Does TUSD's ethnic studies program violate Arizona's new law?

"...9 on Your Side took a closer look. One of the textbooks that TUSD uses in its ethnic studies program is Chicano!, by F. Arturo Rosales. The book teaches the history of racism and oppression in the United States directed against the Mexican, Mexican-American, and Hispanic populations. As the name implies, a large portion of the textbook is devoted to the Chicano movement that sprang up to fight social injustice and to push for civil rights. There are some similarities between the Chicano movement tactics that the book documents and the tactics some TUSD students have practicing recently.

The cover of the book features graphic art of protesters with their fists in the air. Pages 248, 249 and 253 feature photographs of Chicano movement members with raised fists. The photograph on page 253 shows a student with a raised fist sitting in a classroom with other students; the text on that page makes the point that Chicano studies programs in the Southwest are "the most visible vestige" of the Chicano movement. A review of KGUN9 News footage over the past week shows many TUSD students raising their fists in the same fashion as those shown in the textbook.

Page 185 shows a picture of students walking out of school as part of a protest. Such student walkouts have been a major component of recent protests in Tucson against the ethnic studies restrictions and against Arizona's controversial immigration crackdown.

And then there is the brown beret issue. Pages 193 and 199 of the textbook show pictures of demonstrators wearing brown berets. The book acknowledges a link to Che Guevara as an inspiration for the berets. Interestingly, the textbook does not explain who Guevara was. Guevara was a Marxist revolutionary leader and a major figure in the Cuba's communist revolution, revered by some as an inspiration to the downtrodden, but reviled by others as a ruthless killer who bragged about personally shooting defectors..."

Click to expand...

TheHat said:

Well, it sure sounds like it does. Sounds and looks like they are breeding revolutionaries and basically slamming the USA for racism. I mean, getting the brown berets yet not teaching the history behind it and who Che Geuvara was, is enough isn't it?

Does TUSD's ethnic studies program violate Arizona's new law? - KGUN 9 On Your Side, Tucson News, Weather & Sports



Sounds all cute and innocent doesn't it? You can read more at the link.

Click to expand...

Deuce said:

Leave it to conservatives to oppose editing history

Click to expand...

Areopagitican said:

I know this may sound completely intolerant, but college should be about learning facts, not opinions and definitely not opinions aligned on a racial axis.

Anyone who says these "textbooks" are 'learning about histoy' is an idiot who has, clearly, never read them. I have and I can tell you there is about one historical fact per page with about 100 political commentaries/opinions. I see no problem in defending the books as an opinion that must be heard. I don't agree, but I understand that argument. Saying that these classes are somehow a history class? These books are history books? Sillyness.

Click to expand...

danarhea said:

Call it by any name you want, but it is really just plain old Communism, disguised by feigned patriotism, and wrapped in the flag. Founding fathers be damned.

Click to expand...

danarhea said:

Actually, the purpose of college is not only to learn, but also to develop critical thinking skills, and not to parrot "facts" that are approved by the government.

Click to expand...

danarhea said:

Actually, the purpose of college is not only to learn, but also to develop critical thinking skills, and not to parrot "facts" that are approved by the government.

Click to expand...

danarhea said:

Call it by any name you want, but it is really just plain old Communism, disguised by feigned patriotism, and wrapped in the flag. Founding fathers be damned.

Click to expand...

jallman said:

Except that communism is an economic system and this decision has little to do with that....

Click to expand...

Hatuey said:

You have just both proven you know nothing of communism. One for calling what Arizona is doing 'communism' and the other for saying that communism is an economic system.

Click to expand...

danarhea said:

Actually, the purpose of college is not only to learn, but also to develop critical thinking skills, and not to parrot "facts" that are approved by the government.

Let me also add that, for a group of people who claim to be Conservative, and wanting the government out of their lives, some of our Arizonans (not all, but many) are not acting Conservative at all, but are actually some of the most "statist" people in the United States, wanting more government control over its citizens, not less. Call it by any name you want, but it is really just plain old Communism, disguised by feigned patriotism, and wrapped in the flag. Founding fathers be damned.

Click to expand...

If that statement might seem like a stretch to some, Arce has other important facts that are much harder to argue with. He grows most passionate when talking about the academic success of his ethnic studies students. "We have increased academic achievement levels, we have increased literacy rates in our classes, our college matriculation rates of students in our classes are around 80% for Latinos, and a national average is 25%."

According to Arce's figures, kids participating in the ethnic studies program have a graduation rate of nearly 98%. By contrast, the national graduation rate for Mexican Americans is only 44%. In addition, Arce's figures show that his ethnic studies students are three times more likely to pass the state's AIMS reading test, 4 times more likely to pass the writing section, and 2.5 times more likely to pass the AIMS math test.

Click to expand...

jallman said:

Except that it is an economic system. Now who's just proven that he knows nothing of communism?

Click to expand...

Socialism is a political philosophy that encompasses various theories of economic organization based on either public or direct worker ownership and administration of the means of production and allocation of resources.[1][2][3] A more comprehensive definition of socialism is an economic system that directly maximizes use-values as opposed to exchange-values and has transcended commodity production and wage labour, along with a corresponding set of social and economic relations, including the organization of economic institutions, the method of resource allocation and post-monetary calculation based on some physical magnitude;[4] often implying a method of compensation based on individual merit, the amount of labour expended or individual contribution.[5]

Click to expand...

Communism is a social structure in which classes are abolished and property is commonly controlled, as well as a political philosophy and social movement that advocates and aims to create such a society.[1]

Karl Marx posited that communism would be the final stage in society, which would be achieved through a proletarian revolution and only possible after a transitional stage develops the productive forces, leading to a superabundance of goods and services.[2][3]

"Pure communism" in the Marxian sense refers to a classless, stateless and oppression-free society where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made democratically, allowing every member of society to participate in the decision-making process in both the political and economic spheres of life. In modern usage, communism is often used to refer to the policies of the various communist states, which were authoritarian governments that had centrally planned economies and ownership of all the means of production. Most communist governments based their ideology on Marxism-Leninism.

Click to expand...

One point that is frequently raised to distinguish socialism from communism is that socialism generally refers to an economic system, while communism generally refers to both an economic and a political system. As an economic system, socialism seeks to manage the economy through deliberate and collective social control. Communism, however, seeks to manage both the economy and the society by ensuring that property is owned collectively, and that control over the distribution of property is centralized in order to achieve both classlessness and statelessness. Both socialism and communism are similar in that they seek to prevent the ill effects that are sometimes produced by capitalism.

Click to expand...

Marxist Economics – Difference between Socialism and Communism

Socialism and communism are not identical. Marxists believe that socialism is the first phase or first step in the transition to communism, the perfect economic system. The Political Dictionary explains the difference between the two systems: “Socialism is the first phase of communism. The principle of socialism is: from each according to his abilities, to each according to his work . . . Under communism the basic principle of society will be: from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”1

Marxist Economics – Socialism is a Phase Towards Communism
Socialism is the phase in history when the proletariat seizes both the means of production and the state. The arrival of communism will occur when the government has withered away because classes have ceased to exist and no one owns the means of production (it is owned in common). Lenin describes communism as “means working in common.”2 In this perfect economic system, the ideal is that everyone will freely work together to produce the necessary goods and services.

Click to expand...

The Communists believe that as soon as the working class and its allies are in a position to do so they must make a basic change in the character of the state; they must replace capitalist dictatorship over the working class with workers’ dictatorship over the capitalist class as the first step in the process by which the existence of capitalists as a class (but not as individuals) is ended and a classless society is eventually ushered in. Socialism cannot be built merely by taking over and using the old capitalist machinery of government; the workers must destroy the old and set up their own new state apparatus. The workers’ state must give the old ruling class no opportunity to organize a counter-revolution; it must use its armed strength to crush capitalist resistance when it arises.

The Socialists, on the other hand, believe that it is possible to make the transition from capitalism to socialism without a basic change in the character of the state. They hold this view because they do not think of the capitalist state as essentially an institution for the dictatorship of the capitalist class, but rather as a perfectly good piece of machinery which can be used in the interest of whichever class gets command of it. No need, then, for the working class in power to smash the old capitalist state apparatus and set up its own—the march to socialism can be made step by step within the framework of the democratic forms of the capitalist state.

Click to expand...

Areopagitican said:

And you know how you develop critical thinking skills on college? I'm not going to answer that, but I'll give you a hint: it doesn't come from a book containing a selection of race-based opinions masqurading as history.

I agree that critical thinking needs to be developed, but if you are against parroting facts; how are you for parroting opinions?

Click to expand...

Hatuey said:

No. That is socialism. Socialism is an economic system. Communism is a social structure. Learn the difference.

Socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Communism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



What Is the Difference Between Socialism and Communism?



Marxist Economics and the Difference between Socialism and Communism



Socialism and communism are alike in that both are systems of production for use based on public ownership of the means of production



Think of communism as a way of life and socialism as a means within that way of life. Socialism is the economic system.

Click to expand...

Deuce said:

Leave it to conservatives to oppose learning about history when they don't like the contents. I learned about America's horrific shenanigans in the past but it didn't make me want to overthrow the country. It's college. They chose to learn about those subjects.

You people are starting to scare me. Going to start burning "subversive" books next?

Click to expand...

jallman said:

No, communism is an economic system with socialist foundations. It's like taking socialism to an extreme.

Click to expand...

Deuce said:

Leave it to conservatives to oppose learning about history when they don't like the contents. I learned about America's horrific shenanigans in the past but it didn't make me want to overthrow the country. It's college. They chose to learn about those subjects.

You people are starting to scare me. Going to start burning "subversive" books next?

Click to expand...

Hatuey said:

Lol. No. It's not.

Click to expand...

RightinNYC said:

Yea, it's definitely the conservatives who are most outraged about "biased" textbooks:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news/68112-texas-revises-history-textbooks.html

Interestingly enough, you seemed to object to the "biased" textbooks used in Texas, but have no problem with the "biased" textbooks used in AZ. Why is that?

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...revises-history-textbooks.html#post1058617136

Click to expand...

American said:

I wonder who reviewed this book before allowing it into the curriculum?

Click to expand...

TBone said:

Yeah, we don't want ethnic americans learning about the oppression they were subjected too. Instead, we have to have european, god is rights, white is right, subjects.

Click to expand...

danarhea said:

Actually, the purpose of college is not only to learn, but also to develop critical thinking skills, and not to parrot "facts" that are approved by the government.

Let me also add that, for a group of people who claim to be Conservative, and wanting the government out of their lives, some of our Arizonans (not all, but many) are not acting Conservative at all, but are actually some of the most "statist" people in the United States, wanting more government control over its citizens, not less. Call it by any name you want, but it is really just plain old Communism, disguised by feigned patriotism, and wrapped in the flag. Founding fathers be damned.

Click to expand...