Multicultural Education

MYTH: Multicultural Education encourages acceptance of cultural diversity and makes students more tolerant of other cultures and people.

Back in the dark ages before schools became bastions of enlightenment and tolerance, social studies classes exposed students to the rich tapestry of countries and cultures that thrived in every corner of the planet. Despite their levels of interest, students came away with at least a basic understanding of the costumes, food, music, and other cultural details of various peoples and the countries in which they lived.
In the American History class, students, regardless of their ethnic or racial origins, developed a strong sense of pride in being citizens of this country. From Columbus to D-Day and beyond, students were taught the strengths and weaknesses of this great country and its profound effect upon the world. The Pledge of Allegiance (including reference to God) was part of every school day and patriotism was not a dirty word.
Back then; American students graduated form high school with a pride of citizenship in a nation abounding in cultural variety, united in the pursuit of liberty and equality. These ideals formed part of the foundation of the American culture and are part of what made this country the exemplar of strength, unity and freedom to the world. Children learned that people braved sometimes unspeakable hardships to come here and become part of what made America. They came here to be Americans. Children hearing these stories learned to appreciate this country and the culture that defined it. They were proud ingredients of the Great Melting Pot of American culture.
Bringing the discussion up to date, we find that there has been a shift in emphasis in traditional social studies curricula. To better accommodate this progressive shift, a new academic term was needed; a term that would have a broad social and academic appeal to facilitate its implementation while masking it true objective. Contemporary educationists and other liberal types chose the term “Multicultural Education” to replace the more archaic term Social Studies.
Multicultural education (MCE) has all the attributes of the traditional social studies curricula, at least on the surface. Those promoting MCE in the schools couch it in academic jargon that rings true with educators, tossing a few universals to give it credibility with parents and school boards. Multicultural education teaches students about the histories, languages, cultures, and economies of various ethnicities and countries around the world. Like all modern progressive ideas, MCE seems to make sense, appeals to parents and teachers, and appears to have academic merit. Students are informed of the wonderful diversity of people and civilizations of the world. Parents are secure in the knowledge that their children are being taught those things that other people do, what they eat, use, make, and play. It forms the foundation of understanding that allows children to be tolerant of people and cultures the world over. Sounds just like social studies, but with a new name.

What is MCE?
Since it was first conceived in the 1960s, MCE has furtively crept into the schools under the guise of teaching about the world’s cultural diversity updated to include more than just knowledge of them. It couches its true intent in terms like tolerance, acceptance, and understanding. Despite all of its flowery new-age eloquence, MCE focuses neither on the world’s diversity of cultures nor our unity as a nation, but on the oppression and exploitation of alienated and marginalized groups by the dominant Eurocentric-American culture.
Unless you’re a recent public school graduate or you attended the Oliver Stone School of Revisionist History, you know Lincoln’s dictum that “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” The meaning is clear: a people divided are easily defeated. The enemies of democracy understand very clearly that weakness derives from diversity of purpose. To divide the opposition is to weaken it and set in motion the process of defeat. In the typical lexicon of the left, the chattering class prefers the word “deconstruct” to that of defeat, but the meaning and intent are the same. The true purpose of multicultural education is the eventual transformation of American society through deconstruction of the dominant Eurocentric American culture. MCE has become one more tool used by liberal fanatics to “contribute progressively to the transformation of society and to the application and maintenance of social justice and equity.”1
MCE claims to promote diversity as means “to extinguish racism and build tolerance of differences”2. Sounds nice, but in fact it promotes a theory of oppression based on ethnicity, class struggle, and alienation. Dedicated multiculturalists blame American Capitalism and free enterprise for every evil in the world including racism, exploitation, and even slavery. The very roots of our society and its economy are routinely attacked in the guise of tolerance and sensitivity to diversity.
To bring to light the oppression committed upon under-represented groups by the dominant culture (the U.S.), MCE teachers couch their ideology in the cloak of “social justice.” Social justice has recently entered the educational arena as a significant aspect of MCE. It is a convenient term used to enlighten others about oppressed people everywhere. In reality, social justice is a curriculum of vengeance with the intent of imposing retribution for perceived injustices perpetrated by irreversible and unchangeable historic events. Social justice seeks “to blame somebody else, to blame the system, to blame those who (mythically) control it.”3 Injecting the social justice concept into the discussion serves to expose MCE’s true intent.
Regardless of promises to the contrary, MCE does not emphasize the variety of ways other people in other lands solve problems, make art, write poetry, or play music. Instead, its emphasis is on oppression, class struggle, and social justice.
Furthermore, MCE promotes the concept that personal identity is not determined by citizenship, but by ethnic or racial affiliation. MCE upholds the idea that ethnic affiliation and identity should be the only component of educational and social resolutions. The eventual outcome of this concept will turn the country into an assortment of diverse groups competing with one another for ever more scarce resources. While claiming to enlighten students about ethnic and cultural diversity, MCE is racism cleverly disguised as political correctness.
Multiculturalism seeks to divide the culture into subgroups, then points out the differences of each, making some more significant than others while placing blame on the dominant culture for the differences. The dominant culture, of course, is the Eurocentric, Judeo-Christian, American culture. MCE is responsible for the student self-imposed segregation that we are seeing in the schools in the form of separate graduations, proms, and even separate tables in school cafeterias as a result of a heightened awareness of racial and ethnic diversity.
In April of 2006, two noteworthy examples of multiculturalism run amuck were the mass immigration marches and the release of the Spanish language U.S. National Anthem (with some lines in English that disparage U.S laws: “these kids have no parents cause (sic) all of these mean laws.”4 Hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants and their supporters marched to demonstrate their animosity toward the rule of law as it applied to their particular situation. Waving foreign flags, singing the National Anthem in a language in which it was not written (nor intended to be sung), and demanding rights to which the demonstrators were not entitled showed the depths to which multiculturalism has plunged the country. Surprisingly (or not), some schools offered community service credit for their students who participated in the demonstrations. Patriotism, respect for law, and love of country have been de-emphasized in favor of belonging to elite subgroups that demand and believe are entitled to recompense.
Afghanistan is a splendid example of what our culture might look like if MCE prevails. We will become bunch of tribes and ethnic subgroups united in only one thing: our hatred of each other. Strict adherence to multiculturalist doctrine will bring about the “Balkanization” of America.

MCE In the Schools
The three tenets of MCE are 1. Transform the self, 2. Transform the schools, 3. Transform society.5 Schools are the most vital component to achieving MCE’s goals. A major publisher of school textbooks and of MCE curricular materials publishes a web site that enthusiastically proclaims, “Multicultural education acknowledges that schools are essential to laying the foundation for the transformation of society and elimination of oppression and injustice”6. Proponents and advocates of MCE focus their attention on the schools because they know well that indoctrinating children in harebrained liberal ideas at an early age will have a lasting effect. It is nearly impossible to reverse the psychological stranglehold of liberalism after it has been firmly implanted in developing young minds. As Lincoln explained, the philosophy in the classroom today will be the philosophy of the government tomorrow. To paraphrase Hitler, give him the boy and he’ll own the man. The Bible as well recognizes this simple concept in Proverbs: “Raise up a child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it”.7 In other words, teach them when they are young.
Many of the problems within classrooms today can be partly attributable to a multicultural emphasis. Student progress and classroom decorum are to some extent determined by the personal self-image of the students themselves. When portions of the educational constituency are constantly told that they are the victims of an unjust system and an ongoing program of oppression and alimentation, it becomes difficult for them to attend positively to academic tasks. Academic success and classroom conduct will follow expectations for specified subgroups.
In 1988, City University of New York Professor Leonard Jefferies helped draft a report that recommended “an expanded focus on ‘Multiculturalism’ in (New York state’s) K-12 curriculum”8. In the report, Jefferies declared that “African Americans, Asians, Puerto Ricans/Latinos, and Native Americans have all been the victims of an intellectual and educational oppression that has characterized the culture”9 and American institutions for centuries. The use of the word “oppression” appears to be a common idiom among MCE proponents.)
It is the opinion of the authors that the elimination of oppression and injustice should not be a function of the schools, nor should it be an educational pursuit. Social justice is a political goal and not a legitimate academic objective. As such, it has no place in classrooms. It diverts educational focus away from legitimate educational goals. What’s more, children should not be radicalized in an effort to support personal agendas.
Telling children to be more sensitive to perceived injustices, imagined or real, deprives them of true cognitive development. Instead of learning about factual cultural details of other people and lands, they are forced to adopt attitudes and emotions that demonstrate a commitment to social justice. MCE encourages students to adopt a radical and activist response to perceived social inequities, unfairness, and biases. They are expected to demonstrate a proper response to social justice issues. Telling children how to feel is not teaching them how to think.

Where Does MCE Begin?
The process of spreading MCE doctrines into the schools begins at the university level. Liberal professors, many of whom are anachronistic leftovers from the 60s (a.k.a. old hippies), managed to manipulate their lack of marketable skills into tenured positions at institutions of higher learning. They brought with them their (chemically induced) visions of utopia inspired by Marxist socialism all dressed up as authentic academic pursuits with valid philosophical principles. Once ensconced within the ivory towers of academia, they became the gatekeepers of campus thought, and political ideologies, and are now in control of hiring new faculty members. In true academic tradition, they are tolerant of diverse ideas. But only if those ideas are of a liberal alignment. Almost anyone espousing a radical socialist agenda is welcome in higher education including felons, ex-convicts, former most wanted fugitives, and Communists. Professors Angela Davis, a former FBI Most Wanted, and Ward Churchill, pseudo Native American wanna-be, are but two that readily come to mind.
Before these dedicated socialists can transform the schools, and subsequently society itself, they must first transform the next generation of educators. And they do so with an extraordinary enthusiasm. Preservice teachers are a particularly vulnerable target for multiculturalist ideologies. These unsuspecting, impressionable youngsters eagerly grasp onto any legitimate sounding academic theory put forth by their liberal professors. These kids represent the next generation of educators “who will use the classroom to transcend the negative effects of the dominant culture”10.
After four or more years of marinating in wacko MCE concepts they are thoroughly indoctrinated. Upon demonstrating a commitment to multicultural ideals, this new cadre of teachers is ready to pursue social justice. They are sent out to transform the schools and then transform society (a.k.a. overthrow the dominant culture).
These oddball concepts have the weight and influence of governing authority. The oversight authority for teacher training programs in universities is the National Council for the Accreditation for Teacher Education (NCATE). NCATE controls the accreditation of university teacher education programs nationally. Institutions of higher education must comply with NCATE standards or lose accreditation for their programs. And non-accredited programs attract few students. So schools are obliged to adhere to NCATE standards, which have traditionally been tough but reasonable.
Recently, however, NCATE imbedded in its list of six standards a new “disposition requirement” for teacher candidates that can be broadly interpreted by far left activist faculty members. The disposition requirement can be used to twist its meaning in ways that the NCATE board of directors may not have intended. It can be and is being used to screen out teacher candidates with unacceptable political beliefs.
Traditionally, teacher candidates were required to demonstrate “knowledge of their subject field and mastery of essential educational skills”11. However, under the NCATE disposition requirement, teaching skills have now been supplanted “by beliefs and attitudes related to values such as caring, fairness, honesty, responsibility, and social justice”12.
Although teacher education programs now seek candidates who can demonstrate a proper disposition toward social justice, apparently intelligence is not part of the selection criteria. Take for example Aurora, Colorado high school social studies teacher Jay Bennish. This twenty-something product of modern university teacher education could arguably be called the poster child for MCE.
His commitment to social justice and his dearth of intellect were brazenly put on display in early March 2006. During a class session, Bennish went on a rant in which he equated George W. Bush to Adolf Hitler, declared that capitalism is responsible for the world’s problems with human rights, and claimed that World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the US Capital Building, the focus of the 9/11 attacks, were legitimate military targets. In addition, his “lecture” was filled with inaccuracies that any real social studies teacher would have researched before presenting as fact. He stated that the US is the world’s largest producer of cigarettes and that millions of people in other countries die as a result. China, India, and Brazil each produce more cigarettes than the US. Bennish also claimed that a British Prime Minister was assassinated in Palestine by Israeli Zionists, clearly an utter prevarication. What’s more, he audaciously allowed this lesson to be taped!
When the contents of his lecture were disclosed, Bennish was placed on leave with full pay. After he hired an ACLU lawyer, he was reinstated without penalty about a week later. He is now back in the classroom where he is free to continue indoctrinating impressionable students without fear of reprisal. And that is what MCE is, indoctrination, not teaching.
So, from whom do young teachers like Bennish learn their craft? They pick up these little tid bits of knowledge and attitude from people like Assistant Professor of Education at Brooklyn College, Priya Parmar. Professor Parmar teaches that “rap music is an effective tool for teaching English literacy to school children.” She has a disdain for proper grammatical use of the English language referring to it as “the language of white oppressors.” She requires her students to develop lesson plans with a social justice focus.13.
Another dispenser of contemporary pedagogical knowledge is University of Illinois at Chicago Professor Bill Ayers. This teacher’s teacher is a former leader of the domestic terrorist group The Weathermen. He spells the word America with three Ks (Amerikkka). And he “argues against expelling disruptive students from classrooms, especially (minority students)”14.
History and English are required courses for education majors. Saint Exavier College Professor of History Peter Kirstein’s philosophy is that “teaching is not a dispassionate, neutral pursuit of ‘truth.’ It is advocacy and interpretation.” This admitted Socialist has written that “one of the great achievements of Communism...is its relatively successful containment of American power from the early 1950s through the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991.”15 Absurd.
Associate Professor of English Grover Furr who teaches at Montclair State University “believes it was ‘morally wrong’ for the United States to bring about the collapse of the Soviet Union.” He is a staunch supporter of communist dictator Joseph Stalin claiming him to be grossly misunderstood as a human being.16

What’s Next?
The multicultural context of social studies has metastasized to other subject areas and disciplines. In some schools, traditional mathematics has been superseded by the new “multicultural math.” Imagine, a more tolerant arithmetic. We go from: Bobby has five apples and gives two to his friend Pete...to: Five undocumented, oppressed migrant workers are seized by the imperialist US Border Patrol. But seriously, the Iowa Global Education Manual once asked 4 - 6th grade students to calculate the number of trees in the rainforest that died each time they ate red meat.
What’s next? How about chemistry with a social justice focus? Before you fall over laughing, a recent teaching position announcement from an Illinois community college invited applicants for “Diversity Chemistry.” Candidates must demonstrate a “commitment to multicultural education...and to have little or no teaching experience,” said the announcement. Furthermore, the announcement specified that “preference will be given to candidates...(of) under-represented groups”.17 This announcement demonstrates the inherent bias and racism that has come about as a result of multicultural brainwashing. Membership in ethnic or gender based groups now supersedes experience, skills, and ability.
Another position announcement from a major world-class institution listed as required qualifications “scholarly practice that emphasizes critical perspectives in education and social justice...urban education...(and) critical multiculturalism.”18 And this was for a position in Art Teacher Education!

Origins of MCE
At the risk of sounding like a tin-foil hat, black-helicopter fanatic, much of MCE is inspired by the radical ideas of renowned Socialist Julian Huxley, brother of Aldous and first head of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The UNESCO constitution, written by Huxley in 1945, encourages a global educational model and “the intellectual and moral solidarity of mankind.”19 UNECO forces its objectives on schools world wide through the binding authority of international laws and treaties. Unfortunately, the US is a UNESCO member state.
It appears as though MCE has a distinctive Marxist, hence socialist, emphasis. Texas A&M University Professor of Sociology Joe Feagin teaches courses with a decidedly Marxist focus. He states, “The Marxist tradition provides a powerful theory of oppression centered on such key concepts as class struggle, worker exploitation, and alienation. Marxism identifies the basic social forces underlying class oppression, show how human beings are alienated in class relations, and points toward activist remedies for oppression.”20 Replace the word “class” with “race” or “ethnic” and one can see the parallels between Marxism (a.k.a. socialism) and MCE.
MCE is strong on pointing out the flaws in the system, but provides no strategies or solutions to solve the problems it highlights other than encouraging activist radicalism and social disruption to “transcend the effects of the dominant culture.”21 Nor does it tell us what it wants as a result of the transformation of society. MCE is long on critiques, but short on solutions.
On August 28, 1963, Martin Luther King said in a speech in Washington DC, “I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” Multicultural education seeks to bury this dream under the detritus of socialism. Parents can counter the effects of MCE by communicating regularly with their children. But don’t wait. Red flags should be going up when kids come home spouting rote liberal rhetoric.
_______________
1. Paul Gorski, “Defining Multicultural Education,” McGraw-Hill Supercite, McGraw-Hill Companies, 2002. Full text available at http://www.mhhe.com/socscience/educaation/multi/define.html
2. S. Berline, G. Hull, “Diversity and Multiculturalism: The New Racism,” (citation incomplete)
3. Full text of the article from which this quote was taken is available at www.anchorrising.com
4. Decatur Herald & Review, “U.S. Anthem in Spanish Criticized,” Associated Press, April 28, 2006, p. A-3
5. Paul Gorski, “Working Definition,” EdChange Multicultural Pavilion, 2006. Full text available at www.edchange.org/multicultural/initial.html
6. Gorski, op. cit. footnote 1
7. Proverbs 22:6
8. David Horowitz, The Professors: The 101Most Dangerous Academics in America, Regnery Publishing, Inc. (Washington DC, 2006), p. 234
9. ibid
10. K.C. Johnson, “Disposition for Bias,” full text available at http://insidehighered.com/views/2005/05/23/johnson
11. Ibid
12. National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE, 2005)
13. Horowitz, op. cit., p. 296. Also see this professor’s web site at http://depthome.cuny.edu/schooled/Parmer-cv.html
14. Horowitz, op. cit., p. 32. Also see this professor’s web site where his book Fugitive Days: A Memoir (Beacon Press, 2001) is referenced. It is a memoir of his days in the Weathermen domestic terrorist group: www.uic.edu/educ/college/faculty/biopages/%20AYERS.HTM
15. Horowitz, op. cit., p. 247. Also see this professor’s web site at: http://people.sxu.edu/~kirstein/
16. Horowitz, op. cit., p. 186. Also see this professor’s web site at: http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/homepage.html. His extensive writings and philosophy are accessible here.
17. Position announcement from Parkland Community College, Illinois, dated April 17, 2006
18. Position announcement from the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, Illinois, dated January 3, 2006
19. Manual of the General Conference United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (Paris, 2002)
20. Horowitz, op. cit., p. 169
21. Johnson, op. cit.