They have "Six Guiding Pillars For Interdisciplinary Learning" that all ethnic studies courses in the district must adhere to. They include positioning ethnic studies as a counterweight to the presumably false dominant narrative:
Ensure the study of how colonization has lead to neocolonial ideology, systemic and structural racism and present day mainstream culture resulting in dehumanization, genocide and ecological destruction.Critique empire-building in history and its relationship to white supremacy, racism and other forms of power and oppression.Analyze and articulate concepts such as race, racism, racialization, ethnicity, equity, ethno-centrism, eurocentrism, white supremacy, self-determination, liberation, decolonization, sovereignty, imperialism, settler colonialism, and anti-racism etc.Challenge Hegemony and NormalizationCo-construct learning spaces with students to develop critical historical literacy in order to counter the normalization of the master dominant narrative
There are a lot of problems with these. Most groups throughout history have exhibited antipathy towards other groups, whether they are different colors, tribes, cultures, languages or castes. The hate for the "other" is not only a function of white vs. non-white; it is almost universal. In fact, the entire idea of equal rights and anti-racism is a Western concept. In fact, some native American groups would engage in "slave raiding" and steal members of other groups to be slaves to them.
I don't think the ethnic studies curriculum teaches that.
Additionally, "colonialism" is also not a Western concept. Indigenous peoples expanded their territories and took over other lands and their people.
The ethnic studies program pretends to give a counter-narrative to classical Western history, but it is at least as biased and political as any other.
I was struck by their first pillar, though, about indigeneity:
Cultivate Indigeneity and Cultural Roots● Recognize diasporic indigeneity, pre-colonial ancestry, and roots.● Place high value on the pre-colonial, ancestral knowledge, narratives, and communal experiences of Indigenous people, communities of color, and groups that are typically marginalized in society.
By this definition, Jews should be celebrated: they maintain their culture, their traditions, their customs, and their languages even when dispersed. And they have always remained deeply connected to the land of their birth, Israel. Zionism and the rebirth of Israel was a victory for anti-colonialists and for indigenous peoples worldwide. It is an inspiring story, not an example of white supremacy and colonialism.
I had a friend, sadly recently deceased, who was partially native American. He would pepper me with questions on how Jews managed to keep their unity throughout the Diaspora, because he saw in real time how today's native Americans were forgetting everything about their own culture and customs and he wanted to stem this loss.
That is the irony of ethnic studies. If they weren't designed by antisemites and anti-Zionists, students could look at the Jews in their own communities as role models for how an ancient culture maintains its unity, uniqueness, peoplehood, religion, customs and language and yet still be productive members of the larger society.
Isn't that what they want from every minority group?
When students study racism, they could learn how antisemitism has been the prototype for all hate - how Jews have been hated by being associated with every society's biggest ills, even when they contradict each other. And how that hate has morphed into "social justice" today, and even the biggest self-avowed anti-racists can themselves fall into the trap of hate - a much more powerful lesson in how ordinary people can become bigots than studying the Holocaust is.
If ethnic studies wants to accomplish what it claims it wants to accomplish, Jews should be near the center of the coursework. Because what happens to Jews will eventually happen to all other minorities.
