Got Diversity?
At fifteen years old, I chose to take a fusion class of American History and American Literature known as American Studies. In a touch of modest irony, the class involved much more than American Culture, it was a fusion of all those cultures that have come to serve as the foundation of the United States of America. I found the course enlightening, and did not understand why so little of my classmates had opted to take the course. It taught me much more than an appreciation of our country’s history and it’s literature. American Studies taught me that the United States truly is that melting pot you learn about in elementary school, and that our country is founded on a mutually understanding of diversity and respect for that diversity.
Now, back to Arizona, and their ever so knowledgeable Jan Brewer. Something tells me she went to a school headed by those with a very small mind, and narrow perspective.
What is her newest bill? Arizona House Bill 2281. This down to earth winner prohibits ethnically biased classes. In other words, if a class concerns one race, it is prohibited from being taught. Here is the breakdown, courtesy of 2281:
- Promote the overthrow of the United States government.
- Promote resentment toward a race or class of people.
- Are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group.
- Advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.
Sadly, this bill is nothing new in Arizona. State school chief, and attorney general candidate, Tom Thorne has been pushing the bill for years. Thorne believes classes concerning other ethnicities and cultures harbored a type of “ethnic chauvinism” and taught students that whites, in the United States, are responsible for suppressing minorities. What a backwards way of justifying prohibiting classes that teach diversity. Thoughts, anyone? I taste irony.
One might understand a bill such as this passing if it had some basis in reality. Yes, various school districts in Arizona do offer classes and programs geared towards African-Americans, Latinos, Asians, and Native Americans. These classes teach students the history and literature of different races and cultures, but successfully manage to relate the class’s subject matter back to American history, giving it a sort of American perspective. Where is the chauvinism?
This bill does have a clear and present target seen in a Tucson Unified School District, with a particular aim at the Mexican American Studies Department. As the program claims, however, it relies on hegemony as a basis of its creation.
It baffles me, personally, that a sane person could sit down and willfully sign away a student’s right to education. A student will gain from knowing mathematical equations, they will gain with an expanded vocabulary, and a student will gain tremendous amounts if they are well versed in the many cultures that come to stitch our country together. Signing away a student’s right to that type of education merely signs away part of their right to appreciate the diversity living within their home country. 
After Jan Brewer’s second controversial bill in the past month, it is safe to say: Jan Brewer, you must be a racist with an agenda and a transparent Trojan horse. I feel that is far from judgmental, clearly this woman is using her spot to put down minorities, primarily Mexicans, right to live in America, and the right of students to learn about the different cultures of minorities, particularly Mexican culture and history.
Governor Jan Brewer’s bill has not been enforced with a proper and vocal bashing. The United Nations human rights experts expressed a great deal of concern sprouting from Arizona’s new educational reform. They believe what all other opposing people do:
“The state superintendent of schools, the primary state official who promoted this legislation, has repeatedly stated that the law is aimed at eradicating particular existing ethnic studies programs that provide instruction featuring the history, social dynamics, and cultural patterns of Mexican-Americans in the United States.
‘The independent experts noted that “such law and attitude are at odds with the State’s responsibility to respect the right of everyone to have access to his or her own cultural and linguistic heritage and to participate in cultural life. Everyone has the right to seek and develop cultural knowledge and to know and understand his or her own culture and that of others through education and information.”
Eugene Robinson, a brilliant writer from The Washington Post, brings up a great point that remained virtually untouched by other media outlets. Does this law then, in turn, abolish the ability to teach basic history?
“More than half the students in the Tucson Unified School District are Latino, the great majority of them Mexican-American. The land that is now Arizona once belonged to Mexico. Might teaching that fact “promote resentment” among students of Mexican descent? What about a class that taught students how activists fought to end discrimination against Latinos in Arizona and other Western states? Would that illegally encourage students to resent the way their parents and grandparents were treated?”
There is clearly a basket of unresolved issues present in Arizona. It is true that certain parts of Arizona are suffering from illegal immigrants, but not to the extent of deserving the newest immigration law. There is also no uncertainty in my mind, and many other’s that educational reform is entirely unneeded and just another bigoted move.
The show is an interesting one, which may be the swiftest way to put it. What comes to mind when you think of Charles Darwin and … rap? A tough mix to conjure up. That is, unless you are Baba Brinkman.
September 25, 2010
Come One, Come All
These next coming days will probably be the only days I stick to a severely biased news network and do not mind doing so. Why? Well, because for once, they are beyond right and I cannot seem to do anything but nod in agreement with them. The network? Fox News… Now, please, stop shaking your finger at me. The issue? Immigration. I know, immigration has been so drawn out and chatted about it is almost unnerving. But, as long as there are border hoppers and illegal workers illegal immigration will always be relevant, so why not chat some more concerning it?
Everyone knows the deal with illegal immigration. I mean deal as in definition, so far very few parties have made out well in this illegal situation and I am sure you can guess by process of elimination that so far, America has not been one of them. In 2007, America’s immigrant population reached 37.9 million, this including both legal and illegal immigrants. This statistic translates roughly to one in eight of those residing in America to be immigrants. If one would like to go further and know how many of those immigrants happen to be illegal, it is about one in three. Where do many of them hail from? Nearly half of the Mexican immigrants in America are here illegally, along with one half of Central American immigrants and one-third of South American immigrants. It may sound like the singling out of an ethnicity, but it’s not, it is just a cold hard truth.
With this constant flow of negative statistics, a person has to wonder: why are these immigrants coming, and staying, illegally? Is it for the American Dream of that darling cape with a white picket fence? Ah, to have two full sized bathrooms and a breakfast nook. Or is it because they are safer here in the good ole’ United States? I mean, who really wants to stay in Mexico with this unending drug war? No hands? I didn’t think so. Then what is it?
If you could enter a country, nearly free of financial cost, send your children to school without having to pay taxes, and possibly receive government financial aid, wouldn’t you jump on that border crossing band wagon? Welcome to America, land of the free.
I know, illegal immigrants do participate in their share of work, and at a depressingly low cost. Remember, this low cost is generally paid under the table, tax-free. It is that cost that makes these illegal immigrants attractive, and so employable by corporations and small businesses alike. Actually, so employable that they are among the highest percentage of employed people residing in New York City today. Citing recent Census statistics, Mexicans, as the one of the largest immigrant groups present in New York City, are more likely to be employed than an actual New York City native. This employable nonsense is not something that is only harbored in New York City; it is spreading among the country too. Illegal immigrants are taking jobs that should rightfully be handed to those who live in America, legally.
If only the problem with illegal immigration stopped with those who have become employed over legal American citizens. There is also the crime to think about. First off, illegal immigration is a crime punishable by the United States government. A family of illegal immigrants crossing American borders and staying undermines America’s national security and puts a drain on national funding. Though, statistics can be found that illegal immigrants are less likely than an American native to commit a heinous crime due to fear of being deported, isn’t living in America illegally and forcing Americans to pay the way heinous enough?
If all of this is true, then why did Stephen Colbert appear in Congress fighting for rights of immigrants currently residing and working in the United States? He may like to speak out for those who are not usually heard, and fight for their rights but… Why would you give an illegal resident Constitutional rights? I may not have been there when the Bill of Rights was first drafted, but I am immensely confident that “We the People” meant Americans, and those legally residing in America.
Colbert’s show of meager intelligence and mockery was just that, nothing more. Essentially, his satirical notion came down to those illegal immigrants holding agricultural jobs. Colbert, before addressing Congress did participate in a day’s work to become a sort of self-proclaimed expert.
Farm work may be grueling, but does that mean a legal American would deny such a job? I would like to think the answer to that question would be a ‘no’.
Stephen Colbert’s appearance may have been nothing more than a headache inducer, but the Democratic Party seems intent on making illegal immigration more of an everlasting migraine. It looks as if Colbert may have had one thing right, many of them may be out of jobs come November.
This notion in turn brings me to The DREAM (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors) Act. If I were to go with the nutshell explanation of what The DREAM Act really is, I would tell you it is amnesty for illegal immigrants between the ages of twelve and thirty-five. Oh yes, amnesty. How? By receiving credits in higher education or serving proper military service, those illegal immigrants previously in the United States for five years, can apply and be granted American citizenship. The cost? Well, that would mean American taxes paying for those four years of high school, and the possible years before that, required by any higher education institution. And an illegal immigrant participating opts to go in to the military? Those positions are paid once boot camp is completely. So yes, the Democratic Party wants to pay illegal immigrants to become legal.
Then, what does the Republican Party so desire within the realms of illegal immigration? Do not fret; this issue was rightfully addressed in their newest “Pledge to America”.
This whole debate may sound like it is leaking from a Conservative’s mouth, or maybe even a Tea Partier’s political leanings but isn’t it just common sense that illegal immigrants are illegal? This then striking the possibilities of a well-rounded education, employment opportunities and equal rights… Away? That is what I had though, but who knows, maybe it’s not common sense and somewhere along the way a large group of Americans forgot what “We the People” truly means. Or, maybe that meaning has just evolved in to more of a “Come one, Come all, here is my open wallet” type of interpretation.