Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A Colorado elementary school student wore a backpack to school with a Gadsden Flag (“Don’t Tread on Me”). School staff told him he could not have that backpack at school due to its “origins in slavery and the slave trade.” In effect, the Gadsden Flag is the equivalent of the Confederate War Flag, according to his school staff.
His mother met with staff and recorded the exchange. The recording was published on social media. School Board intervenes. Now, the student can wear the backpack to school. In reporting this victory, Red State includes the following:
The mother of the young boy, who is named Jaiden, filmed the meeting she had with the director of the school. In it, you can hear her push back on the idea that the Gadsden flag is about slavery, noting that its origins are in the Revolutionary War. The director remained combative throughout the video, claiming that she had to enforce the policy provided by the district. [emphasis added]
What goes unstated in the report is the origins of the claim by the staff. The staff is “educated” by the 1619 Project. And one of the Project claims is that the Revolutionary War came about to protect slavery in the colonies:
Significant controversy has centered on the project’s claim that “one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery.” According to Princeton Universityprofessor Sean Wilentz, the claim that there was a “perceptible British threat to American slavery in 1776” is an ahistorical assertion, noting that the British abolitionist movement was practically non-existent in 1776. Wilentz also criticized the project’s mentioning the Somerset v Stewart case to support its argument, since that legal decision concerned slavery in England, with no effect in the American colonies. Wilentz wrote that the project’s claims that “if the Revolution had caused the ending of the slave trade, this would have upended the economy of the colonies, in both the North and the South” did not consider the numerous attempts to outlaw—or impose prohibitive duties on—the slave trade by several colonies from 1769 to 1774. The historians critical of the project have said that many of America’s Founding Fathers, such as John Adams, James Otis, and Thomas Paine, opposed slavery. They also said that every state north of Maryland took steps to abolish slavery after the revolution.
So we have a staff that is indoctrinated by the 1619 Project that sees anything reflecting American history as having origins in slavery and the slave trade, and a School Board believing that American history includes both pro- and anti-slavery elements and that the Revolutionary War was not fought to preserve slavery.
Is this victory? No, this means we have a serious problem. The staff will not be “re-educated” as a result of the School Board decision. They are only told that in one particular way, they are limited in enforcing their beliefs. This School Board has a miseducated staff plying students with miseducation.
And this is not one school. This includes many, many schools, a teacher’s union, and likely more than a few school boards.
Poison is flowing in the bloodstream of American education.Published in