A number of readers have written to ask why I wrote an apology to Michelle Rhee when I had not been the one to speak the offending words (“Asian bitch”). I wasn’t even present when the words were spoken.
Frankly, the story focused on the negative, rather than the reasons that the rally was happening. The story presented a false, demeaning, and hostile portrait of the rally. It was akin to the stories about Occupy Wall Street that presented a peaceful assemblage of citizens exercising their First Amendment right to assemble as if they were a dangerous mob. Perhaps we should ask the reporter Michele McNeil of Education Week to apologize for her misrepresentation of the parents and teachers who assembled peaceably to protest school closings, high-stakes testing, privatization, and other abuses, while ignoring our positive message about the importance of providing every school with the resources it needs to succeed–with small classes, librarians, guidance counselors, social workers, the arts, physical education, a full curriculum, and professional working conditions.
Let me explain my apology for a term I did not utter or even hear.
A reader on this blog asked me my reaction to the ethnic slur made referring to Rhee. I wrote a comment, then decided to say it louder in a post.
I don’t play by the same rules as Rhee. She goes around the nation insulting teachers and trying to persuade the public to support reactionary legislatures and governors who take away their right to have a collective voice, cut their pensions and their health benefits, and remove any job security from them. That’s wrong and I will say it’s wrong again and again.
But I won’t condone the use of ethnic or racial slurs.
My rules include civility, courtesy, fairness, and reason. Is it fair that someone who makes $50,000 to give a speech for one hour attacks teachers who make that much in a year? Is it fair that she belittles people whose jobs are so hard and so valuable to society?
I don’t think so. I will argue it, say it, and insist upon it. But without any slurs based or race, ethnicity, or gender.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
You’re absolutely right, it’s about the issues.
This is great. As you say, that sort of racist, sexist language has no place in civil discourse, and despite our differences, we must all remain civil. Your reminder to everyone about this speaks volumes about you, Diane. Thank you for taking the time to take this stand against hate speech.
Last time I checked, “Asian” was not a perjorative, but an accepted adjective.
To insist it is racist reveals a condescending, racial superiority.
Those who are destroying public education by chopping it up and selling it to the highest bidder by enabling charters (siphoning money, parent triggering) are B****es and B****rds and history will uphold this judgment.
It may have been brute to say B****, but it was accurate.
Furthermore, It was necessary to identify which B**** was the focus of the conversation to distinguish from other education (de)formers like Levesque (Executive Director for the Foundation for Florida’s Future) and Allen (founder, Center for Educational Reform and self-proclaimed author of ALEC Parent Trigger language).
By providing the qualifier “Asian,” listeners had no doubt which female education (de)former was the point of the paragraph.
I know and have worked with Ceresta.
She is NOT racist.
She is harshly critical of the individuals and corporations that are turning public education into a profit feeding-frenzy.
Regards,
Shawn Beightol
http://www.shawnbeightol.com
Seems reasonable to me to apologize for use of that term when you were part of the group that organized the meeting. Seems reasonable to also note that you were not the person who made the comment.
For those interested in helping improve education (which I think includes everyone participating here), here are a few suggestions from an outstanding district and an outstanding charter public school educator.
http://hometownsource.com/2013/04/10/joe-nathan-what-advice-do-you-have-for-caring-educators/
For the record, Joe Nathan, I did not organize the Occupy event nor was I on the organizing committee. I was invited to speak and gladly accepted. I arrived after the opening remarks and did not hear what was later so controversial. It was a wonderful opportunity for people who care about public education in the United States to meet and share ideas.
Sorry for the mistake.
The left is well known for its politics of personal vilification. That you defend Ceresta’s use of “Asian” as a way of rallying her troops against her opponents by appealing to white, black and Hispanic envy of the perceived superior competence of Chinese, Indian, Korean, and Japanese students suggests you are as much a part of the culture of incivility as any stereotypical tea party red neck. Asterisks do not purify the well water of civil discussion. Granted, Diane Ravitch tries to set a higher tone, but nevertheless engages in the same kind of all or nothing thinking as all but two or three of the posters on this blog. My personal conclusion is that what we see here is pure interest polemics fueling the moral indignation at union jobs lost. In my view it is at least debatable that the public schools have done more harm than good to the nation as a whole by preaching that the government is the only true source of ultimate good in a society. Rather the main source of good in any society is the character of the individuals in it, and to the extent that the institutions of the society promote dependency rather than self-reliance, they do harm. It may even be possible that multiplying the sources of education funded by public revenues will promote a small degree of increase in proactive self reliance in education. Judging by the abuses which Diane so well turns up here, that is a rather small possibility, I must admit. That so many excellent teachers are being railroaded out of the “profession” (I think of it as a craft guild) is a disgrace, but their long time tolerance of the statist lie when times were good is part of their karma. Pity though.
I think Diane’s apology shows her, as always, as a good role model. Although the Education Week article should not have led with a comment unrelated to education, it is up to our side to make it harder for the media to do that. As the article made clear, Diane leads the charge against the pseudo-reform movement, and the article ended by quoting her:
“Ravitch criticized the Education Department for being allied with ‘some of the wealthiest people in America’ and ‘aligned against public education, against teachers, against children, and against good education.’
“‘What we have is a destruction strategy,’ said Ravitch, who pointed to state and federal policies supporting charter schools, vouchers, and merit pay.”
Diane thus feels a responsibility to call on us to stick to the issues. We don’t need anything else.
It’s a little silly to lump the use of personifications in one political camp or another. It is impossible to have a meaningful conversation in a pluralistic world without adjectives:
In the last presidential campaign, we heard “African-American anti-christ” (re: Obama) or “african-american cheater” (Cain)…
When I read insults like the above, I do not see the negativity being placed on the racial qualifier/adjective, but on the noun which the adjective qualifies. Neither of these insults I remind you of here is a judgment on a race, rather, they pin-point/identify the object of the insult – very clearly the individual.
They do not constitute a broad brush categorizing all Asians as b****es, or all African-Americans as cheaters or religious figures.
No doubt, calling anyone b**** or anti-christ or cheater is an insult and ad hominem, but I insist that to call any of these racial, including Asian b****, reveals a hidden rascist/superiority complex in the responder.
Perhaps my psychology accounts for how I hear the phase, but I still think “Asian” is not a mere neutral identifier, but a racial intensifier.
I think the other thing is that the wrongness of Ms. Rhee’s positions doesn’t originate from her being of Asian descent or being unlikable or a woman. I don’t think. If she’s even unlikable, which I couldn’t say since I’ve never met her. So, not only is it wholly unacceptable on a name calling basis, it’s also completely besides the point.
Diane,
You were right to apologize for one reason:
It’s not a question of who said it (although that person or people should be addressed for preventive reasons at future events).
It’s a matter of us representing each other. We are all in this together, and when even one of us does something to weaken the cause, we weaken ourselves individually and the collective whole as well.
That does no one any good.
Anyone in either camp will lower our credibility if we start attacking reformers for the wrong reasons.
Anyone who knows me knows how I feel about Michelle Rhee. It’s her politics and leadership I detest. And I will fight her politics with every last dying breathe I have if I can help it.
But a slur against her gender is one against all women, bad and good. This goes for any other inherent trait of hers. An angry mention of her Asian decendency is a slam against all Asians.
We must remember: it’s the content of one’s character that counts.
Thank you for apologizing, Diane.
Ms. Rhee, if you are reading this, I sincerely apologize to you as well if someone referred to you in these terms. Yet, I can also tell you that you are so wrong in your approach to poverty, education, and unions, that you are the antithesis of an ally to me, an NBC public school teacher who teaches low income, high needs immigrant children.
Many people said that you should not have apologized for something you did not do, but people do that all the time, as in “I’m sorry that happened to you.”
That said, I still wish you hadn’t because it drew attention to the unfortunate situation. If I hadn’t read it here, I wouldn’t have known about it. Oh well.
Linda,
Believe me, this incident would have been used by the corporate reform smear machine to attack those of us fighting for change. That machine never sleeps.
Linda Johnson: I agree with your first paragraph—and I appreciate your many postings on this blog.
However, I must respectfully disagree with your second paragraph. If I may, two points.
1), As a minor technical point, better to “head things off at the pass” or heed the old saying “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” If Diane doesn’t bring this up now, the edubullies are sure to do it in the future—and perhaps even misattribute it [please refer to the “Nazi” nonsense that they tried to stick on Diane not too long ago]. This falls into the category of debate strategies.
2), IMHO, the major point is doing the right thing. Always. Not when it’s convenient or self-aggrandizing but even when it seems to—or does—hurt. Self-serving principles are not what will bring about a “better education for all.” Please consider: some of the harshest critics of public education are those fighting to save and improve it. I know—I am one of them! As far as I can tell, the owner of this blog and most of the posters on this blog fall into that category as well.
As an aside that I hope you find relevant…
Remember Michelle Rhee’s famous evasion of the simple question about where her children go to school? Chris Christie did the same, albeit with more vehemence and contempt. People may like or dislike, agree or disagree with this blog and its posters, but evasion is hardly an adjective that applies here. In fact, I sometimes get the feeling that this website might appropriately have the sub-subtitle “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” [with all due apologies to Clint Eastwood and Sergio Leone].
As it should be. Although I originally heard this in another context, I remember one of the teachers I worked with telling me about a faculty department meeting [SpecEd]. When I asked if they were able to reach agreement or even consensus on the matters they were discussing, the teacher laughed and said something like, “You know how many opinions you have when there are ten teachers in a room? Twelve!” We both laughed—please understand, there was a lot of collegiality [even with some sharp differences] among the SpecEd faculty but they were always ready to have a full discussion.
So sometimes we won’t agree with what is brought up—forget about even reaching a consensus on contentious issues.
But with Diane’s “Rules of the Road” to make sure we don’t implode or explode, let the discussion “boldly go” where no edubully wants to take it, i.e., wherever it needs to go in order to achieve a “better education for all.”
Just my opinion.
And thank you again for your postings.
🙂
Oops!
Correct to “evasion is hardly a word that applies here”—and I can’t blame that one on autocorrect or faulty copy-and-paste.
My bad
😦
You have all given excellent reasons why it was probably for the best that Diane apologized. Also, I was thinking this morning that when a person is in charge of an organization, an event, a group of students etc. and someone makes a very rude remark, that person (in charge) usually feels obliged to apologize.
Krazy: Thank you for the nice compliment. I appreciate your postings also. And thanks, again, to Diane, for giving us all the opportunity to unite and to express our concerns about the fraud that parades as “reform.” The good news is that each day there is another story that exposes this fraud. In today’s Los Angeles Times, there is a story about the conviction of two more charter school “operators” who have stolen money from public school children (“Ivy charter’s operators guilty”). The truth is coming out, as I always knew it would.
Education “reform” is really about siphoning off school tax money for personal gain and soon most citizens will know about it.
I appreciate Diane’s open acknowledgement of the incident whether or not it would have reflected badly on her personally as a participant and supporter of this event. We must all take responsibility in one way or another when these unfortunate lapse of judgment, decorum and human sensitivity occur. Group psychology is a dangerous influence and takes judicious and expert leadership when organizing large events. Energizing and stirring emotions can be effective in building grassroots movements, but a focus on the real mission and principles keeps it on track. This group’s mission to end high stakes testing is an honorable one and the movement is building. As more of our parents, policymakers and the public become more educated to the damages of high stakes testing ( and the futility if it), the mission will be accomplished. Many thanks to those advocates of public education who give of their time, money and love to participate in these many events nationwide. You do make a difference. http://www.saveourschoolsmarch.org
Linda Johnson: most excellent reference!
🙂
For anyone viewing this discussion section I include the link to the LATimes article she mentioned: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lausd-charter-20130406,0,515080.story
This whole discussion reminds of something that it has taken me a long time to really appreciate. Diane doesn’t have a staff of 120 like Michelle Rhee. She doesn’t have the billions of Bill Gates. She doesn’t have the bully pulpit of Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. She doesn’t have an ALEC standing behind her in the shadows using its far-reaching insider political connections to rewrite the laws of entire states.
She has only one truly decisive advantage: to speak out in such a manner, to conduct herself in such a manner, that by speech and behavior she makes a compelling case for a “better education for all.” To show in practice what moral leadership in the service of a righteous cause look like.
Yes, hired help and money and bully pulpits and political connections help a lot, a whole lot. But “resources” that can be counted up and totaled is all the edubullies and their accountabully underlings understand. Moral leadership is a complete mystery to them because it can’t be bought and measured and VAMinized.
So let’s hit them with what they fear the most: compassion, honesty, logic, facts, behavior that matches the rhetoric and rhetoric that matches the behavior.
So what if they cry foul? They only brought it on themselves.
🙂
As a teacher still trying to enter the full-time job market, I see anyone who is trying to upset the establishment as positive. The establishment being those in power who do not want to change anything that might weaken that power. I see unions as part of that establishment. I want great benefits and job security, but I don’t have that right now either. I just want to teach, desperately, while I still have time. I don’t need a union, I need a classroom. So I see Ms. Ravitch and Ms. Rhee as defenders of students, they just have different ideas of how to protect them. Yet, as pure as the Network for Public Education’s ideas are, they will never happen with the current establishment in place. It’s a pipe dream at this point. That is why I would rather see the politicians, union bosses and district administrators washed away, so we could start anew. It will take radical change. I fear it will have to get much worse before it gets better.
Rob Raphael, good luck getting a job. There might be many openings as there are many older teachers leaving. You may not get great benefits. You may get none.Your salary may depend on your students’ test scores. And then again, you may find there are no jobs because the politicians are replacing teachers with computers and increasing class sizes.
I’m already finding that out, it’s one reason why I do not have a job. I live in Illinois. Our district is still owed over $1 million from 2003, and millions more since then. We are cutting left and right, closing schools, increasing class sizes to ridiculous amounts. I see benefits being targeted. It’s a very bad situation. But I’m working 50+ hours a week now, and I’m getting no benefits, and have no job security. It’s the real world. It sucks. But I’d trade my current job for a teaching job without benefits right now.
Municipal and state finances are in very bad shape, and Illinois is one of the worst. This is the storm cloud that looms over all of these debates about school closings, class sizes, the charter explosion, and pay and benefits. It will likely get worse and have dramatic impacts on all public services, including education, unless it’s dealt with. And frankly I think it may be too late. I feel bad for you, I feel bad for my kids, I feel bad for myself.
Municipal and state finances are only in bad shape because politicians have been using the public trough as a goody bad to hand out treats to their cronies for decades now. Read the book RETIREMENT HEIST.
There are a lot of reasons, Dienne. Most of them involve the conscious decisions by lawmakers and city and state executives, often at the urging of lobbyists, to defer the costs of running government to the future rather than enact appropriate tax policies (or make unpopular decisions to reduce government services). For non-federal government entities, which can’t print money and must balance budgets, there is a sharp breaking point. We haven’t hit it yet, but it gets closer every year.
I forgot to add that just because someone is Asian does not make them a bad person nor make their intentions poor. And just because someone is rich doesn’t make them a bad person or make their intentions poor. People of wealth are not necessarily members of the establishment.
Love your open-minded attitude, Rob. Do you speak a 2nd language? That helps to get a teaching job in some communities. For example – Spanish is a very valuable language for a teacher to have, and not super hard to learn.
What is your area of certification? Have you checked in neighboring states that may be willing to accept your Illinois certificate?
For what it’s worth, many of us experienced challenges finding our first public school teaching jobs. (I started in 1970) If you can add some skills (such as a 2nd language) it can help you find a job.
Get your Michigan certificate. They have a lot of charters and they are hiring all the time due to high staff turnover rates. The pay is lower and the benefits stink. You might find your current job was better than the charter job. (There’s a reason why there is high staff turnover). I don’t understand your solution though. Why should other’s have to lose their good jobs? Politicians and others are starving out the schools which makes it harder to get a good job. There are a lot of teachers in Michigan who need jobs too. It’s hard to get hired in good districts.
At no point did I offer a ‘solution’ of any kind. I was merely stating opinion; that those who dread losing their benefits are simply the last bastion of workers finding out what the real world is like. Why should any of us lose benefits? I suppose because there isn’t money to pay us what we deserve. Again, it sucks, but for many of us this is old news. Welcome to our world.
I agree that Ms. Rhee’s ethnicity is off-point. I’m not entirely sure that her gender is, given that her appearance is, I strongly believe, a factor in getting her face so prominently displayed in print and broadcast media.
What should be relevant, too, is her class and upbringing, her having attended private schools in greater Toledo, and of course her pedigree from the Broad and TFA worlds.
As for calling her a “bitch,” I wrote about this yesterday. It’s not unusual for people who are outraged by broad and dishonest attacks that hit close to home to respond with some epithets. I needn’t list some of the more common ones leveled at men (and I make no bones about being a regular hurler of insults, as well as employer of satire, lampoon, and other literary styles that are offensive to some (most particularly, I hope, the targets). I guess calling Michelle Rhee something that generally only applies to men would be more than a bit odd. So the insults that are gender-specific are pretty limited when the target is female.
There will never be complete agreement on what weapons to employ in this or any life-and-death struggle (as, I believe, the education and culture wars truly are). And I don’t ask that you, Diane, accept my standards, either in your own choice of language or tolerance of mine.
But I think it reasonable to ask that you try to understand the rage, and to cut a bit of slack to those who are frustrated enough to express it. Sometimes, words are the only legal weapons people have at their disposal. Naming Michelle Rhee as a “bitch” strikes me as fair. Bringing her ethnicity into it seems remarkably stupid. But then, I think it would be stupid to attack Joel Klein as a “money-grubbing Christ-killer” instead of, say, a tool of various billionaires. Similarly, I wouldn’t call Arne Duncan a “WASP child-abuser,” (although it’s tempting), rather than a soulless catspaw of privatizers, conservatives, and neo-liberals.
I do understand why you apologized. I don’t mind that you did. I know your standards and respect your right to have them. Were I in your shoes, I might well have decried the use of the word “Asian.” I don’t see that as an insult and it’s irrelevant. “Bitch”? Not so much. Just my viewpoint.
I, for one, learn from your style of verbal polemics and enjoy them. I am finding that my own efforts in that direction have been uniformly unproductive. Jay Leno lampooned the current Chief of State of North Korea by saying he looked like one of those people women hate because he prematurely fired his missiles. Not ethnic, except for the picture on the screen. We no longer are permitted to say “Islamic” by the AP style book. I haven’t heard “rag heads” in years, and “gooks” in decades. One I like to use myself is “Country Club Republican,” a species, (think RINO) that I personally detest, but it doesn’t quite carry the bite one would want. As a student of the 18th Century in England, I can hardly want to discard lampoon and satire but I am finding that I perhaps do not have quite the wit to bring it off. I do, however, wish you well in your efforts to defend your side and attack mine. I do believe we are in a life and death struggle culturally and educationally.
I was also at the rally, heard many wonderful, thoughtful speeches and missed the offending comment. I applaud you Diane for taking the high road. It’s a shame that with so much happening at the rally the reporter chose to focus on one line from one speaker. Rhee has been a divisive figure who gets lots of coverage for her self promoting tactics and has irresponsibly caused damage to public schools. It’s time for some healing and an end to the “reform” that has been a cash cow for a few and a national disaster for teachers, students, and parents.
You rock, Diane. You are showing yourself to be classy, and passionate about fairness.
I left my comment on the Huffpo piece. I thought it was ridiculous to write a story based on a few inappropriate comments and use it as a way to slur the whole mission of the SOS conference. It would have been better if those individuals took responsibility for their actions and issued the apologies. I can only hope they realize how their actions cast a dark shadow on a very important conference and rally and do the right thing and step down.
Diane,
While your apology demonstrates the laudable ethics you bring to a debate, the same cannot be said for the news report itself.
Education Week frequently functions as a propaganda vehicle for so-called education reformers, who fund the publication directly. That this repulsive statement, clearly an outlier among opponents of the hostile takeover of public education, was trumpeted in the news report’s opening paragraph, tarring by implication the entire event and movement, is itself something to be pointed out and challenged.
Does Ed Week lead off its articles about Arne Duncan by referring to his vicious comment that Katrina was the best thing to happen to public education in New Orleans? Does Ed Week lead off its articles about Michelle Rhee by referring to her persistent lies and slander against DC teachers unfairly fired as a result of her policies, whom she accused of raping students?
No, that would go against the faux “objectivity” that dominates officially-sanctioned, billionaire-subsidized media, which uncritically reports the lies and slanders of the powerful with a straight face, while highlighting the anger and bigotry of one individual, and implying that it represents a movement opposing the self-interested policies of its funders.
The comment about Rhee was disgraceful, but so was the news report that, in its very structure, dishonestly implied that it represented the event and its participants.
While those of us fighting for the values represented by public education at its best are obliged hold ourselves to the highest standards, Michelle Rhee and her ilk deserve no apologies, but only implacable opposition.
If anyone should be apologized to, it is the participants and supporters of SOS, who were made vulnerable to being smeared by an ugly statement that, when the shameful history of the so-called education reform movement is written, will not even rate a footnote.
You are a ‘classy lady” with good manners.
Anyone who is a speaker at a rally should not use those types of slurs. I despise Rhee and her low-down tactics. She looked like a complete insensitive idiot when she fired a principal on tv. She is a self-serving jerk. Diane, you didn’t need to apologize for something you didn’t do. It was good though that you made it clear that you thought it was inappropriate. I understand the speaker’s dislike of Rhee. I really
I really wish she would be indicted for the cheating in DC. How is she any different than the super. in Atlanta that got indicted???
Couldn’t agree more. I’m not a fan if Rhee and her proproganda but she doesn’t deserve to have the slur hurled at her. Great post. Keep fighting!
You made the right decision and I appreciate you!
That’s the ultimate criterion we all think with: Fairness. What’s unfair about making $50,000 a speech if she can get some idiot to pay her. Bill and Hillary can make as much. Obama can make 6 times more when he steps down. He won’t be a billionaire, unless, like Al Gore, he is given lots of stock in expanding companies. Why this hostility to making money when it’s someone you disagree with but not a word about making money by people you agree with. Michelle Rhee may be pandering, but so are you, Diane, to low salary, low information teachers. It’s beneath you.
Harlan, I can’t speak for Diane, but I don’t resent people making money. It’s a matter of how they make it that I tend to question. Thus, I’m very unhappy with people in math education, some of whom I know personally and long considered friends, allies,and colleagues, who appear to be jumping on the Common Core gravy train. My analysis of how the Common Core has been positioned to appeal to people I would generally consider progressive mathematics educators by throwing them a bone in the first section (the one BEFORE the actual content standards that will be the basis of the assessment, the textbooks, the professional development, etc.) suggests that some folks are happily swallowing a load of malarkey in order to justify making beaucoup bucks off of the never-ending transition process. And trust me: there is a LOT of money to be made in that area.
I realize that if someone says, “Hey, I’m not pandering. I really believe in the Common Core math standards,” that I am engaging in armchair psychoanalysis cum mind-reading to claim that the reality of what’s at play might be a bit different and that I hear a lot of what sounds like rationalization. But that’s what I do believe I’m hearing and have to call ’em as I see and hear ’em.
So at least in this case, it’s not just those I disagree with in general whose motives and actions I’m calling into question around profiting from something. That said, I think Michelle Rhee is a shameless and shameful self-promoter, a snake-oil saleswoman of the worst kind, and the media has helped make her into another fraudulent miracle-working superstar, perhaps the biggest one right now when it comes to public education. She deserves to be prosecuted for her role in the DC cheating scandals, not lauded as a savior of our children. If there’s any justice, she will be.
How about the fact that she gave up custody of her own children to Huffman who now is head of education in Tennessee and they both met at TFA. What kind of woman gives up custody of their children I might ask. This is her psychological makeup. Could it be her career is more important and if so what business does she have telling anyone what to do with their children?
Nobody’s divorce arrangements are any of your business, and aren’t relevant to any discussion here.
Oh no. Look at that whopping double negative. I think I just suggested we turn this discussion over to the Jerry Springer Show.
while UOO organizers are a group of six, we are also comprised of individuals, each of of us now grappling with how to respond with compassion, empathy, deep soul searching and a way to heal the injury that has been caused to so many as a result of the language choice used publicly at our rally aimed to fight, not perpetuate, racist practices in our schools and society. So speaking for myself, as an individual dedicated to the fight against hate, discrimination, and harmful policies aimed at children, I am deeply sorry for the offense, hurt and/or divisiveness this incident has caused for so many
Thank you for speaking out, Morna.
As the mother of an Asian child, I’m grateful to you for responding to the remarks employing race in a manner both offensive and irrelevant to the issue they were discussing. Your apology, while not necessary as you were not the offender, speaks against what happened and that’s an important point. Sometimes, it is tremendously valuable to apologize for others’ behavior simply to show that one does not agree with them, nor does one stand with them.
These last two comments show that this problem isn’t really about good press or bad, or using nice language when addressing an opponent. Unity is the core of any defense of public education.
Racist language reveals an underlying set of assumptions that strikes at a WHOLE GROUP of people who may not have been its intended target. The Asian American communities in our cities are a vital part of our movement. At the same time, black and Hispanic neighborhoods are under such brutal attack that they’re losing their schools altogether, and they’re a vital part of our movement. What part of “united” do we not understand here?
Ceresta’s chilling explanation of her choice of words is a wake-up call for community organizers in Boston, for instance. We can’t exclude Asian American residents of district 2 from our call to defend public education just because the schools (and children) being most savagely targeted are in Roxbury or Dorchester.
And honest people, of any ethnicity, can’t turn away from their emergency just because one representative of the devastated schools in Miami resorted to a toxic phrase to unite her own faction.