SC Republicans don’t stop at CRT. Now they want to ban current events?
Imagine a father reassuring his young children as he tucks them into bed at night, “Don’t worry kids, I checked under the bed and in the closet. Not a single CRT to be found. Sleep well.”
CRT, as you may have heard, stands for critical race theory and it is the subject of multiple bills in South Carolina and other states that would limit what America’s children are able to learn.
“Are we really creating a boogeyman,” asked South Carolina Rep. Jerry Govan as the state’s House Education & Public Works Committee discussed Wednesday the merits of five bills designed to limit what South Carolina teachers are allowed to say or do in their classrooms.
Critical race theory, which the committee has yet to sufficiently define, is not part of the state’s academic standards and as our reporter Lucas Daprile recently reported it does not appear anywhere in the state’s K-12 classrooms.
But, as Govan suggested, it has become a boogeyman, a way to suggest that rogue teachers are roaming the countryside filling students’ heads with ideas designed to bring them discomfort about the existence of racism in America.
But banning critical theory race, which again is not being taught in South Carolina schools, was not the only issue on Wednesday’s agenda.
Another was the curious Keep Partisanship Out of Civics Act (curious coming from an incredibly partisan body), which states, “A teacher of history, civics, U.S. government and politics, social studies, or similar subject areas, whether for regular credit or advanced placement credit, may not be compelled by a policy of a state agency, school district, or school administration to discuss current events or widely debated and currently controversial issues of public policy or social affairs.”
In essence, teachers cannot teach what’s going on in the world today?
Other bills would ban the mere mention of The 1619 Project, created by the New York Times, which asserts “that the full origin story of the United States begins not with the arrival of the Mayflower in 1620, but with that of the White Lion and its cargo of captive Africans in Virginia the year before.”
The project has its critics, but as Rep. Terry Alexander noted, “You can’t deny history.”
One representative said the creation of the bills was a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the use of virtual learning, which meant parents were seeing for the first time how their children’s classrooms operated.
At its heart, the classroom instruction likely didn’t change or deviate from the state’s standards, but it made some parents uncomfortable.
During the committee hearing, some members also noted the discomfort of those in the room and the term discomfort appears more than once in some of the bills.
Is that at the root of the debate?
Did parents become uncomfortable with what they saw and heard as their children attended school online?
If so, is feeling uncomfortable enough to warrant banning books and censoring teachers and students?
It shouldn’t be.
Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart once said, “Censorship reflects a society’s lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime.”
South Carolinians, in my experience, are not lacking in confidence, but are instead strong enough to face the past, talk about it, learn from it and move forward.
The committee will take public testimony at its next meeting on Feb. 8 and it is incumbent upon every teacher, parent and student in South Carolina with that same confidence in the state and its children to make their voices heard.
You can call 803-734-3053 or email gingerlee@schouse.gov to ask to speak at the meeting or to submit written testimony.about the five bills.
I have confidence that South Carolina’s parents, teachers and students want the freedom to learn. Now it’s up to you to prove it.