Has Arizona gone completely nuts?

[somavision]

A general note about history.
What is considered history or what is given priority as historically significant is not static, nor is it universal.
When a national or region selects possible curriclum, it is shaping a collective national identity, a shared inclusive narrative.

If a curriculum focuses on white people, who for centuries had the privilage of writing history, particularly in the US, then this can help maintain and reinforce and a national narrative that excludes Black people.

There are other examples, for instance the Irish. There are two reasons that differentiates the Irish american narrative from the African american narrative. Firstly the Irish did not have their personal or cultural identities, stripped when being bought over to the US as slaves. And shared skin culture allows for easier assimilation into the established cultural narrative.

Due to the circumstances in which many Black Americans where bought to the U.S., as a race has had it's contributions vastly underepresented.
And whilst I realsise that the topic was relating to "A history month in the U.S." similar projects happen elsewhere, for example in the U.K.

This change in emphasis and perspective on educating and understanding 'history', is in fact about shifting the national identity to make it more inclusive, fairer and equal.

And history is always political, whether it is selected by teachers or politicians. If a teacher is given free licence to choose a curriculum, his or her choice will be as much shaped by his or her politics as any government.

[marooned]

Due to the circumstances in which many Black Americans where bought to the U.S., as a race has had it's contributions vastly underepresented.
And whilst I realsise that the topic was relating to "A history month in the U.S." similar projects happen elsewhere, for example in the U.K.

Well I think if I were black I might feel rather singled out and given some sort of "you're so special because of your ethnicity" award during that entire month, and once again I wouldn't be able to simply be a person and think of myself as simply a person without all these constant reminders that I'm actually not a person, but a black person (a person who always comes with a caveat). This is generally why I find it insulting, and I find it as an excuse to not actually fix problems of representation by just throwing it in on the side as though that makes it all better (kind of like the two pages of "what were black people doing during such and such time?" in a history book). And it needn't be black history month--I would feel this way as a member of any "group" that has a special day/month devoted to it. I mean other people might feel differently about this, but anyway. And maybe I am under-representing the purpose/meaning of a cultural identity (which can be powerful and a source of strength/identity) as I don't personally feel attached to any such identity and like feeling I don't have to have one. My feeling of it being insulting though rests on how I think I would feel in such a situation and how I could understand one might feel. Of course having history taught to me that completely neglected the history of those of my ethnic group as though we don't exist at all and never did except in mere snippets would also feel unfair and insulting... but I might rather be invisible than directly insulted by having a special month that I'm supposed to feel proud about and that again ties me as belonging to a group, where I can never be free of it. Of course being invisible often comes at a high price: the price of not mattering... and so in the end, it is far worse.

This is getting really off topic. I didn't really want to say much on the actual topic as I'm not quite sure what has happened (I consistently neglect to watch/read the news) and I know that tcaudilllg tends to exaggerate.

[somavision]

Well I think if I were black I might feel rather singled out and given some sort of "you're so special because of your ethnicity" award during that entire month, and once again I wouldn't be able to simply be a person and think of myself as simply a person without all these constant reminders that I'm actually not a person, but a black person (a person who always comes with a caveat). This is generally why I find it insulting, and I find it as an excuse to not actually fix problems of representation by just throwing it in on the side as though that makes it all better (kind of like the two pages of "what were black people doing during such and such time?" in a history book). And it needn't be black history month--I would feel this way as a member of any "group" that has a special day/month devoted to it. I mean other people might feel differently about this, but anyway. And maybe I am under-representing the purpose/meaning of a cultural identity (which can be powerful and a source of strength/identity) as I don't personally feel attached to any such identity and like feeling I don't have to have one. My feeling of it being insulting though rests on how I think I would feel in such a situation and how I could understand one might feel. Of course having history taught to me that completely neglected the history of those of my ethnic group as though we don't exist at all and never did except in mere snippets would also feel unfair and insulting... but I might rather be invisible than directly insulted by having a special month that I'm supposed to feel proud about and that again ties me as belonging to a group, where I can never be free of it.

This is getting really off topic. I didn't really want to say much on the actual topic as I'm not quite sure what has happened (I consistently neglect to watch/read the news) and I know that tcaudilllg tends to exaggerate.

I agree with what your saying, it's a difficult issue. I'm speculating a little bit here, but it seems to me that in a lot of ways that before the civil rights movement that White American History and Black American History were divided, perhaps having a month dedicated to recognising that segmentation is an attempt to bring together the two histories and recognise a unified future history. As I said speculating alot. Regarding invisibility, the focus is on shaping broader perceptions rather than immediate feelings of self awareness due to attention being drawn to oneself. Anyway, I agree with alot of what you said, I don't know how this is presented, I personally am interested in looking into this more, especially as someone with an interest in American history from a foreigners point of view.

[tcaudilllg]

Until racism is a crime (and it should be), we need all the public hedges against it that we can muster.

[Eldanen]

Until racism is a crime (and it should be), we need all the public hedges against it that we can muster.

What do you mean by racism? What exactly would that entail? What act would someone be committing that would be punishable by law?

[tcaudilllg]

What do you mean by racism? What exactly would that entail? What act would someone be committing that would be punishable by law?

1) Any organized activity which exalts discrimination on basis of ethnicity
2) the promotion of hate speech against any ethnic group

[FDG]

If I travel to Arizona and purposefully forget my documents, are they going to pay me a trip to Mexico? It might be a good opportunity to save some money.

Re @ minimum wage: abolishing minimum wage only works insofar as the government provides some kind of "wage compensation" for people whose wage doesn't allow them to make ends meet (obviously, here the defintion is arbitary). This type of policy does shift the burden from the companies to the government, although ultimately there will be a form of redistribution via higher taxation.

[tcaudilllg]

If I travel to Arizona and purposefully forget my documents, are they going to pay me a trip to Mexico? It might be a good opportunity to save some money.

Re @ minimum wage: abolishing minimum wage only works insofar as the government provides some kind of "wage compensation" for people whose wage doesn't allow them to make ends meet (obviously, here the defintion is arbitary). This type of policy does shift the burden from the companies to the government, although ultimately there will be a form of redistribution via higher taxation.

Well you'd get an arraignment, in which the arresting officer would have to prove his case that you are there illegally. (I think?)

[tcaudilllg]

Kim, what are you going to do if more states pass laws like this?

At first I was kinda excited about all of this. But now it's just looking stupid.

Here's some recent commentary on the issue.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/05/1...#disqus_thread

[Kim]

Kim, what are you going to do if more states pass laws like this?

I don't know, but I also seriously doubt that more states will. TBH, if I was offered a great job in Arizona, I would probably take it, but I would feel apprehensive. I really hate to see what this law is doing to immigrants, legal and illegal, local businesses, and also police officers who are now under pressure to act on every bloody suspicion by narrow-minded bigots who hate their Hispanic neighbors.

And for those who put this in place and deny that it involves racial profiling, give me a break. At least call the beast by its name.

[MatthewZ]

The OP strikes me as highly alarmist.