Free Censored 2014 by Mickey Huff Page A

renounced the far right attack on ethnic studies. Here is an overview of some of the strategies used to attack ethnic studies indirectly.
Vague Laws
Code Words
Micromanaging Classrooms
Doughnut Hole Legislation
Bogus Reports
Denial
    Vague Laws
    The anti-ethnic studies bill is vague, successfully hiding that the target is Mexican American studies. Even as the Arizona Supreme Court condoned HB 2281, it was pointed out by one of the judges onthe case, A. Wallace Tashima, that the part of the law was so vague that it was unconstitutional. HB 2281 never even mentions Mexican American studies. Of course, once we are out of the way and our programs are terminated, the other ethnic studies shall fall, too, for the rules will be set to eliminate all other ethnic and women’s studies, or to never implement them. This is also part of an attack on “critical thinking,” which the Texas 2012 Republican platform is very honest about. 7
    Code Words
    Here are some direct quotations taken from the 2012 Texas Republican platform that appear again and again and again in anti-ethnic studies legislation or are used to justify such bills.
    â€œWe believe the current teaching of a multicultural curriculum is divisive. We favor strengthening our common American identity and loyalty instead of political correctness that nurtures alienation among racial and ethnic groups. . . .
    â€œWe oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs . . .” (Emphasis added.) 8
    Micromanaging Classrooms
    Anti-ethnic studies policies strive to legislate the books we can put into students’ hands. This was the case in Arizona and in Texas.
    An editorial against HB 1938 and SB 1128 by the San Antonio Express-News put it best:
    The Legislature should leave the content of Texas college courses alone. Micromanaging education from the peanut gallery is hazardous. Repeated attempts over the years by some members of the State Board of Education to impose their ideologies into the textbooks being used in Texas classrooms made the state a laughingstock of the nation on more than one occasion. 9
    Doughnut Hole Legislation
    Arizona Republicans fine-tuned the tactic of creating “doughnut hole legislation” to attack ethnic studies. 10 Teachers are the targets of the attack; rather than attacking them directly, though, laws are enacted to surround them and pressure them into compliance. Dan Patrick’s SB 1128 is doughnut hole legislation, and the National Association of Scholars (NAS) report, Recasting History: Are Race, Class, and Gender Dominating American History?, revealed that professors are, indeed, the target.
    The report stated: “We looked at the assigned readings for each course and the research interests of the forty-six faculty members who taught them. We also compared faculty members’ research interests with the readings they chose to assign. . . . We classified faculty members assigning primarily high RCG [race, class, and gender] readings as ‘high assigners’ of RCG materials.” 11
    Bogus Reports
    House Bill 2811 was created to prohibit courses that promote the overthrow of the government? Who even worries about that? Besides, we already have a Sedition Act that prevents individuals from promoting the overthrow of the government. Why do we need a Sedition Act for academic courses? How do you even put a school course on trial? Oh, I guess you can’t. Thus, the US Supreme Court will throw out that law, even though it might take another three to five years, and half a million to a million dollars.
    Just as illogical, Texas’s HB 1938 and SB 1128 were based on the aforementioned National Association of Scholars Recasting History report, which slammed professors for talking too much about race, class, and gender when discussing the following American classics like Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass and César Chávez