• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Arizona gov. signs bill targeting ethnic studies

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
59,298
Reaction score
26,919
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Arizona gov. signs bill targeting ethnic studies - Yahoo! News

State schools chief Tom Horne, who has pushed the bill for years, said he believes the Tucson school district's Mexican-American studies program teaches Latino students that they are oppressed by white people.

........

The measure signed Tuesday prohibits classes that advocate ethnic solidarity, that are designed primarily for students of a particular race or that promote resentment toward a certain ethnic group.

The Tucson Unified School District program offers specialized courses in African-American, Mexican-American and Native-American studies that focus on history and literature and include information about the influence of a particular ethnic group.

For example, in the Mexican-American Studies program, an American history course explores the role of Hispanics in the Vietnam War, and a literature course emphasizes Latino authors.

Horne, a Republican running for attorney general, said the program promotes "ethnic chauvinism" and racial resentment toward whites while segregating students by race. He's been trying to restrict it ever since he learned that Hispanic civil rights activist Dolores Huerta told students in 2006 that "Republicans hate Latinos."

District officials said the program doesn't promote resentment, and they believe it would comply with the new law.

The measure doesn't prohibit classes that teach about the history of a particular ethnic group, as long as the course is open to all students and doesn't promote ethnic solidarity or resentment.

About 1,500 students at six high schools are enrolled in the Tucson district's program. Elementary and middle school students also are exposed to the ethnic studies curriculum. The district is 56 percent Hispanic, with nearly 31,000 Latino students.

Another bill targeting Hispanics and other minorities in Arizona with vague language. Who gets to decide whether a class 'promotes resentment'? If they learn about American support for the dictatorial PRI who killed hundreds of young students days before the Mexico City Olympics, does that promote 'resentment'? Thoughts?
 
Tricky situation, the problem is alot of people will believe that argument.

But you know, in Canada we had a class called African-Canadian studies, and the vast majority of the class was white with some African-Canadians. And you know what, even with all the whites in the class, no black person ever said anything to us about how bad we should feel, in fact we use to talk quite openly about what happened, especially with Slavery and various other crimes that happened. You know when you're open, and just talk about things in a civilized manner, it really helps.
 
Another bill targeting Hispanics and other minorities in Arizona with vague language. Who gets to decide whether a class 'promotes resentment'?

IMO it should be the school board who decides what elective classes it provides.

If they learn about American support for the dictatorial PRI who killed hundreds of young students days before the Mexico City Olympics, does that promote 'resentment'? Thoughts?

If anything it should be taught as an example of our disastrous foreign policy, not a white America vs Hispanic Mexico.
 
I don't see anything wrong with this law, in fact I like it. I think it helps move America towards being American, not towards African-American, Mexican-American, White-American, etc. We should be one America of many races. I think this law is good, if only the Arizona government was the Federal Government :cool:
 
I don't see anything wrong with this law, in fact I like it. I think it helps move America towards being American, not towards African-American, Mexican-American, White-American, etc. We should be one America of many races. I think this law is good, if only the Arizona government was the Federal Government :cool:

But that's only if you want to be the borg.

Look, I am a staunchly proud South African, I value our progress and our history. I have learned all I can about it. I am also staunchly proud Briton. But when I moved to Canada, I wanted to become a Canadian, I learned their history too, and not just the WHITE history, but the black history, and the chinese Canadian history as well. All are part of the regions history, and the peoples history and heritage.

I am a Proud South African, British, Canadian. And I have the capacity to be all 3
 
I never liked these ethnic studies classes. They only breed resentment and separation by race. This is a good idea, why?
 
I don't see anything wrong with this law, in fact I like it. I think it helps move America towards being American, not towards African-American, Mexican-American, White-American, etc. We should be one America of many races. I think this law is good, if only the Arizona government was the Federal Government :cool:

I agree with you, to a point. I have real troubles in my mind with ethnic studies classes. However, as Hatuey pointed out, the law itself is way too vague. I don't like vagueness in laws. Further, just because I am uncomfortable with ethnic study classes does not mean they do not serve a purpose. Targetting them feels more like a political ploy for popularity than fixing some real problem that is best fixed at some other level.
 
I agree with you, to a point. I have real troubles in my mind with ethnic studies classes. However, as Hatuey pointed out, the law itself is way too vague. I don't like vagueness in laws. Further, just because I am uncomfortable with ethnic study classes does not mean they do not serve a purpose. Targetting them feels more like a political ploy for popularity than fixing some real problem that is best fixed at some other level.

Someone slap me I just thanked a dirty lib.
 
But that's only if you want to be the borg.

Look, I am a staunchly proud South African, I value our progress and our history. I have learned all I can about it. I am also staunchly proud Briton. But when I moved to Canada, I wanted to become a Canadian, I learned their history too, and not just the WHITE history, but the black history, and the chinese Canadian history as well. All are part of the regions history, and the peoples history and heritage.

I am a Proud South African, British, Canadian. And I have the capacity to be all 3

Shouldn't a country's history be a combination of everyone who contributed to that country, not divided up into different racial/ehtnic histories? The father of American black history hoped that one day that there would not need to be a separate race category but instead taught just like regular American history. Focusing on the race of someone only encourages racism and contradicts the idea that it does not matter what your skin color is.
 
Shouldn't a country's history be a combination of everyone who contributed to that country, not divided up into different racial/ehtnic histories? The father of American black history hoped that one day that there would not need to be a separate race category but instead taught just like regular American history. Focusing on the race of someone only encourages racism and contradicts the idea that it does not matter what your skin color is.

Well... it didn't encourage racism here.
 
Arizona gov. signs bill targeting ethnic studies - Yahoo! News



Another bill targeting Hispanics and other minorities in Arizona with vague language. Who gets to decide whether a class 'promotes resentment'? If they learn about American support for the dictatorial PRI who killed hundreds of young students days before the Mexico City Olympics, does that promote 'resentment'? Thoughts?

I think it is more important to learn about American history in America then it is to learn about Mexico. The fact that students think America is a democracy is proof enough that students today don't know a thing about the country they reside in. Maybe it's just me, but all you need to know about Mexico is that is ran by corruption and it would be wise to bring extra money if you plan to party during your visit.
 
Shouldn't a country's history be a combination of everyone who contributed to that country, not divided up into different racial/ehtnic histories? The father of American black history hoped that one day that there would not need to be a separate race category but instead taught just like regular American history. Focusing on the race of someone only encourages racism and contradicts the idea that it does not matter what your skin color is.

I agree with this. History should not be broken up into racial perspectives. It only incites racial separationism.

Now I can see the argument where racial historians don't want anyone to forget what their race had to go through to get to where it is today ( slavery, genocide, segregation, etc.) but focusing on these things just breeds resentment and holds future generations back from eliminating these past transgressions as factors and truly uniting based on nationality and not race.

Hopefully one day nationality won't be a factor either.
 
Last edited:
I don't see anything wrong with this law, in fact I like it. I think it helps move America towards being American, not towards African-American, Mexican-American, White-American, etc. We should be one America of many races. I think this law is good, if only the Arizona government was the Federal Government :cool:

My kids are Filipino Americans. What part of their heritage is important, Digs? I consider that all of it is important. I want them to know, for instance, how heroic Filippinos were during WWII. The history of Arizona can't be understood without understanding and appreciating the role of Latinos and native peoples.
 
I agree with this. History should not be broken up into racial perspectives. It only incites racial separationism.

This is a naive perspective. My kids are racially separated every single day by the fact that they are part of a tiny minority in their school. They look different. Their parents look different. My kids have been asked hundreds of times: "Are you chinese? Are you Latino? Are you Mexican? Are you Japanese?"

When was the last time your kids had to field those kinds of questions? My kids are half white and half Filipino. Both sides of them are equally important.
 
Keep poking the hornet's nest Arizona.

A pew poll showed that 73 percent of Americans support Arizona's law regarding citizenship papers.

And I'm sure a bunch would agree with this, too.
 
This is a naive perspective. My kids are racially separated every single day by the fact that they are part of a tiny minority in their school. They look different. Their parents look different. My kids have been asked hundreds of times: "Are you chinese? Are you Latino? Are you Mexican? Are you Japanese?"

When was the last time your kids had to field those kinds of questions? My kids are half white and half Filipino. Both sides of them are equally important.

Agree entirely, but it isn't a school's job to teach them how important they are with specifically designed classes for that purpose.
 
My kids are Filipino Americans. What part of their heritage is important, Digs? I consider that all of it is important. I want them to know, for instance, how heroic Filippinos were during WWII. The history of Arizona can't be understood without understanding and appreciating the role of Latinos and native peoples.

I think their problem is when these classes start going into the specifics. I remember being in school and I don't remember being taught about American involvement in Latin America at all. I don't remember being taught that the U.S. and the United Fruit Company had central roles in the overthrow of the Arbenz government in Guatemala. I don't remember being taught that thousands of Chileans died as a result of the U.S. backed coup that overthrew Allende.

Do you?

If you don't that's probably because it is not the American history we want to be teaching. It's impossible to tell American History for the past 150 years without including heavy amounts of Latin American history.
 
Agree entirely, but it isn't a school's job to teach them how important they are with specifically designed classes for that purpose.

No, it's the school's job to present a cohesive look at history in history classes. However, very few schools examine the history of native peoples, Chicanos, or Asians in the U.S. So, until the history of ALL Americans is told, this is the best option.

Do the school's English classes read books by non-white authors? RARELY. Do the school's history classes talk about much apart from Euro history? RARELY. Why is that? Is it because only the accomplishments of white people are important?
 
I'm honestly getting worried for Arizona.

The idea that put this measure into motion seems to be that ethnic studies promotes a division of ethnicities:

[1] There *is* a difference in ethnicities and the difference should be understood and accepted, but held only as a generalization. The blacks I grew up with in the rural south share very little ethnic similarities than my black classmates at the University.

[2] I think it is healthy to discuss the differences between ethnicities.

[3] The measure goes too far. An ethnic-study can be largely unbiased it requires how the subject is approached.

[4] I find complete hypocrisy of those in favor of liberties, freedoms, and free markets, but seek to stop the university to be the masters of its education. Universities are designed in a way where if there is a problem in a course, then students will petition against it either thru a direct petition to administration, or by not taking the course.

[5] If you are going to ban or draw measures against ethnic studies because of bias and possible citations for racism, then why not ban religion studies, or history studies, or language studies, or science studies, or art studies, or music studies? All of these you can denote a division between various subgroups and you can draw negative and prejudicial conclusions.


This is a bit ridiculous.
 
No, it's the school's job to present a cohesive look at history in history classes. However, very few schools examine the history of native peoples, Chicanos, or Asians in the U.S. So, until the history of ALL Americans is told, this is the best option.

Do the school's English classes read books by non-white authors? RARELY. Do the school's history classes talk about much apart from Euro history? RARELY. Why is that? Is it because only the accomplishments of white people are important?

All of which I can agree with you on. But don't create seperate classes; rather, teach it within the context of the whole.

This is how racism breeds, getting a teacher to teach the history (and agenda) of a particular GROUP as seperate from other Americans.

My kids are half white, half Hispanic, so I can relate to you. They have the advantages of an affluent life, but we don't talk about our family as "mixed", we just talk about it as a family. Mom's ethnicity is Hispanic, and she's fluent in Spanish. So what, that's really cool.

I don't want my kids associating or empathizing with any "movement" or "cause" built around their ethnicity. I want them to concentrate on who they are as our kids, their teacher's students, their coach's athletes, their friends' friends, and their community's citizens, and nothing more.
 
I don't see anything wrong with this law, in fact I like it. I think it helps move America towards being American, not towards African-American, Mexican-American, White-American, etc. We should be one America of many races. I think this law is good, if only the Arizona government was the Federal Government :cool:

People who write things like this ^ have little to no understanding of the cultural history of this country.

Hyphenation and keeping cultural traditions is not new to Mexican immigrants and African-Americans.

During the 18th and early 19th centuries Italian-Americans, Swedish-Americans, Irish-Americans all did similar things. Over the years, the ties to their ethnic heritage have thinned out. But in our history it is very common for there to be hyphenated ethnic churches, ballclubs, dance groups, neighborhood associations. The only difference, it was white skin rather than brown skin. Perhaps it is that distinction that is the true root of people's outrage here.
 
People who write things like this ^ have little to no understanding of the cultural history of this country.

Hyphenation and keeping cultural traditions is not new to Mexican immigrants and African-Americans.

During the 18th and early 19th centuries Italian-Americans, Swedish-Americans, Irish-Americans all did similar things. Over the years, the ties to their ethnic heritage have thinned out. But in our history it is very common for there to be hyphenated ethnic churches, ballclubs, dance groups, neighborhood associations. The only difference, it was white skin rather than brown skin. Perhaps it is that distinction that is the true root of people's outrage here.

99.5 percent of African-Americans have never stepped foot in Africa. That is the problem people have with it.

I don't think of LeBron James as African in any way. He's an American, the same as me.

My ancestors are from Holland. I don't see a Dutch-American space on the list of options.

Just be a freaking American, and we can ALL move forward. These delineations just feed the fires of racial tension, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE SHARPTONS, JACKSONS, AND OBAMAS WANT!! It is for their political gain that these distinctions be kept alive and deep-rooted.
 
One of the things I found interesting reading through the thread very few talked about the role parents/family have in teaching "roots". I do not understand why people want schools to do everthing. Teach my kid to manage a home budget, teach my kid about why they should be proud (whatever), teach my kid sex education. You are either an American or not. No English-American, African-American, German-American, Mexican-American. We are a melting pot for sure. But we should be one people.

"In the first place we should insist that the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equity with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming an American and nothing but an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any flag of a nation to which we are hostile. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people." Theodore Roosevelt in a letter to the American Defense Society in 1919.
 
Keep poking the hornet's nest Arizona.

Yeah - so we can get on with the oncoming war that's slowly churning because I'm sick of this entire issue and the fact that many American's aren't even touched by it and have no thought on illegals or otherwise.

We need a good fight on our soil to knock people off their "as long as it's not on OUR land" view of all sorts of issues.
 
Back
Top Bottom