Florida's history-whitewashing school bill and the banality of fascism.
Fascism succeeds because, at least initially, it sounds moderate and reasonable. But the anodyne language cloaks authoritarian machinations. Take H.B. 7, a Florida law enacted in April that revises existing laws on employment discrimination and K-12 education. A bill so awful it has been challenged by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
It starts by saying that you cannot make it a condition of employment that “a person believe one race, color, sex, or national origin are morally superior to members of another race, color, sex, or national origin. Or that a person is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive because of their demographic. Or that “an individual's moral character or status as either privileged or oppressed” is a result of their race, color, sex, or national origin. (Bolding mine)
Fair enough, I think we can all agree on that. But Florida already had a law that banned discrimination in the workplace. So why did they have to amend it? You can find the answer in the language of the new law. The previous act, Florida 760.10, concisely stated that employers cannot discriminate against an employee,
“because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy, national origin, age, handicap, or marital status.”
The import of the old law was clear. You cannot discriminate against someone for being a member of a group that has traditionally suffered from discrimination. Like many civil rights laws, its aim was to allow others besides white men to get a slice of the pie.
But the new law adds a lot of baggage. The subtext is that you cannot call white people racist, natural oppressors, or inherently privileged. Conservatives will whine that the new law does not say that. To which I would ask why did we then need to amend the old law? It was clear, no? What has changed? The answer is that conservative Florida politicians from Governor DeSantis on down are whipping up white fear of minorities and other oppressed groups for electoral gain.
I guarantee that few, if any, Black politicians thought that adding the fraught language was needed.
And if that was not clear enough, the law specifies that Florida students cannot be made to feel uncomfortable by the actions of their ancestors. Specifically, it says teachers cannot teach that:
“A person, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex, or national origin, bears personal responsibility for and must feel guilt, anguish, or other forms of psychological distress because of actions, in which the person played no part, committed in the past by other members of the same race, color, national origin, or sex.”
It is safe to say that Florida's Republican Legislature did not write the bill to shield Black or Hispanic schoolchildren from the cruel, bloody, and discriminatory parts of American history. Conservatives will argue that the law clearly says that the Civil War and civil rights should be part of the history curriculum and teachers should teach:
“The history of the United States, including the period of discovery, early colonies, the War for Independence, the Civil War, the expansion of the United States to its present boundaries, the world wars, and the civil rights movement to the present.”
Two thoughts: One, the syllabus is not exactly complete. Where is reconstruction, post-reconstruction, and Jim Crow? Will the Civil War be taught factually as a conflict initiated by the South to protect slavery? Or will teachers be only allowed to teach from texts that maintain the lie that the causus belli was to preserve state’s rights in the face of Northern aggression? (More on textbooks later.)
Two, most teachers, like most employees, rely on their paychecks. There is therefore enormous pressure on employees not to jeopardize that paycheck. As Upton Sinclair said, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” The message is clear.
Let’s return to textbooks. The law states,
“Members of the instructional staff of the public schools, subject to the rules of the State Board of Education and the district school board, shall teach efficiently and faithfully, using the books and materials required that meet the highest standards for professionalism and historical accuracy, following the prescribed courses of study, and employing approved methods of instruction.”
And, “Instructional materials recommended by each reviewer shall be, to the satisfaction of each reviewer, accurate, objective, balanced, noninflammatory, current, free of pornography, and material prohibited under and suited to student needs and their ability to comprehend the material presented.”
A noble sentiment, but the words are smoke. Who decides the “highest standards for professionalism and accuracy”? By what metric is “accurate, objective, balanced, noninflammatory, current, free of pornography” measured? Who appoints the reviewers?
The answer is the Florida Board of Education. And who appoints the seven board members? The Governor. And do you think DeSantis is about to name non-partisan experts, with educational expertise, into one of the most highly politicized offices in Florida? (Rhetorical)
The current chair is a finance guy, and the vice-chair is a lawyer. The other five members are the Director of Public Affairs and Government Relations for Walmart, another lawyer, an anti-choice activist doctor, a tech entrepreneur, and the President of AT&T Florida & Caribbean.
Let us return to the curriculum and note that, while it is light on the sordid parts of American history, it does mandate teaching,
“Flag education, including proper flag display and flag salute”. And the “qualities and responsibilities of patriotism.”
Which brings to mind Dr. Johnson’s aphorism on the subject. "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."
Lastly, because this is a conservative law, we should not be surprised that, while it aims to protect fragile white egos, it is cavalier about preventing children from getting sick.
“For students in grades 6 through 12, shall include an awareness of the benefits of sexual abstinence as the expected standard and the consequences of teenage pregnancy.”
“1003.42(3) Any student whose parent makes written request to the school principal shall be exempted from the teaching of reproductive health or any disease, including HIV/AIDS, its symptoms, development, and treatment. Course descriptions for comprehensive health education shall not interfere with the local determination of appropriate curriculum which reflects local values and concerns.”
God forbid the unfortunate child should live in a community where “local values” include wishful thinking, ignorance, and purity pledges.
As no public policy analysis would be complete without the legal community running up their fees, let us hear from them. Lawyers representing the Florida Governor and Attorney General last week rebutted claims that H.B.7 is unconstitutional. “The First Amendment,” they argued, “does not compel Florida to pay educators to advocate ideas, in its name, that it finds repugnant.”
Where is the fainting couch?