New Orleans: A Failed Experiment

By dianeravitch
April 29, 2024 //
12

The founding myth of the corporate reform movement is the rebirth and transformation of the public schools of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Most of the city’s public schools suffered physical damage because of the horrendous storm. Large numbers of the students and teachers were scattered after the storm. The state of Louisiana moved in aggressively: it lowered the bar at which a school was deemed to be failing. It took control of most of the public schools and turned them over to charter operators. It fired all of the teachers, most of whom were African-American, disbanding the teachers’ union. The charter operators hired large numbers of Teach for America recruits. The media hailed the experiment in privatization as a success story. Numerous states followed the lead of New Orleans, turning over their lowest-performing schools to charter operators. Michigan created the Education Achievement Authority. Tennessee created the Achievement School District. North Carolina and Nevada launched similar but smaller experimental districts. All of them failed.

Now comes a report that the nearly all-charter New Orleans district did not live up to its hype.

Dr. Barbara Ferguson 
Research on Reforms, Inc. 

April 2024

Following Hurricane Katrina, a newly enacted state law identified schools that scored below the state average as failing and subject to take-over. The state then took-over 107 of New Orleans’ 120 public schools and turned them into charter schools. Last year’s scores showed that 56 of New Orleans’ 68 public schools had scores below the state average.*

Thus, after nearly twenty years, over 80% of New Orleans schools are still below the state average. This charter school experiment has been a failure.

Of the five worst performing high schools taken-over, only one now scores above the state average. Two are still below the state average. Another was closed and then reopened as a campus to expand the Willow selective admission charter school. The status of the other, Walter Cohen, is unclear. Recall that the New Orleans College Prep Charter took-over Cohen High School, operating its selective charter school on one floor, while leaving the failing Cohen students on the other floors. Thus, we learned that the take-over of a failing school simply meant taking-over the building, not the failing students in the building.

Of the five highest performing high schools taken-over, they continue to be the highest performing except for one, McDonogh #35, which is now below the state average. These schools, except for McDonogh #35, collectively received over $5 million in Charter School Grant Funds. The five worst performing high schools received nothing in Charter School Grant Funds following the takeover.The Louisiana law, which termed charter schools “an experiment,” also stated that they were to “serve the best interests of at-risk” children and youth.

But the legislative auditor found in 2022 that for the past six years, more than 1 in 5 charter schools failed to meet requirements on enrollment of children from low-income families.

Louisiana’s “state takeover” law required schools below the state average to be taken-over. Thus, half of the schools should have been taken-over because half are below the state average and half are above. Yet, only the New Orleans’ schools below the state average were taken-over. Targeting New Orleans seems to again be popular with our new governor.

Research on Reforms, Inc. consistently reported on the status of the state-takeover through its website and a published book, “Outcomes of the State Takeover of the New Orleans Schools.” This will be the final of its outreach, which ends with hope that our legislature will one day enact laws that provide equity and excellence in education for our New Orleans children and youth.

Barbara Ferguson, Attorney and Co-founder 
Charles Hatfield, Co-founder 
Research on Reforms, Inc.

Comments to 

bferguson@researchonreforms.org

Research On Reforms Website

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reform, Education Industry, Failure, New Orleans, Privatization

ACLU: How to Protect Free Speech on Campus

By dianeravitch
April 28, 2024 //
27

The American Civil Liberties Union issued a statement to advise college and university presidents about responding to student protests.

We write in response to the recent protests that have spread across our nation’s university and college campuses, and the disturbing arrests that have followed. We understand that as leaders of your campus communities, it can be extraordinarily difficult to navigate the pressures you face from politicians, donors, and faculty and students alike. You also have legal obligations to combat discrimination and a responsibility to maintain order. But as you fashion responses to the activism of your students (and faculty and staff), it is essential that you not sacrifice principles of academic freedom and free speech that are core to the educational mission of your respected institution…The American Civil Liberties Union released a statement describing how universities should react to demonstrations on campus.

The statement begins:

Schools must not single out particular viewpoints for censorship, discipline, or disproportionate punishment

These protections extend to both students and faculty, and to speech that supports either side of the conflict. Outside the classroom, including on social media, students and professors must be free to express even the most controversial political opinions without fear of discipline or censure. Inside the classroom, speech can be and always has been subject to more restrictive rules to ensure civil dialogue and a robust learning environment. But such rules have no place in a public forum like a campus green. Preserving physical safety on campuses is paramount; but “safety” from ideas or views that one finds offensive is anathema to the very enterprise of the university.

First, university administrators must not single out particular viewpoints — however offensive they may be to some members of the community — for censorship, discipline, or disproportionate punishment. Viewpoint neutrality is essential. Harassment directed at individuals because of their race, ethnicity, or religion is not, of course, permissible. But general calls for a Palestinian state “from the river to the sea,” or defenses of Israel’s assault on Gaza, even if many listeners find these messages deeply offensive, cannot be prohibited or punished by a university that respects free speech principles.

Schools must protect students from discriminatory harassment and violence

Second, both public and private universities are bound by civil rights laws that guarantee all students equal access to education, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. This means that schools can, and indeed must, protect students from discriminatory harassment on the basis of race or national origin, which has been interpreted to include discrimination on the basis of “shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics,” or “citizenship or residency in a country with a dominant religion or distinct religious identity.”

So, while offensive and even racist speech is constitutionally protected, shouting an epithet at a particular student or pinning an offensive sign to their dorm room door can constitute impermissible harassment, not free speech. Antisemitic or anti-Palestinian speech targeted at individuals because of their ethnicity or national origin constitutes invidious discrimination, and cannot be tolerated. Physically intimidating students by blocking their movements or pursuing them aggressively is unprotected conduct, not protected speech. It should go without saying that violence is never an acceptable protest tactic.

Speech that is not targeted at an individual or individuals because of their ethnicity or national origin but merely expresses impassioned views about Israel or Palestine is not discrimination and should be protected. The only exception for such untargeted speech is where it is so severe or pervasive that it denies students equal access to an education — an extremely demanding standard that has almost never been met by pure speech. One can criticize Israel’s actions, even in vituperative terms, without being antisemitic. And by the same token, one can support Israel’s actions in Gaza and condemn Hamas without being anti-Muslim. Administrators must resist the tendency to equate criticism with discrimination. Speech condoning violence can be condemned, to be sure. But it cannot be the basis for punishment, without more.

Schools can announce and enforce reasonable content-neutral protest policies but they must leave ample room for students to express themselves

Third, universities can announce and enforce reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on protest activity to ensure that essential college functions can continue. Such restrictions must be content neutral, meaning that they do not depend on the substance of what is being communicated, but rather where, when, or how it is being communicated. Protests can be limited to certain areas of campus and certain times of the day, for example. These policies must, however, leave ample room for students to speak to and to be heard by other members of the community. And the rules must not only be content neutral on their face; they must also be applied in a content-neutral manner. If a university has routinely tolerated violations of its rules, and suddenly enforces them harshly in a specific context, singling out particular views for punishment, the fact that the policy is formally neutral on its face does not make viewpoint-based enforcement permissible.

Open the link to finish reading the statement.

Categories Academic Freedom, Accountability, Democracy, Disruption, Freedom of Speech, Higher Education

Indiana: Jennifer McCormick for Governor!!

By dianeravitch
April 28, 2024 //
0

Indiana has plunged headlong into privatization of its-once-beloved public schools.

Fortunately, there is a knowledgeable candidate for Governor who has promised to stop the destruction of public education.

Jennifer McCormick is a career educator who began as a special education teacher, then became a language arts teacher, a principal and a district superintendent.

She was elected Indiana State Superintendent of Public Instruction in 2016; she ran as a Republican. She served out her four-year term and switched parties in 2021.

McCormick wrote on Twitter:

Indiana GOP’s school privatization efforts have diverted 1.6B of tax dollars away from public schools, and the majority of communities do not have families and/or private schools participating. As governor, I will champion for Indiana to pause funding school privatization.

At the NPE conference in D.C. in 2023, JenniferMcCormick and me.

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reform, Education Industry, Elections, Extremism, Indiana, Privatization, Vouchers

Rick Wilson: The “Both-Sides” Argument is Dangerous

By dianeravitch
April 28, 2024 //
11

Rick Wilson, a Never-Trump Republican and a founder of The Lincoln Project, warns about the danger of normalizing Trump:

I’m seeing a lot of traditional, DC “bothsides” reporting lately, arguing that this is at some level a “normal” election between a center-left Democratic party and a center-right Republican party.


This morning, Axios published a piece by Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei titled “Behind the Curtain: America’s reality distortion machine,” which caused a stir in political media circles.


It leads out with a question: “Here’s a wild thought experiment: What if we’ve been deceived into thinking we’re more divided, more dysfunctional, and more defeated than we actually are?” and proceeds to make some pretty good arguments about why we’re not a dystopian hellscape. I think they missed the big point, and this piece will stand out as a Washington Normalcy Bias exemplar for a long time.


My friend Molly Jong-Fast lit them up on Morning Joe,
She had precisely the right response: “But you understand that the conventional framing elevates the autocrat.”


No, not every American — in fact, not even a majority — is locked in the day to day of political struggle. Yes, there are silos. Yes, the algorithmic hypnosis of social media is real.


I cede all those points. America is a nation filled with hundreds of millions of people who aren’t partisan jihadis, left or right. There really is a desire for basic decency, decoupled from political rage, induced or not.

They’re not wrong to make these points, and the America they describe is one we should crave—not being involved in politics every moment of the day is a luxury only present in stable democracies.


But they ignore the existential issue underpinning this all.


We aren’t in a nation where the sensible center will survive if Donald Trump wins.


Only one side of the political argument wants their president to govern like a dictator. Only one side believes that the President is above the law — if his name is Donald Trump. Only one side of the political equation mounted an armed attack on the United States Capitol.


Only one side has welcomed the “no enemies to our right” philosophy, which means their party winks and nods at the alt-reich, the white nationalists, and the rest of the Daily Stormer crowd. Only one side is banning books, diving deeply into the seas of culture war cruelty and persecution.


Only one side backs America’s enemies abroad and promises to hand Europe over to Vladimir Putin on a plate. I could recite the Bill of Condemnation all day, but you understand the point.


The political movement that embraces the aforementioned horrors is MAGA, and its sole leader is Donald Trump.

Once again, the world is playing chess, and Donald Trump is eating the pieces and crapping on the board, and instead of horror, the reaction is a shrug.


This isn’t a regular election with typical outcomes.


Ordinary people living ordinary lives who think politics doesn’t matter and that the world will go on as it has can’t grapple with what happens in a post-American Presidency. It seems a lot of Washington reporters can’t either.


Normalcy bias is the best friend of authoritarians. If you think the algo-driven bubble on social media is robust, nothing tops normalcy bias. This cognitive bias can play into the hands of authoritarian regimes or leaders in a few ways:


It plays to the natural tendency for people to underestimate the possibility of a disaster, dictator, or disruptive event coming to the fore. It lets people assume that things will continue as normal because they’ve always been that way. (Berlin, 1936, anyone?)


It lulls people into complacency: they assume things will continue as they always have, and like frogs boiling in a slow pot, they may fail to recognize creeping authoritarianism and the erosion of democratic norms and civil liberties until it’s too late.


It makes people—even people reporting on it professionally—miss clear signals that a movement or regime is becoming more authoritarian, even when its leaders lay out their plans in broad daylight.

Once you say, “It can’t happen here,” there’s a high likelihood it’s already happening.
The normalcy bias makes people slow to react and resist authoritarian encroachments because they don’t perceive the seriousness of the threat until it’s too late.


Normalcy bias also rears its ugly head after the damage is done. Authoritarian actions are emergencies, you see. “The Caravan! Antifa! Transing the kids!” demand temporary measures lulling citizens into acceptance of the worst…and the temporary measures seem to last forever.

People convinced that the current system is immutable are less likely to make contingency plans or organize resistance against potential authoritarianism taking root. Trust me, the Never Trump folks screaming into the void for the last decade can tell you all about this one.
It’s tempting to hope that societal inertia in the center will overcome the energy and danger on the MAGA flank.


It hasn’t, and it won’t.

Categories Bigotry, Cheating, Corruption, Cruelty, Democracy, Disruption, Elections, Ethics, Evil, Extremism, Fascism, Trump

Jess Piper: It’s My State Too! I’m Not Moving!

By dianeravitch
April 28, 2024 //
8

Jess Piper lives in rural Missouri. She is a fearless progressive and a fighter. She has repeatedly called on the Democratic Party to contest every seat, even in rural areas, where voters usually have no choice. She will be a featured speaker at the next convening of the Network for Public Education in April 2025 in Columbus, Ohio.

She wrote recently:

“You don’t like it? Move.” 

This sort of advice is often given to me in online spaces when I say something truthful about Missouri that irritates folks on the right. When I talk about abortion bans, I should move to California. When I talk about funding schools, I should move to New York. When I speak out against harmful policies, I’m just an out of place, out of touch, liberal.

I’ve been told to move to California or New York many times, and while I have visited both states, and appreciate the CA beaches and the NY atmosphere, I wouldn’t move to either state for two very important reasons: 1) This is where my children and grandchildren live. 2) This is my state too.

Here’s something that may interest you; I hear the same rhetoric, although presented in a much more caring way, from progressives in states with better representation. My blue state friends have given me the “just move” advice on several occasions. They fear that I am in danger or that specific policies will hurt my family. They are justified in thinking I should move, but what they don’t realize is that moving will eventually harm them. If all of the like-minded congregate in progressive states, we will all eventually be overwhelmed by the regressive states. 

If we don’t contest and protest in every GOP-dominated state, the bad policies will leach into all the states.

I will preface this essay by saying that I understand that not all folks have the privilege I have to stay and fight. Those with trans children, those impacted by our state healthcare failings and childcare issues, those dealing with things I can’t even begin to understand have every reason to flee states like Missouri. I make absolutely no judgment on those who choose to leave. I am in solidarity with them.

If you’ve done the reading, you know that our country is slowly being swallowed up by right-wing billionaire rhetoric and policies. You likely know the long-game for this takeover was hashed out decades ago, and the way the extremists were able to do this was by taking over state legislatures and positions like the Secretary of State and the Attorney General. They have bankrolled the campaigns of State Reps and Senators, and even dip their toes into school board races.

In my state, the evolution is complete. Missouri went from a bellwether state to a radical state bent on stripping the rights of over 1/2 of the population and passing policies meant only for the wealthy. But, my leaving this state would be detrimental to other states and here’s how: GOP-dominated states create the policies that would overcome the country if left unchecked and uncontested.

None of us is safe so long as there are folks living in states that are unsafe. They will roll over us first, and you next.

The billionaires are using my state AG and other regressive state AGs to file suit to dismantle public schools. They sue to ban abortion and the medicine for self-managed abortions. They sue to stop college loan forgiveness. They sue to overturn civil rights and anti-discrimination policies. My former AG, Eric Schmitt, even sued Missouri public schools to make them stop masking procedures during a global pandemic. The worst part? He was then elected as our Senator. 

If we can’t stop these extremists in our states, they often go on to win higher office and harm the entire country.

The billionaires are also using GOP-dominated states to appoint Secretaries of States who will throw voting rights into the toilet. These SOSs have the ability to impact the nation and create the chaos we saw in the 2020 Presidential election with some states allowing fake electors that would have given the office to Trump. 

And there’s this: On January 2, 2021, during an hour-long conference call, then-President Trump pressured Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to change the state’s election results from the 2020 presidential election. The country is lucky the GA Republican Secretary of State did not fold, but we may not always be so lucky.

Progressives fighting back in regressive states are fighting for all of us. They represent the tipping point for the nation. They contest seats, they protest human rights violations, and they show up to keep the red from leaching into the blue. 

The real fight for democracy is at the state level. Activists in GOP-dominated states can’t just move…there is nowhere to go. 

If we can’t stop the slow churn toward fascism in our states, there is little hope we can stop it nationwide. So, we stay. We stand up and talk back. We link arms and fight the local corrupt policies to stop national corrupt policies.

Just move? No. I can’t. I won’t. 

This is my state too.

~Jess

Categories Education Reform

Eva Moskowitz May Expand “Success Academy” to Florida

By dianeravitch
April 27, 2024 //
8

Eva Moskowitz runs the most successful (when measured by test scores) and the most controversial charter chain in New York State. Controversial because her schools are highly regimented, “no excuses” schools where student behavior and dress are tightly monitored. Controversial because her schools have a high attrition rate and a high teacher turnover rate. Outspoken parents complain that their children were “counseled out” or pushed out due to their behavior, their test scores, or their special needs.

Eva expected to expand to 100 schools in New York City but she constantly must fight parents and community schools who oppose her methods. So long as Michael Bloomberg was mayor and Joel was chancellor of the schools, Eva got whatever she wanted. But when they left office a decade ago, Eva had to fight off her critics without the certainty that City Hall. Backed her.

Funding has never been a problem for Success Academy. The chain is a favorite of Wall Street billionaires. Eva is said to have a salary and bonuses that are nearly $1 million. She has purchased properties and leases space to her schools.

Now, Chalkbeat reports, it appears that Eva is pondering open Success Academy schools in Florida, where charter schools are booming.

Alex Zimmerman writes:

Success Academy, New York City’s largest charter operator, is considering an expansion to Florida, a major shift in strategy for the network.

Success founder and CEO Eva Moskowitz said Wednesday she is in search of friendlier terrain for expansion.

New York has been “a rather hostile political environment” for charter schools, Moskowitz testified at a Florida State Board of Education meeting Wednesday morning. She later added: “I want to be in a place that’s high-growth, that’s high-innovation, that is welcoming to parental choice.”

The network’s decision to contemplate expanding beyond New York is a notable shift, as Success has operated schools exclusively within the five boroughs since launching in 2006.

Moskowitz previously outlined aggressive plans to expand to 100 schools locally, roughly double the number that the network currently operates. But Moskowitz and other leaders have faced strong headwinds. Charter schools have fallen out of favor with many Democrats and the sector faces a strict cap on the number of schools that are allowed to operate in the state. The legislature recently allowed 14 new charters to open in New York City, but have not signaled any plans to allow dramatically more than that.

Plus, the city’s charter networks have struggled with declining enrollment in recent years, including Success, though preliminary state figures show the network now enrolls about 21,000 students, erasing pandemic-era enrollment losses. Success is currently looking to open six new schools, according to the SUNY Charter Schools Institute, which oversees Success.

Florida officials, meanwhile, are rolling out the red carpet. The State Board of Education voted Wednesday to designate Success as a “School of Hope” operator, a program designed to attract high-performing charters to the state, offering funding for construction and other startup costs.

Enrollment in Florida’s charter sector has steadily grown in recent years, educating nearly 14% of students, or roughly 400,000 children, state data show. Charters are publicly funded, but privately operated schools.

In her testimony, Moskowitz emphasized that the network’s students are overwhelmingly low-income children of color and their test scores far outpace the city’s district schools — and even affluent suburbs. She also highlighted the network’s track record of preparing students to attend competitive colleges.

“This is exactly what we were envisioning: To have a charter school network to be able to come in and really serve those populations that are in need of this kind of academic rigor, of this performance,” State Education Commissioner Manny Diaz, Jr. said at the Wednesday hearing.

But Success has also been dogged by persistent allegations that school officials push out children who are more difficult to serve, including suspending them or dialing 911when students are experiencing behavioral problems or emotional distress. In 2015, the New York Times reported that one of its Brooklyn campuses had created a “Got to Go” list of troublesome students. Success officials said the list was a mistake and have disputedthat they systematically push children out.

It’s not clear how quickly Success might move to open schools in Florida or even if they will ultimately move forward with plans to do so. A Success Academy spokesperson did not elaborate.

Open the link to continue reading.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Cruelty, Discipline and Suspensions, Education Industry, Florida, Harlem Success Academy, Privatization

Will Bunch: The Scariest Part of a Trump Rally is not Trump

By dianeravitch
April 27, 2024 //
10

Will Bunch is the national political columnist for the Philadelphia Inquirer. He attended a Trump rally recently, where he was more interested in the crowd than in the speaker. Who are the true believers who swear fealty to a man who tried to o return the 2020 election? To the man facing multiple indictments? To a billionaire who sells them sneakers and Bibles?

SCHNECKSVILLE — Even 30-mile-an-hour wind gusts whipping down from the nearby Poconos couldn’t move the bubble of Donald Trump-scented awe and alternative reality that descended on this hilltop village for about eight hours on Saturday.

And the thousands who waited hours on a single-file line that snaked around the fire department and a nearby technical college, like the endless headlights in the climax of Field of Dreams, did not want that bubble pierced by any stray jabs to remind them that Trump, who finally addressed the frigid crowd after sunset, is a criminal defendant or that Joe Biden isn’t actually America’s worst-ever president driving the nation into crime and deprivation.

Ask the one man who dared try.

He was an older gentleman from New Jersey, bespectacled, wearing an “ARMY” sweatshirt and a red Make America Great Again hat to show the multitudes of passersby that he’d once been one of them. He wouldn’t give his name, and his cause — Trump was somehow to blame for the prison time served by the Jan. 6 insurrectionist Jacob Chansley, “the QAnon Shaman” — was inscrutable. But any questioning of Trump was too much for one man in a backward baseball cap brandishing a can of Michelob Ultra, who abruptly hopped out of the line.

“I don’t like that. Get that sign out of here!” he threatened, as several on the line echoed their support. “You need to leave the immediate area.” The New Jersey man eventually slid down the line.

This Schnecksville extravaganza was the fourth Trump rally in the Mid-Atlantic that I’d attended since 2016. I go largely because I think the media still fails to understand America’s most important story of the last 10 years. U.S. democracy is staring out into the abyss not so much because of the narcissistic bluster of one alleged billionaire ex-president, but because of the people with fleece hoodies over their MAGA hats who spent hours in an April windstorm to see him.

These rallygoers are the vanguard of the 74 million who voted for Trump in 2020 and who still have him in a dead heat with Biden, according to a New York Times/Siena College poll released hours before the event — despite or maybe because of the two impeachments, the 88 felony charges, or the Project 2025 blueprint for a “Red Caesar” dictatorship. If the American Experiment grinds to a halt after Jan. 20, 2025, it will ultimately be not the fault of Trump but the everyday citizens I met Saturday who are so eager to put him back in the White House.

Things have changed a lot since I talked to folks outside of Trump’s 2016 rally in Chester County, when they were intrigued by Trump’s not-a-politician bluster and his “get-’em-out-of-here” rage at liberal protesters. Eight years later, a Trump rally has become an Orwellian celebration of an upside-down world where the lowest unemployment rate in more than 50 years is actually the worst U.S. economy ever, the nation’s cities are cesspools of violence despite a plunging crime rate, and the only person wronged on Jan. 6 was not the scores of injured cops but Ashli Babbitt, shot by “a Black police officer.”

Categories Extremism, Fraud, Trump

Jim Hightower: George Orwell Would Understand the Texas GOP: Mean and Crazy

By dianeravitch
April 27, 2024 //
6

Jim Hightower is an old-fashioned Texas liberal. He tries to understand what’s happened to his state in his blog. The GOP is just plain mean and crazy.

He writes:

If you think the GOP’s Congress of Clowns represents the fringiest, freakiest, pack of politicos that MAGA-world can hurl at us – you haven’t been to Texas.

It’s widely known, of course, that Ted Cruz, Greg Abbott, and most other top Republican officials here are obsequious Trump acolytes. Thus, Texas is infamously racing against Florida to be declared the stupidest, meanest, most-repressive state government in America, constantly making demonic attacks on women’s freedom, immigrants, voting rights, public schools, poor people, and so on. But I’m confident Texas will win this race to the bottom for one big reason: GOP crazy runs extraordinarily deep here.

We have a county-level layer of ultra-MAGA cultists constantly pressing the state’s far-right officials to march all the way to the farthest edge of extremism – then leap into absurdity. Therefore, the party officially supports abolishment of labor unions, elimination of the minimum wage, privatization of social security, legalization of machine guns, and… well, you get the drift. Now, though, local mad-dog Trumpistas are pushing their party straight into the abyss of autocracy by declaring war on H-E-B.

What’s that? H-E-B is a Texas chain of supermarkets beloved in communities throughout the state. “Beloved,” because the stores fully embrace the rich diversity of all people in our state, has affordable prices, values employees, and supports community needs.

Nonetheless, county Republican zealots screech that H-E-B violates their party ideology by accepting food stamps, opposing privatization of schools, and (horrors!) sponsoring some LBGTQ pride events. So, they’re demanding official condemnation of the grocery chain for – GET THIS – “advocating for policies contrary to the Republican Party of Texas platform.”

Yes, violating the party platform is to be criminalized. It’s the reincarnation of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four: Be MAGA… or else.

Categories BATS, Bigotry, Billionaires, Censorship, Civil Rights, Corruption, Cruelty, Democracy, Disruption, Elections, Evil, Extremism, Fascism, Freedom to Read, Guns, Ignorance, Insane, Privatization, Racism, Republicans, Stupid, Texas

World Leaders Call on Hamas to Release Hostages and Accept Ceasefire Deal

By dianeravitch
April 26, 2024 //
5

Haaretz reported that world leaders urged Hamas to accept a peace proposal:

WASHINGTON – U.S. President Joe Biden released a statement alongside the leaders of 17 other countries – all with citizens held captive in Gaza – calling upon Hamas to release the hostages in order to bring an immediate and prolonged cease-fire.

“We call for the immediate release of all hostages held by Hamas, now for over 200 days. They include our citizens. The fate of the hostages and the civilian population in Gaza, who are protected under international law, is of international concern,” the leaders said in the statement.

“We emphasize that the deal on the table to release the hostages would bring an immediate and prolonged cease-fire in Gaza that would facilitate a surge of additional necessary humanitarian assistance to be delivered throughout Gaza and lead to the credible end of hostilities,” the leaders continue.

The leaders say “Gazans would be able to return to their homes and their lands with preparations beforehand to ensure shelter and humanitarian provisions,” noting “we strongly support the ongoing mediation efforts in order to bring our people home. We reiterate our call on Hamas to release the hostages.”

“Let us end this crisis so that collectively we can focus our efforts on bringing peace and stability to the region,” they conclude. 

Beyond Biden, the leaders include heads of state from Argentina, Austria, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Spain, Thailand and the U.K.

The Hostages Families Forum welcomed the statement from the world leaders, and expressed their gratitude to them for “putting the issue of the hostages as a top international priority.”

They called the statement a result of “diplomatic efforts carried out by the families of the hostages over recent months, alongside cooperation from decision-makers worldwide, aimed at bringing home all the hostages, the living for rehabilitation and the murdered for burial.”

A senior U.S. official noted the collection of leaders on the statement is “quite extraordinary,” noting a previous similar effort failed given some disagreements. This statement, however, earned widespread support given the current situation on the ground and the fact that a deal remains on the table that would bring an immediate cease-fire with the release of women, wounded, elderly and sick hostages.

“The key, really, is hostages,” the senior official said, acknowledging the recent proof-of-life video of U.S. citizen Hersh Goldberg-Polin, which the Biden administration received 48 hours prior to its publication.

“This is a daily, hourly focus of ours. That is no exaggeration,” the official said, further detailing Biden’s hour-plus meeting with released four-year-old hostage Avigail Mor Idan and her family. “She played in the Oval Office, as a four- year-old does,” the official said.

“Until she was out of Gaza, we were not 100 percent confident she would ever get out of Gaza, so it always has the feeling of this might never come together,” the official acknowledged.

The senior U.S. official rejected allegations that Israel is the main obstacle to securing a deal, placing the onus squarely on Hamas. “There have been times in which the Israelis, for one reason or another, did not want to put whatever issue might be on the table. If I was answering your question six weeks ago, I might have a different answer,” the official acknowledged.

Hamas reiterated on Thursday its demand Israel end the Gaza war as part of any deal to release hostages held there, with Sami Abu Zuhri, a senior Hamas official, telling Reuters that U.S. pressure on Hamas “has no value”.

Since Biden’s last conversation with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, immediately after the Iran attack, the U.S. believed the latest proposed deal was “extremely forward leaning” and Israel had fully agreed to a proposal that “had all indications would lead to as close you can get to a breakthrough.”

Hamas responded with what the senior official deemed “not a constructive response at all,” adding, “the core truth is there’s a deal on the table. It meets nearly all the demands that Hamas has had,” calling it “the road map to the end of the crisis.”

“This negotiation has a structure, has a detailed document, has the elements of the deal that are all there. It’s really down to one guy to accept the deal,” the official said.

Categories International

Jan Resseger: What Is White Christian Nationalism?

By dianeravitch
April 26, 2024 //
17

Jan Resseger provides a thoughtful analysis of what seems to be a new phenomenon called “white Christian nationalism.” Others say it’s nothing new, that it is just another manifestation of racism, as in the KKK, the White Citizens Councils, and other hate groups. She reviews a new book, The Flag and the Cross: White Christian Nationalism and the Threat to American Democracy that provides a historical perspective.

She writes:

Our politics and our national ethos seem to have gone awry, and a lot of people blame it on something called Christian nationalism or white Christian nationalism. And yet, the book bans, the efforts to prohibit honest teaching about slavery, and the attempts to quash equity and inclusion seem to have nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus, embodied, for example, in the Great Commandment: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matthew 22: 39) If, like me, you have been confused by the seeming contradictions, I recommend a book that begins: “This book is a primer on white Christian nationalism, what it is, when it emerged, how it works, and where it’s headed. White Christian nationalism is one of the oldest and most powerful currents in American politics.” (The Flag and The Cross, p. 1)

The book is The Flag and The Cross: White Christian Nationalism and the Threat to American Democracy, by two professors of the sociology of religion, Philip S. Gorski at Yale University and Samuel L. Perry at the University of Oklahoma. The book is short, readable, and extremely relevant to the political maelstrom in today’s United States.

The authors trace the existence of white Christian nationalism back to the introduction of slavery to Virginia; the subjugation of American Indians beginning in Massachusetts and then westward through the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries; the Civil War and subsequent collapse of Reconstruction followed by Jim Crow; the Mexican American War; and the Spanish American War with the establishment of an American empire including the Philippines, Guam and Puerto Rico.

So… what is white Christian nationalism? “White Christian nationalism is a ‘deep story’ about America’s past and a vision of its future. It includes cherished assumptions about what America was and is, but also what it it should be…  America was founded as a Christian nation by (white) men who were ‘traditional’ Christians, who based the nation’s founding documents on ‘Christian principles.’ The United States is blessed by God, which is why it has been so successful; and the nation has a special role to play in God’s plan for humanity. But these blessings are threatened by cultural degradation from ‘un-American’ influences both inside and outside our borders.” (The Flag and The Cross, pp. 3-4)

Gorski and Perry continue: “Like any story, this one has its heroes: white conservative Christians, usually native-born men. It also has its villains: racial, religious, and cultural outsiders. The plot revolves around conflicts between the noble and worthy ‘us,’ the rightful heirs of wealth and power, and the undeserving ‘them’ who conspire to take what is ours. Sometimes the conflicts culminate in violence—violence that restores white Christians to what they believe is their rightful place atop America’s racial and religious hierarchy… But this story is a myth… At this point, the skeptical reader might wonder what’s ‘Christian’ about this deep story.  It is ‘Christian’ because the vast majority of those who believe this story identify as such.” (The Flag and The Cross, pp. 4-5)

Why has white Christian nationalism exploded in recent years? “The source of the growing pressure is a set of slow-moving changes in American society.  The United States has slowly become less white, less Christian, and less powerful; more diverse, secular, and cosmopolitan. And this collided with a certain conception of America as a white Christian nation favored by God and ruled by white Christian men ready to defend freedom and order with violence.” (The Flag and The Cross, p. 103) Gorski and Perry describe the January 6th insurrection as a symbol of the conflict.

After defining “white Christian nationalism,” Gorski and Perry explain what it is not: “(W)hite Christian nationalism is not ‘Christian patriotism’; white Christian nationalism…. is rooted in white supremacist assumptions and empowered by anger and fear. This is nationalism, not patriotism… Second, white Christian nationalism is not synonymous with white evangelicalism per se, even if there is considerable overlap… Third and finally, white Christian nationalism is not just a problem among white American Christians. There are secular versions of white Christian nationalism that claim to defend ‘Western Culture’ or ‘Judeo-Christian civilization.’ And there are secular white Americans who know how to leverage white Christian nationalist language. For such Americans, the ‘Christian’ label simply signals shared tribal identity or veils political values that would otherwise be socially unacceptable. That is certainly how Trump himself used the label—as a rallying cry and a fig leaf—and one reason why so many white Christians have been attracted to him: not because he himself is an exemplar of Christian piety, but because he waved the Christian flag and announced his willingness to ‘fight’ for it.” (The Flag and The Cross, pp. 8-10)

The book is not principally about the institution of public education, but it says a lot about today’s assault on inclusive public schools. The authors name some of what’s been happening in recent years and in addition create a theoretical scaffolding to help us understand attacks on public education as part of a scheme to use public schools to protect the dominant culture.  Here are four threats to public education that reflect white Christian nationalism:

  • opposition to teaching about racism in American history, and the passage of state laws to ban multicultural education, and ‘diversity, equity and inclusion;’ (The Flag and The Cross, p. 14);
  •  efforts to permit religious education at public expense—promotimg the beliefs of specific faith traditions and undermining the protection of religious liberty (The Flag and The Cross, p. 16);
  • efforts to block school integration after Brown v. Board of Education (The Flag and The Cross, p. 69); and
  • the recent proposal by the Heritage Foundation of a strategy to overturn Plyler v. Doe to exclude from public schools undocumented students who cannot afford to pay tuition.

All  of these attacks exemplify pushback against inclusion and welcome for ‘the other’: “The first and most fundamental way in which white Christian nationalism threatens American liberal democracy is that it defines ‘the people’ in a way that excludes many Americans. White Christian nationalism is a form of what is often called ‘ethno-nationalism.’ Liberal democracy rests on what is usually called ‘civic nationalism’ It defines the nation in terms of values, laws, and institutions.’” (The Flag and The Cross, p. 114)

Categories Education Reform
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »