Radical multiculturalism a growing problem in public schools

Textbooks and school activities that promote destructive forms of multiculturalism are proliferating in U.S. public schools, funded by local and federal tax dollars, with alarmingly little notice or resistance from parents or education officials.

Non-educators who win election or appointment to school boards may be inclined to entrust supervision of instruction to administrators and teachers, lest they be seen as meddlers or even censors.

That might be a reasonable instinct in normal times, but board members who are oblivious to the growing injection of radical agendas into classroom instruction fail in their duty to be good stewards of our children’s education.

A prime current example is the widespread use of U.S. and world history textbooks that are actively glorifying Islam and sanitizing its radical elements, while downplaying or denigrating the Judeo-Christian roots of the United States and Western civilization in general.

The American Textbook Council (ATC), a scholarly organization that keeps tabs on textbook trends, found in a review of 10 of the most widely used junior and senior high school textbooks a concerted effort to cleanse jihad — the rallying cry of Islamic terrorists — of all belligerent connotations.

It is true that jihad has divergent meanings, some of which may have to do with personal religious perspectives. However, it is absurd to deny that it has anything to do with the concept of waging a “holy war” to secure the objectives of radical Islam.

Perhaps the most extreme pro-Islam revisionism is found in the History Alive series of secondary-school texts published by the Teachers Curriculum Institute (TCI). These textbooks have been used, approved or endorsed in a growing number of school districts in Illinois, California, Texas, Florida, Washington State, and elsewhere. The seventh-grade text defines jihad simply as “to strive,” explaining: “Jihad represents the human struggle to overcome difficulties and do things that are pleasing to God. Muslims strive to respond positively to personal difficulties as well as worldly challenges. For instance, they might work to become better people, reform society, or correct injustice.”

The TCI text goes on to describe jihad as sometimes involving a “struggle against oppression.” Thus, the textbook teaches schoolchildren that those targeted for terrorist acts such as the September 11, 2001, mass murder are, in fact, the oppressors.

Incredibly, History Alive devotes five full chapters, 62 pages, to putative accomplishments of Islam through the ages. One chapter focuses in great detail on such teachings as the Five Pillars of Faith, complete with elaborate illustrations.

While not as extreme as History Alive, many other widely used textbooks present a theme of universal Islamic tolerance, or what a Prentice Hall volume weirdly terms a “multicultural society.” Never mind that acceptance of other faiths runs counter to the widespread practice of Islam. Some of the texts completely gloss over the subjugation of women under Islamic law.

  • Pingback: The Unknown Story of Pocahontas | Command the Raven

  • Pingback: AP English–September 29th | Stearns

  • Libertista

    “social and economic justice” = Code for communism. Yeah, that’s working out real well in North Korea and Venezuela.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Matt-Herrick/100000969560328 Matt Herrick

    What astounds me, is the same folks who complain about the smallest infringement of their “civil-liberties” here in the U.S. by what they see as an oppressive conservative Christian right, are the staunchest defenders and, in fact, promoters of a religion that is far more conservative in it’s most moderate form.

  • wane

    What scares me about the libs it seems like that strongest of human basics self preservation has some how been short circuited. Didn’t we all watch the beheading of Dan Peril.
    Can there be any doubt what Muslims would do to each and every one of the Libs friends.

  • Newly Minted

    The leftists have found someone they love more than abortion, homosexuality and euthanasia, something that provides more bang for the buck and gets the job done quicker than the above – Islam. What do they have in common? Doesn’t Islam oppose abortion and homosexuality? Well yes, but that doesn’t stop a good, suicidal leftist.

    What the disparate things that leftists love have in common is both tend to promote death in the west and in America. Leftists are nihilists. The are amoral. Man can worship either God or Man himself. In the cultural wreckage of leftism, there is nothing left that is holy so a nihilistic suicidal gloom prevails. In that gloom the only pleasures are hedonistic. They can’t believe in love, the family, in life and purity. So they see Christianity not in terms of life, forgiveness and love because they’ve lost the ability to believe in them. Christianity for the committed leftist is only something that will take away their booze, sex, pot and abortion.

    In this haze, leftists have stumbled upon Islam. Islam has more potential to destroy the west than abortion or homosexuality ever did.

    • flips

      Most “leftists” actually believe in and fight for social and economic justice, just like Jesus and Martin Luther King.

      The rest of this stuff you are making up out of your Glenn Beck-addled brain.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Deron-Reid/1029130975 Deron Reid

        sorry buddy, you are off base. Conservatives are the ones that strive for social and economic justice, regardless what the lefty’s say.

        Woodrow Wilson, a progressive, was a bigot, as was Byrd, Gore Sr. et al. (Gore sr/byrd voted against the civil rights act of ’64 (look it up))

        The KKK went after freed slaves and white republicans.(Remember Lincoln?)

        Conservatives believe that everyone should be free. free to choose and free to earn.

        those that oppress believe that those that want to choose should be limited in their choices, and those that earn should be penalized for earning. (unlimited wealth by Paul Zane Pilzer is an easier read than Rand)

        furthermore – segregation was a state sponsored concept, not private industry. and the governors opposed to it’s overturning were democrats. the government that the left so loves is responsible for Jim Crow.

        Who sent down the NG to get black students to school? Eisenhower? Wasn’t he a Republican? Kennedy took the credit (typical democrat) but it started on a conservatives watch, just like the freeing of the slaves.

        Lastly, the two men you last cited (Jesus, MLK) believed in natural law, that our rights come from God. Not the Government. i think the Tea Party crowd believes in the same thing.