the Soviet Union though. Hilarious. Difference between language policy in USSR and USA being that immigrants choose to come here, whereas the Russians chose to invade and impose upon their neighbors. And for the record, I would not expect a Lithuania who CHOSE to move to Russia today to be terribly successful without learning Russian. Fair is fair. |
Anonymous
|
"Further proposals were made at the Second Tashkent Conference (1979), The Russian Language - the Language of Friendship and Cooperation of the Peoples of the USSR. It was recommended:
... that specialized disciplines in the professional and technical schools be taught in Russian and that Russian be used in the teaching of other subjects in the upper classes of the general education schools... that the social studies, general education and specialized disciplines in institutions of higher education be taught in Russian starting in the second or third year, and that the study of Russian should begin in the first or second year at the expense of other subjects. Moreover, students in institutions of higher and secondary specialized education are expected to write their course and diploma projects, as well as reports and essays in their major field of study, in Russian (Solchanyk 1982b:32). Needless to say, the general response of the nationalities to these measures was not favorable, especially in the Baltic republics, the non-Russian Slavic republics (the Ukraine and Belorussia), and Georgia, where various protests and demonstrations occurred and many national scholars spoke out against the new policies. Since this opposition, Moscow has backed off somewhat, but there is no indication that the overall goal of Russification has been abandoned." http://www.oxuscom.com/lang-policy.htm RUSSIFICATION. Starry eyed people like you make me understand why history repeats and repeats and repeats. |