San Francisco Media Company Vox's line of thinking here--this over-woke reinterpretation of American history--is what is seeping into education. I've seen it with my own eyes.
Some people are evidently OK with this, and teaching our kids this version of history. And they think they are the good guys.
No, this isn't about whether or not our kids are learning about the utter evils of the slavery system, the atrocities of the Indian Wars, or the important milestones of the Civil Rights era. They are, as they should. They need to learn from our past, and be better stewards of American aspirations and values.
That's not what this is about.
It is about a reimagination of our historical narrative, in a deliberate, stated effort to dismantle American aspirations and values.
I recall as a student delving deeply into the horrific Fascist regimes that brought about World War II and the Holocaust. Hitler documented it well, taking sinister pride in his methods.
But it is revealing how little we learned about the lesser-documented evils of Stalin and Mao's communism run amok. We focused instead on the Red Scare, where people were blacklisted, and even had their assets frozen, for endorsing "unacceptable" political opinions. (Sound familiar, Canada?)
Did we learn nothing from the chilling of our First Amendment?
When Vox spins the American Revolution as a bad thing, that we would be better off controlled by a foreign government, they are preaching Marxist One World Order. When you see that, you cannot unsee it.
I get way too many articles forwarded to me from readers of Vox as some kind of authority on right and wrong. The woke consensus: America is wrong.
Thankfully, even San Francisco has had enough, and recognizes who the bad guys are. Their recent school board recall was overwhelming in its message.
And thankfully for those bad guys, America is a country of redemption, so they have an opportunity to redeem themselves and reject the premise that American institutions must all be blown up and recreated in the twisted vision of Karl Marx.
No blacklisting, no freezing of assets, no divisive language or draconian measures to curb overzealous expressions of grievance--unlike Justin Trudeau.
Woke Americans should not be forced to change their opinion to one that is more "acceptable" to the internal party polling.
We are fixing this in the most democratic, American way--at the ballot box.
https://www.vox.com/2015/7/2/8884885/american-revolution-mistake
Get your free pass to the 2022 Living Superior Virtual Boat Show! Featuring more than 40 of the latest models exhibiting at boat shows around the nation!
https://www.livingsuperiormagazine.com/post/living-superior-2022-virtual-boat-show
Attention lake residents and travelers: Are you sick of all the isolation you've been experiencing?
It is time to reconnect with those who share your enthusiasm for lake living.
Join the exclusive Living Superior Locals Community today, where life is better on the lake!
Disclaimer: Let me start by saying the requisite, "I am not a lawyer," but I have put words into the mouths of lawyers, researched for lawyers, written for lawyers, and argued with lawyers professionally, strictly adhering to the ethical perimeters of the paralegal profession.
So I think that more than qualifies me to opine on the matter at hand....
ISSUE
You have to mitigate emotion and proceed logically when forming lasting case law. The abortion debate is characterized by unhinged hostility toward opposing viewpoints. By its highly charged, emotional nature, the issue requires sound Constitutional reasoning to govern relevant rights and restrictions.
RULE
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973): The government cannot restrict a woman's right to an abortion under the United States Constitution.
APPLICATION
Abortion might be society's most consistently inflammatory topic. Emotions run high on all sides of the debate. Underlying emotions can be, and are, exploited by effective trial lawyers. But ...
Attention history buffs: do you see any similarities between the following?
1) The Washington Naval Treaty of 1922, where the most powerful and influential people in the world tried to limit Japanese naval expansion, while other world powers expanded their navies.
2) The Great Reset of 2020, where the most powerful and influential people in the world tried to limit American reliance on fossil fuels, while other world powers increased reliance on fossil fuels.
We all know how Item 1 played out. If Item 2 is going to play out in similar fashion, we can only hope it isn't as messy as WWII.
Attention physics buffs: Google "Newton's Third Law."
Here’s a tip on understanding how we got here: look no further than “The Great Reset.” Google it… to the extent Google will let you, that is.
The Great Reset of 2020 gathered the world's most powerful and influential people to discuss radically reshaping the global economy in the vision of World Economic Forum (WEF) founder, Klaus Schwab.
Although it was a very big deal, you probably didn’t hear about it on CNN, strangely enough.
The list of dignitaries who attended the Great Reset reads like an Epstein flight log.
Since then, we have been played like pawns by the world's foremost political chess masters.
In fact, every world crisis since Schwab started his little forum in 1971 has been used as an opportunity. If it weren’t well documented and stated out loud as his strategy, you’d call it a conspiracy theory.
Meanwhile, Putin has been playing his own chess game. And like any Russian chess master, he quietly waited until his predictable opponent showed a vulnerability. ...
