Public Education Under Siege

One thing that all vibrant and flourishing democracies share in common is a strong public education system. The strongest democracies in the world have the best public education systems in the world. This should not be surprising news. It makes sense that countries that excel in the education of their people would have persons who are most prepared to participate fully and in a knowledgeable way in the political life of their societies.

In addition to having the best public education systems in the world, we also know that the strongest democracies in the world are the countries that are demonstrably the happiest, healthiest, most free, least corrupt, least racist, least sexist, most protective of LGBTQ2S+ rights, and most ecologically sustainable countries on earth.

With such a strong correlation between a strong public education system and a vibrant democracy and with such a strong correlation between a strong democracy and a flourishing society, it would seem reasonable and wise for any country interested in maintaining a vibrant democracy and a flourishing society to invest in maintaining and strengthening its public education system.

Why then are so many states in the United States like our beloved states of Oklahoma and Texas doing just the opposite? Why are we seeing public education at all levels underfunded, understaffed, and under attack? Why are teachers being underpaid, underprepared, and disrespected?

If public education is so central to a flourishing society, why then is public education in the United States under siege? Why are teachers and schools, especially in places of great poverty, both urban and rural, being attacked and punished for our systemic failures rather than being given the support they need to educate students in such challenging contexts, where millions of children and youth live in poverty, often come to school hungry, and experience trauma that makes learning so difficult?

Sadly, tragically, sinfully even, part of the answer to these questions lies in the fact that there are persons and entities who are profiting both politically and financially from the systemic failures of our public education system – failures, which they actively cause and perpetuate.

As if profiting trillions of dollars off of our unjust and inequitable healthcare system is not enough, these entities see trillions of more dollars to be made on controlling and privatizing public education, with the extra perk of being able to control the curriculum in the schools to further their political and financial interests.

This is what the battle over vouchers is all about.

If you can make public education fail and then convince enough people that the only way to turn things around is by giving people public money to attend private schools, this takes even more money from public schools, further insuring their continued failure, and puts money directly into the hands of the providers of private education.

It is a pernicious and vicious cycle, and it rarely provides students and families who are persons of color with enough voucher assistance to attend a private school, thus bringing even more racial and economic segregation to an already deeply racist and inequitable educational system.

In addition to the profits that can be made by private interests in privatizing public education, weakening our public education system also furthers the interests of persons, groups, and other entities within our society who do not have an interest in strengthening our democratic processes, structures, and institutions. For these persons, a more fully participatory democracy is seen as a threat to their economic and political power, a power that is often linked with religious and racial identity and has found dangerously powerful expression in a growing and primarily white and extremely patriarchal Christian nationalism.

It is no accident that the most vocal critics of public education are the ones who accuse public education of “left-wing indoctrination,” who call for a ban on critical race theory” in all of our schools, who call for the banning of books they don’t like from school libraries, and who vilify persons of different sexual orientations and gender identities.

Sadly, though not surprisingly, my home state, Oklahoma, has become ground zero for the ongoing siege against public education with public school leaders, teachers, and even whole school districts coming under vicious and relentless attacks by the very person elected to support the work of public instruction in my state.

In public higher education, Boards of Regents have been stacked with persons with similar ideologies, and searches for university presidents are no longer public and transparent, but rather are done in secret, more reminiscent of a political appointment process than a search for the best academic leader for institutions of higher education. Humanities and the social sciences are being systematically cut in the name of academic program prioritization under the guise of promoting more “job oriented” programs; and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion work at all levels of public education is vilified as leftist propaganda.

And what is offered to replace the “leftist propaganda” of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and to counter “woke” teachers who are indoctrinating kids into the “woke” agenda? PragerU – that is what is being offered.

Even the name of PragerU is propaganda. The use of the letter U makes people associate this right-wing propaganda organization with universities and higher education – much like Trump U attempted to do. It is not a university. It is not a college. It is not even a school. It is a political propaganda organization funded by rightwing billionaires and the religious right to further rightwing causes and promote revisionist history.

Dennis Prager, the founder of PragerU, the curriculum of which Oklahoma State Superintendent of Pubic Instruction Ryan Walters wants in every public school in Oklahoma, said this on his radio show in April of 2022:

“It’s like their race hoax industry. If you see a noose on a college dorm of a Black student, the odds are overwhelming that the noose was put there by a Black student. If you see the n-word on a dormitory building, the odds are overwhelming that a Black student actually did that. We’re filled with race hoaxes.” – Dennis Prager, April 26, 2022

It of course should be noted that all available data and the evidence collected by persons who actually study hate crimes run counter to Prager’s claim, but Prager is not concerned with the actual truth of such things that do not serve the purposes of his propaganda.

PragerU’s founder Dennis Prager is also well-known for saying the following:

“It is an axiom of contemporary marital life that if a wife is not in the mood, she need not have sex with her husband. Here are some arguments why a woman who loves her husband might want to rethink this axiom.” – Dennis Prager, “When a Woman Isn’t In the Mood, Part I,” Town Hall, Dec. 23, 2008

PragerU is also infamous for posting the following statement on social media:

This would be what some would call a “self own.”

PragerU downplays the evils of racism and slavery in American history, even using cartoon misrepresentations of Columbus and Frederick Douglass to make the case to children and youth that slavery was part of the way things were and not as bad as it has been made out to be.

In addition to developing a partnership with Prager, Oklahoma is also testing precedents set by the Supreme Court of the United States concerning the establishment of religion by agreeing to use public education funding for a Catholic online education program that will be promoting Catholic religious teachings to its students.

The Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University characterizes the SCOTUS precedents on the establishment of religion as follows:

“The Lemon test, while it has been criticized and modified through the years, remains the main test used by lower courts in establishment clause cases, such as those involving government aid to parochial schools or the introduction of religious observances into the public sector. Under the three-part test, the court would examine the proposed aid to the religious entity and ensure that it had a clear secular purpose. The Court also would determine if the primary effect of the aid would advance or inhibit religion. For the third prong, the Court would examine whether the aid would create an excessive governmental entanglement with religion.”

https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/lemon-test/

What Oklahoma is attempting to do with public funding of Catholic education is a clear violation of the Lemon Test, but it is uncertain whether the current rightwing Supreme Court will uphold the Lemon Test or not.

One thing is clear, public education is under siege by forces who have power and money to gain from weakening public education. This is both bad for our democracy and bad for the flourishing of our society in general.

It is also clear that Oklahoma has become ground zero in the attack on public education at all levels, which also means that Oklahoma must become ground zero in the fight to protect public education from being overcome by undemocratic and autocratic powers for their economic and religious interests.

For the sake of a vibrant participatory democracy, we cannot afford to allow our public education system to be the subject of a hostile takeover by corporate greed and Christian nationalism.