dave@teldata.UUCP (05/08/84)
"Liberty cannot be preserved without a general
knowledge among the people." John Adams.
"If this young republic ever goes down to oblivion, it
will be because of the difficulty of educating its multi-
tudes of rulers." Edmund Burke.
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of
the society but the people themselves: and if we think them
not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a
wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from
them, but to inform(them)." Thomas Jefferson.
This is a copy of an article (without permission) that
I read in a local news paper.
This is for all of you that believe that our educa-
tional system should be controlled by our government and not
by the community (or church). I personaly feel that it is
up to the parents (and local community) to be sure that
their children are being educated. It seems that the parents
have decided that the job was too hard and left it up to the
government. We now have people growing up that have learned
(are learning) to be good slaves to the government that they
should be in control of.
CENSORSHIP: A GROWING THREAT
by ANTHONY T. PODESTA
The past few years have been productive ones for
America's censors.
From the highest levels of government to local communi-
ties and schools across America, censorship has become a
frightening reality. In whatever form it takes-imposing
pre-publication restrictions by government officials, black
listing USIA speakers, denying visas to foreign speakers,
weakening the Federal Freedom of Information Act, prohibit-
ing press access to the Grenada invasion, "protecting" stu-
dents from controversial books, courses, and ideas, elim-
inating textbook coverage of controversial events in Ameri-
can history-the effects of censorship are the same: It sti-
fles the debate and diversity of discussion that tradition-
ally have been the core of our democracy. (we don't have a
democracy, we have a REPUBLIC!! my note).
The government's efforts to control information and
ideas are, according to government spokesperson, in the best
interest of the country. The prevailing attitude: The less
everybody knows, the better.
Administration officials explained that press coverage
of the Grenada invasion was prohibited for fear that the
media weren't "on our side." General Maxwell Taylor ela-
borated the same attitude earlier this year when he said: "I
believe strongly that people have a right to know what their
forces are doing but not today, not tomorrow, but at the
appropriate time." Taylor added that not only is timing cru-
cial to public understanding but how the news is presented
is an important ingredient as well: "If they (the people)
get the information in a block, they might well know what to
do with it, but when they get it piecemeal, there's just
confusion."
In other words: It's dangerous for people to be left to
the task of thinking and sorting things out for themselves;
they might heme to the conclusions different from those
sanctioned by the government.
The same attitude prevails among those who seek to cen-
sor ideas and information from the nation's schools. Stu-
dents, the censors argue, shouldn't be encouraged to arrive
at their own conclusions. Professional Texas censor Norma
Gabler has explained the philosophy succinctly: "An idea
will never do anyone as much good as a fact. The problem
with too many books is that they leave students to make up
their own minds about things."
In other words: Students should be taught what to think
rather than how. They shouldn't be thought the lessons-the
traditional values-that are learned from lively discussion,
dissent, and debate.
Last year, for example, in 48 of the 50 states, there
were documented attempts to remove a wide variety of library
books, textbooks, and courses from the public schools. In a
majority of the incidents, the censors' ire was provoked
because the "questionable" material promoted student discus-
sion and understanding of ideas and competing philosophies.
Library books-such as "The Diary of Anne Frank," "The
Grapes of Wrath," "Of Mice and Men," "The catcher in the
Rye," "To Kill a Mochingbird"-were increasingly declared
unsuitable because they are "sordid," "dreary," "depress-
ing," or "just plain filthy." The problem is that such books
containing ideas that censors say are "antiAmerican" or
"unChristian."
Textbooks that probe searing social problems also are
on the hit lists of the censors, and because such textbooks
are economic liabilities, publishers consistently have begun
to shy away from text materials that the censors might label
"too controversial." The result: textbooks that gloss over
or ignore controversial periods in American and world
history, literature texts that have been purged of contr-
oversial stories such as Shirley Jacksons' classic, "The
Lottery," sanitized dictionaries that have been cleansed of
"offensive" words, and science and biology texts that con-
tain alarmingly little mention of the theory of evolution.
(In 1982, one publisher deleted the word "evolution" from
the company's only high school biology text. The reason for
the omission: "to avoid the publicity that would surround a
controversy.")
Controversy, it seems, has become a threat to the cen-
sors' view of the American way of life.
If the censors continue to succeed, whether at the
national level or in the local schools, our nation will
cease to know-and ultimately forget-the value of our demo-
cratic (REPUBLIC my note) traditions of diversity, dissent,
and debate. Those who believe in the freedoms guaranteed by
the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights would do well to
spread the word: Democracy is a risky business. (I agree
democracy is a risky business, that is why we have or should
have a republic, my note). Without controversy and confron-
tation and open and free debate, there is no way that it can
survive. (Mr. Podesta is Executive Director of People for
the American Way.)
I cannot say I agree with the whole philosophy of the
group but I do agree with the idea that we should not let
the government teach our children.
If one radical a day keeps the government at bay,
what can two radicals do?
Dave.