WhatFinger

Dumbfounded that Texas has decided to dispose of the Left's propagandized version of American history

The Left has Gone Maniacally Hysterical over Texas Teaching Authentic American History



The Leftists of this country are gnashing their teeth and writhing in spasms of ignorance over the proposed revising of the Texas social studies curriculum. They are dumbfounded that Texas has decided to dispose of the Left's propagandized version of American history.

The new social studies curriculum is by no means perfect, but is far closer to the authentic history of this nation than the decades of counterfactual didactic teachings were. The members of the opposition to the new curriculum are shackled and bound slaves of ignorance. The Leftists screaming the loudest could only have been suckled on the teats of the pseudo-intellectual and charlatan of American history, Howard Zinn, or a close derivative thereof. These dissenters of history are the end products of years of indoctrination, with the probability of their answering ten fundamental questions about the founding of this country correctly being statistically improbable.

Educational system hijacked by a Leftist's agenda wreaked on this country and its culture

What harm has an educational system hijacked by a Leftist's agenda wreaked on this country and its culture? Look no further than the recently passed health care bill, a bill that is entirely and blatantly unconstitutional. This bill was passed without vote in the Senate and sent to Barack Obama, who eagerly signed it into law. This procedural process would have been unfathomable to the founders of this country. Why? Because of the abject ignorance of voters of this country and the malignant corruption of our elected officials. Pelosi, Reid, Obama, et al. can attribute their elected positions to decades of propaganda taught in schools regarding American history. And it would only be apropos that the same people railing against a history that is contradictory to their spurious view support these politicians. The only plausible defense against these pervasive second-rate Trotskyites is education and literacy, which Texas has attempted. And Thomas Jefferson concurs. An uneducated and uninformed public will be the downfall of our liberty, and as witnessed, the more ignorant our country has become of it's founding principles, the less liberty we possess, and the only method of restoration available to this country is the understanding principles that is was founded upon. Jefferson's remedy: Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty. These naysayers and self-proclaimed liberals of factual history are too simpleminded to know what liberalism is, and oblivious that their ideology is antithetical to liberalism. They are addicted to propaganda, big government, and are incapable of the concept of a self-sustaining life. In short, Thomas Jefferson, whom they adore for the wrong reasons, was a classical liberal: limited government and unfettered individual liberty. A combination unfathomable to government dependents.

Texas has set forth a course to rediscover and teach the authentic history of this country’s founding

Texas has set forth a course to rediscover and teach the authentic history of this country’s founding, devoid of political correctness, prevarications, and the anti-American propaganda the Left needs to dispense to substantiate its existence. These dissenters of history are a hateful lot. After assaying thousands of déclassée opinions of the counterfeit erudite at Facebook’s group 1,000,000 Against the Texas School board's Version of History (79,000 members and holding strong), it is clear this concentration of the obtuse are fine examples of the ignorant and uneducated, with a public forum, sans scholarship. The following quotes are the mode of their literary caterwauls:
  • You don't need to burn or ban books, just rewrite history and science.
  • Help not to rewrite History.
  • Ronald Reagan and conservatism ruined our country.
  • This is worthy of protest! They accuse Washington of infringing on our rights and freedoms, and then turn around and alter American and World History!
  • My God what is happening to us? When did knowledge and education become the enemy? I'm so afraid of the masses running over the truth and brainwashing the country. I do not like the way this country is going.
  • What Texas is doing to education is just disgusting. I'm still in school so what they do to education in Texas could easily affect me. What bastards.
  • If you want to do something about this, join The Thomas Jefferson Movement.
Please note the last sentence in this string regarding Jefferson. Everything these benighted malcontents support is antithetical to what Jefferson envisioned as the role of the federal government. Not one legitimate intellectual argument against the proposed curriculum was made. Moving beyond these amateurs to professional rubes, we encounter a more sophisticated ignorance from compensated journalists. April Castro, writing for the AP, demonstrated in her article, Texas ed board vote reflects far-right influences, why Texas is revising their social studies curriculum.

April Castro's ignorance of U.S. History, mathematics, and the political spectrum is alarming

Castro's ignorance of U.S. History, mathematics, and the political spectrum is alarming, and her unmitigated prejudice against anything conservative, and the Texas State Board of Education, is, quite frankly, on the threshold of comedy. Castro initiates her illiterate exposition with a hazy and intangible proclamation of what constitutes a faction: "A far-right faction of the Texas State Board of Education succeeded Friday in injecting conservative ideals into social studies, history and economics lessons that will be taught to millions of students for the next decade." Considering that the vote was 10-5 in favor of the new curriculum, and that a faction is defined as a smaller group within a larger group, it is impossible for Castro to camouflage her prejudice against the majority of the voting block in her first sentence by proclaiming 2/3rd majority a faction. She also never explains what a "far-right faction" is, even though she wields it as a pejorative. A far-right faction today would sit markedly to the left of the political philosophies of the Founding Fathers, which could only leave disdain for the likes of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, et al. by Castro. Castro then aimlessly wanders into a bewildered query of the Judeo-Christian influences on the Founding Fathers, and her obliviousness of their blatant intent to avoid, at all costs, a democratic form of government: "Teachers in Texas will be required to cover the Judeo-Christian influences of the nation's Founding Fathers, but not highlight the philosophical rationale for the separation of church and state. Curriculum standards also will describe the U.S. government as a ‘constitutional republic,’ rather than ‘democratic....’" There was no philosophical rational for the "separation of church and state" as the "separation of church and state" did not exist, miraculously, for 150 plus years, until the 1947 Supreme Court case Everson vs. Board of Education. The "separation of church and state" is an anti-American plaything that has been brandished by the Left at the slightest suspicion of the Government's acknowledgment of the God that the Founders relied on, prayed to, and used as guidance for crafting the Constitution. It is indisputable that the foundation of the Constitution was based on Natural Law, or Gods' Law. The rational for the "establishment clause" of the 1st Amendment was the same rational as for the 2nd Amendment: the Founders’ intent was to prevent another church-controlled government, as experienced with the Anglican Church in England, and to protect religion from the government. The 2nd Amendment was intended to prevent government confiscation of, or infringement upon, privately owned firearms, which the colonists had just endured during the preceding ten years leading to the Revolutionary War. This Princess of Propaganda, April Castro, and her use of apologetic quotation marks, rendering the phase "constitutional republic" a castrated metaphor, in the stead of a "democratic" government, highlights her uncultivated intellectual disposition. This country was established as a republican form of government, not a democracy. The word "democratic" is never mentioned in the Constitution, and there are volumes of the Founders' writings proclaiming their disdain for a democratic form of government. Moreover, what is found in the Constitution in Article IV, Section 4 of the United States Constitution is, The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a republican form of government. It takes less than an hour to read the Constitution, and it is highly suspect that Castro spent five minutes reading the actual document, and based her statements not on facts, but ideology. Castro appears to be projecting the self-loathing of the Left onto this country with her next statement, and presenting as fact, via her macro-economic callowness, that the periodic travails of the United States free-market could have been avoided by more governmental regulation: “By late Thursday night, three other Democrats seemed to sense their futility and left, leaving Republicans to easily push through amendments heralding ‘American exceptionalism’ and the U.S. free enterprise system, suggesting it thrives best absent excessive government intervention.” "American exceptionalism" came into existence after the Revolutionary War. It existed until the Leftists could no longer be beaten back. Since the turn of the 20th Century, cresting with the leadership of Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi, "American exceptionalism" has become a barren husk of what it once was, beaten into submission by myriad apologies for its very existence. All economies have peaks and valleys; it is the nature of the beast. But every single catastrophic economic happenstance this country has endured can be directly attributed to governmental regulation. I can think of no legitimate reason for the board to have removed Thomas Jefferson from the curriculum. He was one of the more predominant figures regarding the Age of Enlightenment and its influence on the incipient fundamentals of the United States. While the Age of Enlightenment was secular in nature in Europe, Jefferson and company were able to incorporate the Enlightenment's attributes of liberty, republican government, and religious freedom with the devout religiousness of the colonies. But almost every naysayer of the social studies curriculum has been much too quick to lambaste the removal of Thomas Jefferson, and with absolute blindness, as Jefferson, the anti-Federalist in the political spectrum, was to the right of Adams, Washington, Madison, and Hamilton, and would have had no tolerance for the government dependent Left, who are invoking his name in the name of something or other. To understand April Castro, or the 70,000 members of 1,000,000 Against the Texas School board's Version of History, and the Left in general, an understanding of the Founders' reason for the Revolutionary War is in order:
Around 1776, certain important people in the English colonies made a discovery that would prove enormously useful for the next two hundred years. They found that by creating a nation, a symbol, a legal unity called the United States, they could take over land, profits, and political power from the favorites of the British Empire. In the process, they could hold back a number of potential rebellions and create a consensus of popular support for the rule of a new, privileged leadership.
This is an excerpt from A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn, used by the Left for high school and college history classes. Zinn is the messiah of the Left. If you truly believe this country is on the wrong track, as the majority of people polled do, this is what is wrong with this country: The continued perversion of American history, this deceitful propaganda that has poisoned minds. What is wrong with this country is the illegitimacy of casting a vote for a congressman, or president, who is sworn to uphold the Constitution, when neither the congressman, the president, nor the voter, have the faintest idea what the Constitution means.

Support Canada Free Press

Donate


Subscribe

View Comments

Jim Byrd——

Jim Byrd is a conservative writer of constitutional law and politics, with a couple of political satires thrown in per month. Jim generally challenges constitutional law articles that are misleading or just completely wrong.


Sponsored