Zweiter Eintrag -
Today we engage in a brief discussion of history. World history, which although it is rather big, does involve everyone in the world.
Recently reported by the NY Times, 22 September 2010 (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/education/23texas.html) it seems that the forces of evil are rising in Texas schools again, attempting to sugar-coat Islamic history in students' textbooks, leaving only a few astute individuals to combat this terror so subversive, only fools cannot see it. Believe me, if you do not see it, I have bad news for you.
Regardless, one of our fine fighters for free and balanced treatment of all religions on textbooks offered these wise words:
“If you can control or influence our education system, you can start taking over the minds of the young people,” Mr. Rives said. “And so I think we are real passionate that you need to make a bold statement to the publishers that pushing this agenda will not be tolerated in Texas.”
One, "this agenda" is referred to in the article as "a pro-Islamic, anti-Christian version of history" supported by the investments of Islamic companies in American publishing houses. Two, Mr Rives' point should be well taken for anyone with global hegemonic inclinations: if you can influence the education system, you can take over the minds of America's youth.
But let me be honest, in the NY Times article, it is made clear that one of the biggest problems is as follows: "The measure says past textbooks devoted more lines to Islamic beliefs and practices than to Christianity and spelled out atrocities committed by Christian crusaders while ignoring similar atrocities by Muslim fighters." I mean, when learning about the crusades, one needs to really look at the issues carefully and without the leftist academic lens of 'historiographical research.' For example, in the battle of Marrat an-Numan, or siege rather than battle, people always point out the Christian atrocities and never recognize the fact that the Syrian diet caused them to become so delicious and aromatic that whilst fighting, the misunderstood Christian immigrants often to a break from attempting to knock on the front gate for directions, to nibble on a Saracen or two. Can't tell me the thought hasn't crossed your mind to invite the Donners to dinner.
But seriously, people so often clamor for the proper interpretation of history, always moaning about an emphasis on one group or another, or about how something is misconstrued by the "others," that they forget that they are doing the exact same thing. Yes, there are historians that write about the crusades as a product of population pressure, alleviated through migration. In the same vein, there are others who rightly refer to the expansion of Islam in its earliest centuries as "Conquests" and this is actually the majority that I have encountered in reading. Mr Rives belongs on the Narrenshiff... more than most of us.
Finally, there is a concern that "The portrayal of Islam has become an emotional political issue across the country of late, with some Christian conservatives contending that too little attention is paid to the militant aspects of the religion used by terrorist groups to justify their actions." Though the militant aspects of Islam are not only fringe, but not accepted or endorsed by the majority of Islam, they wish this to be the focus of a study of Islam, if it must take place in textbooks. I am fine with this as long as Bernard of Clairvaux's De Laude Novae Militiae to better understand Christianity. Perhaps Urban II's speech at Clermont. I mean, if we are trying to place more attention on Islamic terrorists' justifications for their actions, why not include a deeper look at the religious rational and support slavery had garnered for years after it had been abolished all around the world. Balanced treatment is a good thing, but it is not what Mr Rives or probably any other person on his side actually want.
First, we should take an active role in the education of our children... if I ever have any, I plan on it. The solution is not erimetic homeschooling or the censorship of every textbook that is not "fair and balanced." History is not a science, and a perfectly true account of any history exists only in the minds of those turning a blind eye to the realities of the discipline. If you are like me and only ALMOST omniscient, then the only answer is to do more study on your own, and since no text will ever be without failing, take responsibility yourself. If you do not know if something presented is true, then remedy the problem. Get off your can, stop listening to day time talk shows and political pundits (especially Glenn Beck) and hit a book or two. Who knows, if we don't do something soon, someone might try and "influence our education system" and "start taking over the minds of the young people."
