Why it Matters – I Liked You More When You Drank. By Randy

I live in Michigan, so I am allowed to make this statement:  The Lions have demonstrated an ability to consistently disappoint their fans to a level only surpassed, maybe, by the Cleveland Browns.  And yet, my uncle was not only a great fan of the Lions team but wouldn’t miss a game on tv.  Picture1 That, my friends, is the mark of a true fan:  it isn’t the fact that the product is the best in quality, best in performance, best in taste, it’s the fact that a fan is a fan for no better reason than he has chosen to be a fan.  Thereby lives a love of heartbreak, ridicule, and a test of loyalty sufficient to scar any soul forever.   I of course come from much better stock:  I am a fan of the Chicago Bears.  Da Bears!   If you’ve not solved this puzzle by now, this is not about the Lions.  Don’t get me wrong, they will forever disappoint – Sorry Uncle Bob – but  this post regards how a beer company has received backlash for sending beer to someone who is an internet influencer.  Now, there are few things in this world that I purposely choose not to pay attention to, and among those are the Lions and things that republicans and rednecks have chosen to cancel in their anti-cancel-culture rants.  Yes, that’s confusing.  It makes more sense if you drink a lot of low-quality beer and believe what Tucker Calson tells you.

Loyalty trumps Competence, as the saying goes.  And, while there are those who believe Bud Light cheated on them, I expect to find all of those who have made a Picture2lifetime commitment with their Bud Light beer that has weathered two marriages, four kids, eight teeth and 29-stories that start with “dude, hold my beer…” will be drinking again like nothing happened.   In time they will forget why they were mad at a beer – because let’s face it, who gets mad at beer?  And, those of us watching from the sidelines, even as reluctantly as I, will remember that this was never about the beer, never about the internet influencer, but was ultimately about the homo- and the trans-phobic prejudice and hate that was so easily stirred to cause the easily led to put down their favorite beer.

I, for one, am going to continue to buy Bud Light.  Mainly because it’s very drinkable – as the joke goes it’s much like sex in a canoe.    What I would like to hear them ask these detractors is why they are so against someone being who they are? Picture3 Who are they to not only disparage the character of that person, but to speak as if a beer company deserves to be shot for treating a person as a living and worthwhile person?  Each of us in America is born with the freedom to voice our opinion.  It bothers me that so many have chosen to use this freedom to be so manipulated as to only be able to speak hate and so weak as to give up a beer they appear to love for the affront of giving another citizen simple respect.  What are they truly angry or afraid of?

I love Randy’s writing.   He has a way of getting his heartfelt ideas across with words that few can manage.  I am glad he has offered to add his voice here.  When Randy was talking with me on this post, he mentioned it might help people understand how stupid this unwarranted hate response was if people could see the video that these bigots are responding to.   Also remember that these cans of beer with Dylan Mulvaney’s picture on them were not mass-produced, were never for sale to the public.   These few cans were just a promotional gimmick and were not intended for putting in stores.   This was not a national commercial but only on social media.    If the bigots and haters had ignored it, then very few would even have known of the entire thing.   But the haters managed to gin this up using a fake outrage over something not happening and getting people who drink a mediocre mass-produced beer to question their own manhood.  That was what this was about, men fearing a beer that had let a trans woman promote it made them less than a man if they drank it, made them less masculine, maybe others would question the size of their penis by the beer they drank because a few cans had a trans woman on them.   That is what this is really about, look at how the men reacted in destroying the cans of beer, with displays of macho destruction while yelling about how manly they are.   In fact most hate of trans people is about fear of measuring up to some mythical stereotypical standards for what is masculine or feminine.     Below is the social media promotion by Dylan Mulvaney.   Hugs

*** it was hard to find just the video with no commentary added.  The comments are the YouTube page constantly cisgender Dylan as he and calling her a gay man.  Dylan Mulvaney identifies as a trans woman, and she is proud to be a woman.   Hugs

“Do You REALLY Think I’m Indoctrinating Students?”

A remarkable student comes forward at a school board meeting and shares the importance of lgbtq+ rights and transgender rights. The students shares the struggles the trans community faces in states like Missouri, North Carolina and Florida. The transgender community needs support now more than ever, especially in the young people like this student here.

Damn amazing!     I think this boy will go far in life, and it gives me hope for the future.   We need more young people like him.  Sadly the school board won’t listen to him or his supporters.   They have their idea that adults know so much more than kids do about their own body.   Why because their god tells them this in a book written 2,500 years ago amended and incorrectly translated over centuries, that this boy can not exist.   Their personal view of 1950s gender ideology and their political desires make this boy’s testimony something they scoff at and won’t hear.   Yet in a few years this boy and his friends will vote these people out of office if we still have a democracy.   And that terrifies these religious conservative bigots enough that they want to do way with democracy and allowing people to vote.     Hugs

Drag queen wore the names of school shooting victims to Texas house hearing. She was escorted out.

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2023/05/drag-queen-wore-the-names-of-school-shooting-victims-to-texas-house-hearing-she-was-escorted-out/

This post is for those that mistakenly thought these anti-drag bills were about protecting kids from sexualized burlesque type shows.   The law is written very clearly to stop men from dressing like women and women from dressing like men in public.   That was the intent from the beginning of this anti-drag queens stuff, the republicans just had to frame it as protecting kids from sex to get the public to accept it.  Hugs

 It’s aimed at banning minors from “sexually oriented performance,” which the bill initially defined as a “male performer exhibiting as a female, or a female performer exhibiting as a male.” If the bill becomes law, drag performers could face a criminal misdemeanor charge if they perform in front of children or on public property, and venues that host drag performances could face penalties up to $10,000.

 

Brigitte Bandit
Brigitte BanditPhoto: Screenshot/TikTok

A Texas drag performer was escorted out of a public hearing on one of the state’s anti-drag bills.

As NBC affiliate KXAN reports, the Texas House of Representatives State Affairs committee held a public hearing on Wednesday to discuss S.B. 12, which was passed by the state senate last month. It’s aimed at banning minors from “sexually oriented performance,” which the bill initially defined as a “male performer exhibiting as a female, or a female performer exhibiting as a male.” If the bill becomes law, drag performers could face a criminal misdemeanor charge if they perform in front of children or on public property, and venues that host drag performances could face penalties up to $10,000.

At Wednesday’s hearing, the committee was considering removing any mention of drag from S.B. 12.

Austin drag performer Brigitte Bandit was one of nearly 400 people who signed up to testify, the overwhelming majority of them opposing the bill, according to KXAN. Bandit appeared before the committee in a dress bearing the names of the victims of the Uvalde and Allen mass shootings to argue that the real danger facing the state’s children is gun violence, not drag queens.

 

@brigittebandit

Replying to @Brett Cross looks like we made the same kind of exit. solidarity forever 💗

♬ original sound – brigitte bandit

“This legislature has spent more time targeting queer people than gun violence, even following yet another mass shooting in our state,” she tweeted on Wednesday.

After reportedly speaking 15 seconds over her allotted time, Bandit was escorted out of the hearing by security.

 
 

Constitutional Lawyers Mobilize Against Trans Care Bans Nationwide: 9 States Now Sued

https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/constitutional-lawyers-mobilize-against

“It is mentally and physically painful to feel like you are trapped in the wrong body. Going through puberty for the wrong sex is like having your body betray you on a daily basis. The only treatment we have found to be effective and give our daughter hope again is hormone therapy. The difference we have experienced is night and day and there is no going back. Taking away this crucial medical care is inhumane and a violation of our rights. We will fight this law for our daughter and every other family whose rights are being trampled.”

 

While the wave of anti-trans legislation has been hard to witness, we are seeing the beginning of the fight back in the courts. Gender affirming care bans are challenged in 9 states now.

MAY 9, 2023
 
 
States where gender affirming care bans are being challenged in court.
————————————————————————————
Please support my independent reporting and activism on transgender legislation by subscribing. You help me keep this going and keep people informed.

Amid a surge in anti-trans legislation in the US, attorneys prepared to mount a strong response. Their counterattack has finally arrived. In recent months, lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Department of Justice, National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), Human Rights Campaign (HRC), Lambda Legal, and several other organizations have contested laws banning gender-affirming care for transgender youth in states nationwide. Success stories are emerging, as seen in Missouri, where a temporary restraining order has blocked the ban. With seven states facing lawsuits challenging such bans added in the last few months, the total number of states being sued over gender-affirming care prohibitions now stands at nine.

Many of these lawsuits are spearheaded by the ACLU, a prominent force in the fight against gender-affirming care bans. In seven out of nine states facing legal action, the ACLU serves as a primary organization representing the plaintiffs. Florida and Alabama stand as the exceptions, with Southern Legal Counsel, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, the Justice Department, and the National Center for Lesbian Rights leading the challenges there. The NCLR and other organizations have also been active and serve as co-leads in states like Kentucky. The ACLU has played a significant role in opposing these discriminatory laws this year.

Earlier, the organization’s Deputy Director of Transgender Justice, Chase Strangio, delivered a powerful testimony against an anti-trans bill in Tennessee. In his testimony, he confidently asserted, “Tennessee will not be able to defend these laws.”

See his testimony here:


 

Please support my independent reporting and activism on transgender legislation by subscribing. You help me keep this going and keep people informed.

Shortly after the Tennessee bill was passed, the ACLU challenged it in court on behalf of a 15 year old transgender girl. In a press release from the ACLU, the girl, whose name is not shared, stated,

“I don’t even want to think about having to go back to the dark place I was in before I was able to come out and access the care that my doctors have prescribed for me. I want this law to be struck down so that I can continue to receive the care I need, in conversation with my parents and my doctors, and have the freedom to live my life and do the things I enjoy.”

The ACLU is attempting to ensure that the law meets that fate.

Today, Montana became the latest state to face a lawsuit over its gender-affirming care ban. Montana has emerged as a hotspot for some of the harshest anti-trans laws and actions this year. With a gender-affirming care bandrag ban, prohibition of gender markers on driver’s licenses combined with a rigid definition of sex that excludes transgender individuals, and the expulsion of the state’s first trans woman representative from the House floor, Montana has become a focal point for legal observers. The lawsuit is supported by prominent organizations, including ACLU Montana, Lambda Legal, and Perkins Coie, who are all committed to combating anti-trans measures in the state.

Jessica van Garderen, mother of a trans daughter in Montana and a plaintiff in the lawsuit, was quoted in a joint statement:

“It is mentally and physically painful to feel like you are trapped in the wrong body. Going through puberty for the wrong sex is like having your body betray you on a daily basis. The only treatment we have found to be effective and give our daughter hope again is hormone therapy. The difference we have experienced is night and day and there is no going back. Taking away this crucial medical care is inhumane and a violation of our rights. We will fight this law for our daughter and every other family whose rights are being trampled.”

Earlier this year, Montana increased their budget by $2.6 million to account for court challenges to clearly unconstitutional legislation.

There is ample reason to believe these lawsuits will succeed. So far, legal challenges against gender-affirming care bans and anti-trans policies have been effective. Bolstered by the recent Supreme Court precedent in Bostock v. Clayton County, judges recognize that discrimination against transgender individuals constitutes sex discrimination and is prohibited under US law. Such policies also infringe on transgender people’s due process and equal protection rights.

In AlabamaArkansas, and Texas, courts have enjoined gender-affirming care bans and child abuse enforcement measures. Recently in Missouri, a series of bans and restrictions targeting even adults were blocked, and this injunction will remain in place for at least two months while the case is under deliberation. It is clear that judges have shown little tolerance for anti-trans legislation.

States where lawsuits on gender affirming care bans have been filed include the following:

These lawsuits do not include several other categories of lawsuits where trans plaintiffs have also seen success, such as Tennessee’s drag banWest Virginia’s sports banUtah’s Sports Ban, and Texas’ child abuse enforcements against trans kids, all of which have been blocked in court.

As the legislative season dies down, the narrative around transgender legislation is likely to slowly shift. Fewer laws will be passed targeting the community, although some states with legislative cycles that run throughout the year will continue to demand coverage. The focus will shift toward a massive, nationwide mobilization of constitutional lawyers dedicated to dismantling the anti-trans legislation that has proliferated this year. Considering their previous successes, news of victorious lawsuits should uplift the community during this phase. This period commences now.


 

Please support my independent reporting and activism on transgender legislation by subscribing. You help me keep this going and keep people informed.

Missouri Republicans Refuse To Let Gay Man Speak Against Anti-Trans Bill, Silence Opposition

https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/missouri-republicans-refuse-to-let

Republicans refuse to allow anyone to speak against what they want to do, even if that person is a fellow republican.   This is because they demand to rule the public, not to serve the public.  They demand power so they can use that power to force all others to follow their conservative religious dictates.  And this is happening all over the country, as we have seen.    Hugs

It happened again. Representative Chris Sander, a gay Republican, raised his hand to speak on a bill. Republicans instead chose to silence opposition and did not allow him to speak.

 

MAY 10, 2023
 
 
 

Please support my independent reporting and activism on transgender legislation by subscribing. You help me keep this going and keep people informed.

The Republican Party has repeatedly barred discussion on LGBTQ+ bills this year. Despite holding supermajorities in numerous instances, they have frequently silenced oppositional voices. Notably, in Oklahoma, GOP members censured Representative Mauree Turner, a Black, nonbinary representative. In Kentucky, an attempt was made to hold a hearing without any Democratic representatives. This was announced during a lunch break when microphones were turned off. A recent incident in Montana saw transgender Rep. Zooey Zephyr ejected from the house floor and silenced simply for speaking to the harm these bills cause, preventing her from commenting on anti-trans bills. Today, in Missouri, the GOP restricted Democrats to 15 minutes of debate against a bill prohibiting gender-affirming care for trans youth. During the vote, gay Republican Rep. Chris Sander was denied the opportunity to speak against the bill despite signaling his intent, keeping his hand raised for the entirety of the vote.

The bill itself, SB49, bans gender affirming care for transgender youth. Though it grandfathers youth already receiving treatment in, there will be many trans youth on waitlists who will be entirely shut out. It also bans Medicaid coverage for transgender adults and surgery for transgender incarcerated individuals. All of these provisions are separate from the ongoing attempt by Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s decision to limit most care for transgender adults, banning many of them from transitioning – that decision is currently blocked in court awaiting a final decision.

In a scene eerily familiar to many people who have paid attention to floor debates over anti-trans legislation, Missouri House Speaker, Rep. Dean Plocher, enacted a motion that restricted Democrats to a meager 15 minutes of total discourse on the bill. This appeared to be a calculated move to expedite the bill’s passage with minimal opposition. House Minority Leader, Representative Crystal Quade, used some of her time to denounce this tactic, arguing it silenced representatives’ speech and, in effect, muffled the voice of the citizenry they represent. This contention closely mirrors a recent incident in Montana involving Rep. Zooey Zephyr, who faced silencing and exile when the house speaker there denied her the right to speak.

That comparison would quickly grow stronger as a Republican, Representative Chris Sander, raised his own hand to speak. Local reporter Emily Manley reported that he was never called on despite continually keeping his hand raised. Because Republicans have a choice as to whether they acknowledge their own party member, they opted to not do so.

You can see Rep. Quade’s initial criticism of the GOP’s silencing tactics and Rep. Sander’s hand raised in this video:


 

Please support my independent reporting and activism on transgender legislation by subscribing. You help me keep this going and keep people informed.

Trans Patients Being Dropped As Florida Law Bans “Up To 80%” Of Adult Gender Affirming Care

https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/trans-patients-being-dropped-as-florida

These bans on trans care started as don’t discuss gender at schools except straight gender role models to protect the children.  Then it moved to stopping kids from social transitioning to protect the children.  That moved to we have to protect the children from medical transitioning, including the use of reversible non-harmful puberty blockers.   That moved to preventing all trans people from transitioning, effectively removing them from society.   And they no longer claim it is to protect the children.    This was the goal from the start, ending trans people and reaffirming / enforcing 1950s stereotypical gender roles.  Who do you think they will try to remove next?   They went for drag queens / trans people as the most vulnerable targets.  But these same republicans have already labeled the rest of the LGBTQ+ as dangers to children, especially the gays and their rainbow flag.   They already got rid of the rainbow flag and any mention of being gay in schools, and removed all LGB media from school libraries.   Not even stories about kids with two mommies or same sex penguins raising a chick together.  How long until they try the Russian method of just outlawing any mention or action of being gay in public?   In Texas they again killed a bill to remove the anti-same sex laws off the books even though the SCOTUS made such laws illegal.   I feel like a Jew in Nazi Germany in the 1930s watching laws being made to outlaw me and people like me, telling everyone yet not seeing any real push back to the hate and bigotry.   Hugs

Most media coverage on the impact of SB254 in Florida has focused on the youth care prohibition. In reality, it threatens 80% of all trans adult care by banning nurse practitioners from providing it.

 

MAY 11, 2023
 
 
———————————————————————-
 

Please support my independent reporting and activism on transgender legislation by subscribing. You help me keep this going and keep people informed.

A new Florida law threatens to disrupt up to 80% of gender affirming care for transgender adults, yet this impact has been largely underreported. The legislation, SB254, has been passed and will go into effect when signed by Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida. It has caught the eye of LGBTQ+ media primarily due to its impact on transgender youth as outlined in the bill’s provisions: it outright bans gender affirming care for this demographic, and may also introduce complexities in custody scenarios where parents disagree on affirmation.

While the majority of discourse around SB254 focuses on its repercussions for transgender youth, a provision that has received less attention within the bill is already spelling disaster for transgender adult care. The legislation bars all nurse practitioners from offering gender affirming care and imposes additional restrictions on informed consent care for transgender adults. Considering that nurse practitioners provide the majority of gender affirming care, this could drastically reduce the number of providers, lowering it to a level that is unsustainable for Florida’s transgender patient population.

In an exclusive conversation with Lana Dunn from SPEKTRUM Health, the clinic has indicated that it is getting a near constant influx of phone calls from patients whose appointments are being cancelled. Reasons for cancellation include that the care is too difficult to provide now given new liabilities introduced by this law and restrictions on perscribers. While SPEKTRUM is still providing care, Dunn indicates that they are in an uncomfortable limbo:

“We have thousands of patients at SPEKTRUM, all of whom are eagerly trying to get their appointments in before the law goes into effect and we simply have no way to keep up with the demand. Our team has been working feverishly throughout all of this to meet the demand,” Dunn says.

When asked about organizations that are ceasing care, she even indicated that once the law takes effect, SPEKTRUM may have to cease care: “Here at SPEKTRUM we are operating at the highest capacity possible until such a time as the law goes into effect at which point we will have no choice but to cease providing gender affirming care.”

The provisions causing trouble for organizations are seen here:

Section mandating care be provided by Physicians along with informed consent forms that may amount to medical disinformation.
 
Section giving the Board of Medicine authority to expand on informed consent requirements.

Please support my independent reporting and activism on transgender legislation by subscribing. You help me keep this going and keep people informed.

These provisions taken together spell out requirements for providers of gender affirming care that will drastically lower its availability to transgender adults. SPEKTRUM has confirmed that at least 80% of all gender affirming care is provided by nurse practitioners in the state. This matches with data from my informed consent hormone therapy map – very few of the locations go to MDs/DOs. Planned Parenthood, which provides a huge amount of the care, primarily uses nurse practitioners to administer that care – all of my personal care has been handled by nurse practitioners, as seen from Planned Parenthood’s FAQ on gender affirming care:

Most gender-affirming hormone care is provided at PPSP by advanced practice providers (physician assistants, certified nurse midwives, and nurse practitioners) in our health centers or over telemedicine.

The alarming aspects of the new legislation are not limited to the provisions that prevent nurse practitioners from providing gender affirming care. The law also targets this care through various other channels. For example, one provision grants the board of medicine authority to adopt emergency rules for implementing the new law. The board has already demonstrated its willingness to overstep existing law by introducing rules – earlier this year, it imposed a ban on gender affirming care for transgender youth, despite lacking legislative instruction to do so. This ban is currently under judicial review.

In a similar vein, the attorney general of Missouri recently issued a series of burdensome guidelines that essentially obstruct gender affirming care for most transgender adults with a complex web of rules, making the care nearly impossible to legally provide. This decision, however, has recently been blocked in court for at least two months. The provision in Florida’s law, which grants rule-making authority to the board of medicine, could potentially be wielded in a similar manner to further restrict care.

The legislation also requires misinformation in informed consent forms that must be handed to and signed by every patient. Though the final version of the form is not available, earlier versions have statements erroneously claiming that the care does not conform to generally accepted medical practices. Over 29 major medical organizations maintain gender affirming care as the standard of care for trans people.

See the proposed form from 2022 when the issue was first discussed by the Florida Department of Health here, documented by Zinnia Jones:

Proposed informed consent form for trans adults from 2022.

It remains to be seen how medical organizations and transgender adults will react to the bill if it is signed into law. It is clear that at least some major medical organizations feel that the care is highly threatened, with many being forced to cease providing it. The impact of this legislation could rival and even surpass other states where restrictions are currently being fought over, such as in Missouri where several trans adults were pulled from care before the policy enacted there was blocked. When combined with a recent transgender bathroom ban, Florida is quickly emerging as the state most hostile to transgender people in the United States.


 

Please support my independent reporting and activism on transgender legislation by subscribing. You help me keep this going and keep people informed.

Christian Nationalists are embracing the Christian Nationalist label

https://friendlyatheist.substack.com/p/christian-nationalists-are-embracing

Christian conspiracy theorist Sean Feucht freely

admits “we want Christians to be writing the laws of

the land”

 

Christian conspiracy theorist Sean Feucht freely admits “we want Christians to be writing the laws of the land”

MAY 9, 2023
 
 

This newsletter is free, but it’s only able to sustain itself due to the support I receive from a small percentage of regular readers. Would you please consider becoming one of those supporters? You can use the button below to subscribe to Substack or use my usual Patreon page!

Christian conspiracy theorist Sean Feucht freely admits “we want Christians to be writing the laws of the land”

MAY 9, 2023
291
Share
 

This newsletter is free, but it’s only able to sustain itself due to the support I receive from a small percentage of regular readers. Would you please consider becoming one of those supporters? You can use the button below to subscribe to Substack or use my usual Patreon page!


“We want Christians to be writing the laws of the land according to the Word of God,” writes Christian Nationalist Sean Feucht in a new piece for Charisma. Rather than disavow the label as something pejorative and unfair, he’s fully leaning into the notion that Christians like him should be in charge of government and creating rules that benefit only his tribe.

Sean Feucht, Christian Nationalist

To which I can only say… great. Thank you for admitting it. It’s always helpful when Christian Nationalists openly admit their desire to live in a theocracy.

It’s not Feucht’s first time doing this, either. He’s spent the past few months echoing this extreme rhetoric to the people showing up at his events, often alongside right-wing politicians and organizations.

 
 

The issue here isn’t that he’s a Christian who thinks society would be better off adopting Christian beliefs. That’s basically how all religions work. What’s troubling about his comments is that Feucht (which aptly rhymes with “exploit”) believes his specific brand of Christianity should become law and that everyone who disagrees isn’t just wrong, but an enemy of his fantasy world.

That’s not me saying it. I’m just paraphrasing what he’s already said:

Perspective changes when the political issues of the age are properly framed into a spiritual context. The transgender movement? Rebellion against, “male and female He created them.” Homosexuality? Rebellion against, “a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.”

We have seen a clear unveiling of the secular progressive agenda over America: abortion on demand up until the moment of birth, the normalization of pedophilia and child sexualization and the castration of perfectly healthy children in the name of “gender-affirming care.” This the fruit of anti-Christian leaders employing and legislating dark agendas over our nation.

It is not controversial for us to boldly declare that we want Christians to be writing the laws of the land according to the Word of God.

What’s unsaid in his piece is who would suffer at the hands of this Christian ruling class.

There is no place for Muslims, Jews, Hindus, or atheists in his ideal world. They could exist, sure, but their religious needs would never be treated on the same level as a Christian’s wants.

There would be no room for progressive Christians, either. Feucht doesn’t see them as real Christians, anyway. People who are LGBTQ wouldn’t be tolerated. Preachers’ daughters in need of an abortion would be screwed. Those who went outside the boundaries he’s created in his mind would automatically be declared “groomers.”

In that sense, he’s repeating what conspiracy theorist Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene said last year: “We should be Christian nationalists.” She even sold shirts to that effect:

A post shared by Marjorie Taylor Greene (@realmarjoriegreene)

Remember that 61% of Republicans now say they support declaring the United States a “Christian nation.”

This isn’t a bad apple or two. This is a spoiled orchard.

And yet this may be even more frightening coming from the perpetually paranoid Feucht. By pretending to be persecuted, he convinced a bunch of followers to join him in COVID super-spreader concerts in the name of Christ during the height of the pandemic.

It’s bad enough that we have Republican politicians using Jesus as justification for thoughtless legislation. It’s appalling, though, to have powerful conservatives, amplified by propaganda outlets, claim that the problem with America is that we don’t have enough of those politicians.

But at least there’s a fair way to describe them: They are Christian Nationalists. They are theocrats who claim to be patriots while torching the Constitution. They are people who see what’s happening in Islamic nations and, rather than being horrified, get jealous. Their religious delusions should be countered and criticized by all decent people, and yet there are plenty of Christian pastors who refuse to say anything negative about people like Feucht from their pulpit. They are more than willing to let other Christians hijack their faith for political ends. If they’re too cowardly to say anything useful, it’s all the more reason for sensible Christians to ditch their churches entirely.

If you appreciated this article, please subscribe to my newsletter for free (!) or share this post on Reddit, Facebook, or the godawful Bird app.

Conservative Christians took over a Colorado school district. Now they’re destroying it.

https://friendlyatheist.substack.com/p/conservative-christians-took-over

Notice what the parents and teachers say.   They claim the Christian majority if forcing a Christian view on their kids that they don’t agree with and is not needed, also that in order to promote their Christian conservative views the religious majority on the board is willing to destroy the school district.    Hugs

 

Things have gotten so bad that even Republicans in the district are complaining:

“I think they look at us as this petri dish where they can really push all their agenda and theories,” said Joe Dohrn, a Woodland Park father who described himself as a staunch Republican and “very capitalistic.” “They clearly are willing to sacrifice the public school and to put students presently in the public school through years of disarray to drive home their ideological beliefs. It’s a travesty.”

“They’re trying to push a certain agenda down to these kids,” Amy Schommer, a mother in Woodland Park, said of the school board’s adoption of American Birthright. “I’m a conservative but I’m not against my kids learning something they disagree with. They’re trying to fix problems that don’t exist here.”

… Witt, as president of the school board in neighboring Jefferson County, supported a plan in 2014 to ensure the district’s curricula would promote patriotism and not encourage “social strife.” Witt said students who protested the board policies at the time were “pawns” of the teachers union. After he and two other conservative members of the board were recalled, Witt became executive director of an organization that oversees charter, online and other schools and helped launch Merit Academy.

Merit Academy was the charter school approved by the district.

Woodland Park School District is seeing an exodus of staffers after Christian Nationalists put their agenda over students’ needs

MAY 11, 2023
 
 

This newsletter is free, but it’s only able to sustain itself due to the support I receive from a small percentage of regular readers. Would you please consider becoming one of those supporters? You can use the button below to subscribe to Substack or use my usual Patreon page!

In 2021, Christian Nationalist preacher Andrew Wommack told the members of his political group Truth & Liberty Coalition that, with all the conservatives in their part of Colorado, “we ought to take over Woodland Park.”

 

“We have enough people here in this school we could elect anybody we want,” he said. “We could take over this place.”

Wommack had moved to Woodland Park to launch Charis Bible College, and now he wanted his people to take over the local government. Or at least the local school board. It’s the kind of rhetoric that conservative Christians have been using for decades to urge their followers to run for local office as a way to influence policy. Wommack himself insisted last year that he got “78 or 80” of his preferred candidates elected in local races (out of an estimated 178 his ministry was backing).

Perhaps that’s an exaggeration. But in this particular case, they actually pulled it off.

Reporter Tyler Kingkade of NBC News just published a shocking article detailing what happened after those conservative Christians took over a local school board that, in theory, should have been far removed from culture war battles.

But when you put ideologues in positions of responsibility, you can’t expect them to do the right thing. That’s exactly how it’s played out.

Woodland Park School Board meeting (screenshot via YouTube)

For example, the local school board, now controlled by Christian Nationalists, adopted a conservative social studies curriculum called “American Birthright” that’s focused on American exceptionalism and whitewashes our nation’s ugly history. It says the federal government shouldn’t have any authority over public schools, that teachers should avoid teaching about current events and media literacy, and that telling kids to vote amounts to activism. (Notes Kingkade: “[American Birthright] includes Bill Clinton’s impeachment but not Donald Trump’s.”)

The program was already deemed unfit for students and rejected as extreme by the state’s school board. They said adopting this program would have “damaging and lasting effects on the civic knowledge of students and their capacity to engage in civic reasoning and deliberation.”

The new school board embraced it anyway.

School board president David Rusterholtz added Christian prayers to board meetings:

“This division is much more than political — this is a clash of worldviews,” Rusterholtz said at a board meeting in January. He concluded his remarks with a prayer for the district: “May the Lord bless us and keep us, may His face shine upon us and be gracious to us.”

Beyond that, according to Colorado Public Radio, he has also “used his official board email address to proselytize, inviting fellow board members to join his church and receive Jesus as their savior.”

The same board approved a charter school without properly informing the public in advance.

Then they imposed a gag order and fired teachers who criticized the moves publicly.

Then the newly hired superintendent decided not to apply for grants worth up to $1.2 million that previously covered the salaries of 15 counselors and social workers because he wanted to focus on academics, not emotions… even though the latter has a direct impact on the former.

And now a large chunk of the staffers and administrators are leaving the district:

As the school year winds down, many of the Woodland Park School District’s employees are heading for the exit, despite recently receiving an 8% raise. At least four of the district’s top administrators have quit because of the board’s policy changes, according to interviews and emails obtained through records requests. Nearly 40% of the high school’s professional staff have said they will not return next school year, according to an administrator in the district. 

It’s no wonder they want out. There’s no accountability anymore and the conservatives on the school board are more interested in enacting their personal agendas than doing what experts believe is best for students. When one board member resigned in the wake of the conservative victories, he could have been replaced by someone with a strong background in education and a track record of supporting students. Instead, his replacement was someone who had donated to the campaign of another right-wing board member.

When the superintendent resigned, he was replaced by Ken Witt.

Who is Ken Witt, you ask?

… Witt, as president of the school board in neighboring Jefferson County, supported a plan in 2014 to ensure the district’s curricula would promote patriotism and not encourage “social strife.” Witt said students who protested the board policies at the time were “pawns” of the teachers union. After he and two other conservative members of the board were recalled, Witt became executive director of an organization that oversees charter, online and other schools and helped launch Merit Academy.

Merit Academy was the charter school approved by the district.

His appointment was actually more egregious than that because the board members essentially chose him in secret. Their only interview of Witt happened behind closed doors even though state law requires all district-related discussions between three or more board members to be public.

Kingkade managed to obtain surveillance footage of their meeting. The full conversation (which is inaudible) lasts for about 8 minutes. Witt was hired two days later.

The district staffer who urged the board to release that footage months ago was fired. That person’s boss quit as a form of protest.

Things have gotten so bad that even Republicans in the district are complaining:

“I think they look at us as this petri dish where they can really push all their agenda and theories,” said Joe Dohrn, a Woodland Park father who described himself as a staunch Republican and “very capitalistic.” “They clearly are willing to sacrifice the public school and to put students presently in the public school through years of disarray to drive home their ideological beliefs. It’s a travesty.”

“They’re trying to push a certain agenda down to these kids,” Amy Schommer, a mother in Woodland Park, said of the school board’s adoption of American Birthright. “I’m a conservative but I’m not against my kids learning something they disagree with. They’re trying to fix problems that don’t exist here.”

But none of this will make a difference unless enough of these people vote for board members who care more about students than conservative propaganda. The next elections are in November and three of the board’s five seats will be up for grabs, allowing a non-crazy majority to help undo some of this damage.

The question is whether enough people in the community will care enough to vote in that election. School board races have notoriously low turnouts, but if right-wing Christians aiming to destroy the public schools doesn’t inspire enough people to get off their asses to vote for better candidates, nothing will.

This is incredible reporting from Kingkade and a devastating look at what happens when right-wing rhetoric becomes reality. The people who have a vendetta against public schools should never be placed in charge of them.

“They’re not interested in improving the school district,” said one teacher who is leaving. “They’re interested in killing it.” 

When people don’t pay attention to local elections, however, that becomes very possible—especially when conservative pastors rally their congregations into thinking these elections are existential crises.

The end result is that the best teachers and administrators may leave the district while the worsening schools lower property values and drive away the sorts of people who might consider moving there.

Everyone loses when Christian extremists hell-bent on turning public schools into extensions of their churches get this kind of power.


If you appreciated this article, please subscribe to my newsletter for free (!) or share this post on Reddit, Facebook, or the godawful Bird app.

The HONEST Truth About Transitioning

A clear easy to understand explanation of the difference between sex and gender, and how transitioning makes the body intersex.   Which doesn’t determine gender.  Also I like how he gives the medical information about how all fetus templates have the ability to be both sexes or somewhere between, and he asks how a trans woman and a cis woman who can not produce children are both still women.   Hugs

Indoctrination Nation, Convinced schools are brainwashing kids to be left-wingers, conservatives are seizing control of the American classroom.Indoctrination Nation,

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/desantis-florida-trump-education-politics.html

I am sorry but the current way WordPress classic editor is working it is too hard to bold and color the articles.    I am still trying to find a work around.   The block editor only allows a limited array of colors that are weak and not bold enough to be useful.   The block editor is designed for businesses and if you look at the WordPress plans and what they market themes toward is businesses.  Built for business and to make businesses happy.   Blogers no longer matter to WordPress and are being pushed out of their buisness model.   If you have  ablog like I try to do with videos, memes, and full articles I will run out of storage space very soon.  Plus the block editor is designed to allow businesses to quickly and easily replace blocks as things on their websites change.   The classic editor is still there but no longer works smoothly as it did to edit what you post.   Wordpress support warned me a year ago they planned to phase it out by making it harder to use until no one would use it.   At the time I did not believe them as it seemed to me blogging was a big thing.   I guess all the bloggers are going to substack.   So I again have to find a new host company.   But until I do, this is the way I have to post.    The article below is very important and even though it is long I hope you will read it.   It talks of the republican / right war on education and why.    They point out that the right is no longer concern with US youth keeping up with other countries youth in education but instead the right is entirely consumed with indoctrinated kids with the right wing ideology out of a need to stay in power.    In other words the right / republicans are afraid if schools teach reality and allow the changes in society to be accepted then the right will keep losing young people who beleive as they do and they will go exstinct.   What sets the current movement apart from these previous efforts is not merely its greater intensity but its focus. Academic-achievement levels are incidental to Republicans’ concern. Their main preoccupation is not the ways in which Chinese and Swedish kids may be outpacing their American counterparts. They are instead accusing schools of carrying out an insidious indoctrination campaign that, they believe, poses an existential threat to their party’s future and their way of life.  When an audience member asked how he had been able to find common ground with people who disagreed with him, Corcoran responded, “I have fought … There’s no negotiation. I don’t think antifa wants to sit down and have a conversation with me about how can we make this society better.” Corcoran went on to compare America’s disputes over education to “the warring in the streets” in Germany before World War II between the Nazis and the communists. “The war will be won in education,” he vowed. “Education is our sword. That’s our weapon. Our weapon is education.”    So for republicans it is not about the good of the country or what is best for children, but instead entirely about keeping their party / their ideals in power.  it is about keeping their lifestyle forced on the population no matter how wrong it might by.   Notice part of that is teaching children not to question authority or what they are told to do.     Hugs 

Republicans have begun saying things about American schools that not long ago would have struck them as peculiar, even insane. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida has called schools “a cesspool of Marxist indoctrination.” Former secretary of State Mike Pompeo predicts that “teachers’ unions, and the filth that they’re teaching our kids,” will “take this republic down.” Against the backdrop of his party, Donald Trump, complaining about “pink-haired communists teaching our kids” and “Marxist maniacs and lunatics” running our universities, sounds practically calm.

More ominously, at every level of government, Republicans have begun to act on these beliefs. Over the past three years, legislators in 28 states have passed at least 71 bills controlling what teachers and students can say and do at school. A wave of library purges, subject-matter restrictions, and potential legal threats against educators has followed.

Education has become an obsession on the political right, which now sees it as the central battlefield upon which this country’s future will be settled. Schoolhouses are being conscripted into a cataclysmic war in which no compromise is possible — in which a child in a red state will be discouraged from asking questions about sexual identity, or a professor will be barred from exploring the ways in which white supremacy has shaped America today, or a trans athlete will be prohibited from playing sports.

In the spring of 2021, Richard Corcoran delivered a fire-breathing speech at Hillsdale, a right-wing Christian college in Michigan, touting the agenda he had helped implement as education commissioner in Florida. When an audience member asked how he had been able to find common ground with people who disagreed with him, Corcoran responded, “I have fought … There’s no negotiation. I don’t think antifa wants to sit down and have a conversation with me about how can we make this society better.” Corcoran went on to compare America’s disputes over education to “the warring in the streets” in Germany before World War II between the Nazis and the communists. “The war will be won in education,” he vowed. “Education is our sword. That’s our weapon. Our weapon is education.”

COVER STORY

The Republican Classroom

 

package-table-of-contents-photo

It is hardly novel for Republicans to emphasize the need to improve schools. Ronald Reagan’s administration published a report, A Nation at Riskthat inaugurated the modern education-reform debate. Reagan’s successor, George H.W. Bush, claimed he would be “the education president.” Bush’s son, George W., signed the No Child Left Behind Act, a historic education reform that used testing to hold schools to account. What little attention Trump paid to education when he ran for president in 2016 gestured in this direction, championing educational choice as a tool to lift student achievement. All these Republican executives saw education as a technocratic issue they could use to appeal to voters outside their base.

What sets the current movement apart from these previous efforts is not merely its greater intensity but its focus. Academic-achievement levels are incidental to Republicans’ concern. Their main preoccupation is not the ways in which Chinese and Swedish kids may be outpacing their American counterparts. They are instead accusing schools of carrying out an insidious indoctrination campaign that, they believe, poses an existential threat to their party’s future and their way of life.

Dubya once said, famously, “Rarely is the question asked, Is our children learning?” The complaint of Republicans today is not that the schools aren’t working but that they are working all too well at the objective of brainwashing children in left-wing thought. Education, as Corcoran reportedly put it, is “100 percent ideological.”

Media coverage of the Republicans’ education crusade has largely treated it as a messaging exercise. A New York Times headline from earlier this year, “DeSantis Takes On the Education Establishment, and Builds His Brand,” reflects the cynical assumption that this is mostly a way for him to rile up the Fox News audience. One progressive pollster recently told The Atlantic that for Republican voters, liberal control of schools “is a psychological, not policy, threat,” even as their elected officials strike back with policy. Some Democrats have mocked Republicans for pursuing arcane obsessions that fail to connect with voters’ concerns. And it’s true the voters are not driving this crusade: A recent poll found only 4 percent of the public lists education as the most important issue. Politico reports that “mounds of research by Democratic pollsters over the last several months” have found Republican book bans to be utterly toxic with swing voters.

You might wonder why Republicans would throw themselves into such a risky venture. The answer is that they aren’t looking to enrage their base or get their face on Fox News. They have come to believe with deadly seriousness that they not only must but can seize control of the ideological tenor in American schools, from the primary to the university level. If accomplishing this social transformation carries a near-term political cost, they are willing to pay it. And to imagine that they will fail, or grow bored and move on, and that the education system will more or less remain the same as it ever was, is to lack an appreciation for their conviction and the powers they have at their disposal to realize their goal.

 

Culture wars can break out over almost anything, but the political content of education is the most classic venue. Kulturkampf, the German word for “culture struggle” and the linguistic origin of “culture war,” describes a wrenching conflict over whether the church or the state would control the schools in 19th-century Prussia. Around the same time, France had a similar schism, largely between monarchists and republicans, both of whom believed that if they controlled the schools, they would own the hearts and minds of future citizens.

The nature of these fights is raw. Schools are a foundational institution for inscribing the value system of the state. Nothing enrages parents more than the idea that their children are being turned against them, and few things worry a partisan more than the fear the opposing party is using schools to inculcate its beliefs in the young. “Wherever two or more groups within a state differ in religion, or in language and in nationality, the immediate concern of each group is to use the schools to preserve its own faith and tradition,” wrote Walter Lippmann in 1928. “For it is in the school that the child is drawn toward or drawn away from the religion and patriotism of its parents.”

France’s conflict eventually led to the Dreyfus affair, in which false charges of treason against Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish artillery captain, unleashed a torrent of antisemitism that pitted much of France’s secular republican left against the theocratic monarchist right. Germany’s Kulturkampf preceded … well, you know.

It was perhaps just a matter of time until the Republican Party’s perambulatory culture-war fixations, which have roamed from hippies to flag-burners to Muslims to gay marriage, landed on the schoolhouse.

Throughout American history, fights over the political content of school have broken out from time to time, usually centering on history textbooks and their treatment of racism, immigration, communism, and other social divides. Generations of conservatives have been shocked by the experience of their children reporting some unattractive facts about the Founders or the Civil War and came to suspect educators were plotting to steer children to some new worldview.

Some progressive education reformers embraced this very goal. George S. Counts, an educator and activist who went on to serve as head of the American Federation of Teachers and founded New York’s Liberal Party, wrote a pamphlet in 1932 called Dare the School Build a New Social Order? in which he argued frankly that schools should be used to inculcate progressive beliefs. “Progressive education,” he wrote, should “become less frightened than it is today at the bogies of imposition and indoctrination.” He added, “Every Progressive school will use whatever power it may possess in opposing and checking the forces of social conservatism and reaction.”

Later that decade, a number of history textbooks written by Harold Rugg swept into popularity. The Rugg history scalded the Founders as aristocratic landowners using the Constitution to preserve their wealth from the masses. Critics denounced it as left-wing propaganda, while his supporters insisted that educators alone were qualified to choose the proper historical emphasis. “Judgment as to the merits of a textbook is the function of those most competent to form a judgment: the teachers concerned and professional scholars,” maintained the American Historical Association.

As the New Deal lost momentum in Washington, Rugg’s ideas, held aloft by the assumption that liberalism had entered a new permanent ascendancy, fell out of favor. Sales of his texts plunged from a peak of 289,000 in 1938 to just 21,000 half a dozen years later, and they soon dropped out of usage altogether. The heady liberal dream that schools could serve as a vanguard of a social revolution had met political reality.

After the Rugg conflict, American history and civics texts generally adopted a mushy, consensus-oriented tone that offended very few people. Among the aggrieved minority was William F. Buckley Jr., who shortly before the founding of National Review in 1955 helped establish a publication called the Educational Reviewer dedicated to demanding right-wing content in the schools. Buckley’s first book, God and Man at Yale, proposed that the left-leaning faculty be denied academic freedom, which, he charged, they were abusing to warp the minds of impressionable college students.

Buckley is generally credited as the founder of the modern American conservative movement, but his call to conscript schools into the cause of promoting right-wing thought, like many of Buckley’s ideas, failed to catch on at the time. As Jonathan Zimmerman recounts in Whose America? Culture Wars in the Public Schools (2002), the campaign to censor textbooks never made it far in the halls of power after World War II: “Even at the height of its frenzied search for subversion,” the McCarthy era, “Congress refused to extend the quest into textbooks.”

Eventually, the fights over indoctrination largely receded. “By the early 1980s, the shared sense across the political spectrum that public schools were sites worthy of intense contestation began to diminish,” writes education historian Natalia Mehlman Petrzela in Classroom Wars (2015).

The return came very fast at a magnitude and with a vehemence unlike anything that has ever occurred in American history.

 

The Republican Party emerged from the Trump era deeply embittered. A large share of the party believed that Democrats had stolen their way back into power. But this sentiment took another form that was not as absurd or, at least, not as clearly disprovable. The theory was that Republicans were subverted by a vast institutional conspiracy. Left-wing beliefs had taken hold among elite institutions: the media, the bureaucracy, corporations, and, especially, schools.

This theory maintains that this invisible progressive network makes successful Republican government impossible. Because the enemy permanently controls the cultural high ground, Republicans lose even when they win. Their only recourse is to seize back these nonelected institutions.

“Left-wing radicals have spent the past 50 years on a ‘long march through the institutions,’” claims Manhattan Institute fellow and conservative activist Chris Rufo, who is perhaps the school movement’s chief ideologist. “We are going to reverse that process, starting now.”

Many institutions figure in Republicans’ plans. They are developing proposals to cleanse the federal workforce of politically subversive elements, to pressure corporations to resist demands by their “woke employees,” and to freeze out the mainstream media. But their attention has centered on the schools. “It is the schools — where our children spend much of their waking hours — that have disproportionate influence over American society, seeding every other institution that has succumbed to left-wing ideological capture,” writes conservative commentator Benjamin Weingarten.

Or, as Florida governor Ron DeSantis has said in his most revealing comments on the issue, “Our K–12 schools are public institutions that are funded by our taxpayers. And so that line of thinking is saying, even though they’re public institutions, the people that are elected to direct those institutions have no right to get involved. If the left is pursuing the agenda. So basically, we can win every election and we still lose on all these different things. That is totally untenable. So these are public institutions, and they have to reflect the mission that the state of Florida has in our case, not just K–12, but also higher education.”

A recent study by the Manhattan Institute illustrates why the right finds this cause so urgent. The paper surveys 18-to-20-year-olds about what it calls “critical social justice” concepts they learned in school, such as “America is a systemically racist country,” “white people have unconscious biases that negatively affect nonwhite people,” “America is built on stolen land,” or “America is a patriarchal society.” The survey proposes that adults exposed to these concepts develop liberal beliefs: “CSJ and school ideology appear to be having a major impact in converting young people to left-wing beliefs and Democratic partisanship.”

The report finds that these concepts are being taught in private, religious, and charter schools and spread through social media and entertainment. Therefore, the old conservative method of promoting choice between public and private schools stands little chance of holding back the progressive tide. The biggest shift among young people seems to have occurred among those whose parents were Republicans or independents.

Put aside for a moment whether this finding is correct. What it shows us is why Republicans are acting so urgently (or, to their bewildered critics, hysterically). They believe the schools have become factories for turning children into Democrats, that progressives are so powerful the children of Republican parents cannot resist them, and that their old remedy of exiting the public-school system is nearly useless. Working from these assumptions, Republicans’ determination to seize control of the indoctrination machinery makes perfect sense.

 

Even the most paranoid belief systems often contain elements of reality. It is true that American society has polarized, pushing its most conservative communities rightward and its liberal communities leftward. Schools, largely being run by people who have college educations, have likely undergone the same kind of socially progressive shift that has rippled through the rest of the knowledge economy.

In California, public schools are rolling out required ethnic studies and have pushed schools to decelerate adoption of algebra in order to advance equity goals. Thousands of classrooms have used the New York Times’ “The 1619 Project,” a provocative interpretation of American history that has drawn criticism from some respected historians, including one approached by the Times to fact-check it.

Some teachers and administrators see the role of the school, like Rugg and Counts did, as a vanguard institution driving social change. In 2021, the National Education Association approved a resolution for “increasing the implementation of culturally responsive education, critical race theory, and ethnic (Native people, Asian, Black, Latin[o/a/x], Middle Eastern, North African, and Pacific Islander) Studies curriculum in pre-K–12 and higher education.” The NEA can’t simply dictate classroom pedagogy, but its desires do reflect a popular sentiment within the profession that has left its mark on many classrooms. A national report by Bellwether, a nonprofit firm analyzing education, reported, “Much of the backlash to teachers’ efforts to teach about racism in the classroom or to DEI trainings comes from lessons and programs that are poorly designed and poorly implemented, often because of limited or nonexistent resources and support or politicized approaches.”

Many parents, understandably, don’t like this stuff. A poll last year by the American Federation of Teachers found that voters would be more likely to support a Republican candidate who endorsed propositions like “public schools should focus less on teaching students about race and racism, and more on core academic subjects,” giving parents more say over content, and other right-leaning criticisms of the pedagogy. The idea that some schools have gone farther left on social policy than the public as a whole shouldn’t come as a surprise. Progressive educators can implement change that’s far more radical in character than anything Democrats could pass in Congress.

It is possible for legislatures to restrict some of the pedagogical fads of recent years without preventing children from learning unvarnished historical truths about slavery, reconstruction, Jim Crow, and its aftermath. Reports have described bans on lessons that make students feel guilty, when they have merely restricted lessons that instruct them to feel guilty, a reasonable thing to ask. Commentators on the internet likewise depicted Florida as banning the teaching of African American history, when in fact the state merely objected to elements of the AP African American History curriculum, ultimately resulting in a revised version.

And aspects of the Republican legislation confines itself to these limited measures. But other bills attempt far more expansive levels of ideological control over the classroom, and they suffer from either sweeping vagueness or paralyzing specificity.

As an example of the former, a Montana bill currently tabled in committee would restrict science education to “scientific fact,” defined in the bill as “an indisputable and repeatable observation of a natural phenomenon,” which would present a serious challenge to teaching a field composed in large part of scientific theories. A South Carolina bill introduced in 2021 would have forbidden any lesson that “omits relevant and important context” and created a hotline to report violations of this hopelessly subjective criteria.

An example of the latter can be seen in an Oklahoma bill that tried to stamp out social-emotional learning, a strategy to help students manage their emotions that conservatives have bizarrely associated with indoctrination. (“The intention of SEL,” Rufo has claimed, “is to soften children at an emotional level, reinterpret their normative behavior as an expression of ‘repression,’ ‘whiteness,’ or ‘internalized racism,’ and then rewire their behavior according to the dictates of left-wing ideology.”) But how can a legislature ban an entire style of teaching? The solution settled upon by Oklahoma would have prohibited an array of concepts so vast it has to be beheld in its entirety:

Any evidence-based or non-evidence-based programming that promotes school or civic engagement or builds an equitable learning framework that creates or uses evidence-based benchmarks, standards, surveys, activities, learning indicators, programs, policies, processes, professional development, or assessments that address noncognitive social factors including but not limited to self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, responsible decision-making, and other attributes, dispositions, social skills, attitudes, behaviors, beliefs, feelings, emotions, mind-sets, metacognitive learning skills, motivation, grit, self-regulation, tenacity, perseverance, resilience, and intrapersonal resources.

Imagine attempting to teach a class for a year while keeping this entire list of forbidden ideas in your head at all times.

A broader problem with the wave of conservative legislation is that it is responding to a wildly hyperbolic version of reality. In a very large country with a fragmented education system, there are going to be plenty of examples of outrageous or radical teaching in the schools on a daily basis without necessarily indicating anything about the system’s overall character. As conservatives grew alarmed about left-wing teachers, their favorite media sources started curating examples of it to stoke their outrage.

Chaya Raichik’s account Libs of TikTok has amassed more than 2 million followers — DeSantis once invited her to stay at the governor’s mansion in Florida — partly by finding posts by left-wing teachers on social media. Her audience has come to see these cherry-picked examples as representing the normal experience in an American classroom. In response to a post by a teacher with brightly dyed hair and tattoos appearing to pledge allegiance to the Pride flag, National Review editor-in-chief Rich Lowry commented, “Don’t laugh — this pledge is probably coming soon to blue jurisdictions.” In apparent response to a viral but false Libs of TikTok post claiming a school was placing litter boxes in the bathroom for children who identify as cats, North Dakota’s House passed a bill that would, among other restrictions, forbid any “policy establishing or providing a place, facility, school program, or accommodation that caters to a student’s perception of being any animal species other than human.”

These sorts of lurid fantasies inspired Republicans in Florida, Iowa, and Mississippi to introduce bills to put microphones, cameras, or livestreams inside classrooms. An Indiana Republican bill proposed to require school officials to create parent-led curricular advisory committees. Louisiana attorney general Jeff Landry, who is running for governor, created a “Protecting Minors” tip line to field complaints about libraries and schools.

 

Inevitably, perhaps, conservative fears of sexual indoctrination have led them to seek out evidence of heresy in school libraries. Concerned parents have been pestering school boards to keep scary books away from little Susie’s innocent eyes since the school library was invented. But the movement to do so has taken on a wholly novel scale. PEN America, a literary-freedom organization, has tracked some 50 organizations dedicated to restricting library content — nearly three-quarters of which have formed since 2021. The most prominent, Moms for Liberty, presented DeSantis with a “liberty sword” when he spoke at its summit in July.

About two-fifths of the bans are tied to rules or political pressure from state officials or elected lawmakers, an “unprecedented shift,” according to PEN America, which notes that book bans have historically been initiated by locals in a community, not their governments. Seven states are considering bills to restrict books containing things like “profane language” or “depictions of gender identity.” Twelve states have introduced bills that could make school employees and librarians subject to being charged with violating obscenity laws.

In Florida, HB 1467 — a law requiring all books in schools to be “suited to student needs” — prompted school libraries across the state to frantically pull texts for fear they would violate the new regime. The Florida Freedom to Read Project reported that some 20 school districts in the state eliminated books to comply with this law or DeSantis’s “Don’t Say Gay” and Stop WOKE acts. School officials in two counties covered up all the books in the library until the entire catalogue could be vetted for compliance. “There appears to be confusion over what books or materials could actually lead to a criminal charge,” conceded a report in National Review. Citing DeSantis’s HB 1557, what critics called the “Don’t Say Gay” law, the Lake County district removed And Tango Makes Three, which tells the true story of two male penguins who had built a nest together in the Central Park Zoo, then, when provided an egg by the zookeeper, raised the baby penguin. The book contains no sexual content, not even between consenting penguins.

One of DeSantis’s allies has introduced a bill requiring schools to “teach that the male and female reproductive roles are binary, stable, and unchangeable” and another to remove children from their parents if a court deems that they have been “subjected to” gender-affirming care, making a mockery of their professed concern for parental rights. DeSantis’s state-imposed ideology is being extended to student-run clubs: One high school shut down a meeting by its Queer and Ally Alliance, a student group, after Florida’s Department of Education reportedly sent the school administration a threatening message. <b>Both in theory and in practice, the Republican schools campaign has attacked even basic expressions of respect for gay and trans people.</b>

 

The difference between the old conservative approach to education and the new variant can be seen most starkly in the realm of higher education. American conservatives have never exactly adored universities, and the feeling is mutual. One study found that left-leaning faculty members outnumber conservatives by about six to one, and among administrators the ratio is twice as high. For many years, conservatives have deplored the left-wing tilt of academia and supported the complaint, along with many moderates and liberals, that the hothouse atmosphere on campus was suppressing dissent.

Allan Bloom’s 1987 book The Closing of the American Mind and Dinesh D’Souza’s 1991 Illiberal Education expressed the conservative view of academia: It had become close-minded and abandoned its historic commitment to open inquiry. Conservatives joined groups like the National Association of Scholars to protect conservative professors — or a liberal one who happened to say something provocative — from being intimidated or fired.

In recent years, a rising class of conservative intellectuals has advanced a different critique. Rufo, in particular, has pressed the case that the far left has infiltrated schools and other institutions so thoroughly that conservatives must take drastic action. “We’re going to actually learn the left-wing playbook,” he vowed in one lecture, calling for a “counterrevolutionary strategy for recapturing the institutions.”

Like many radicals who studied the methods of their adversaries, Rufo seemed to come away not with horror but a strange respect. “One thing I almost admire about the political left is that they want to achieve dominance and nothing less than dominance,” he said. In other words, conservatives must discard their attachment to fusty principles of academic freedom and open debate. When laying siege to institutions, Rufo has said, “You have to be very aggressive. You have to fight on terms that you define. You have to create your own frame, your own language. And you have to be ruthless and brutal in pursuit of something good.”

Academic freedom is no longer the solution. It is now the problem.

The world of politics and activism has plenty of would-be Lenins, but few have a direct plan for conservatives to use their power of the state to shape the ideological character of schools. And the place demonstrating the feasibility of this method is Florida, which represents the most advanced proving ground of the right’s new campaign against education.

DeSantis has placed his stamp on K–12 schools with an array of creative methods. His law restricting gender education and another, the Stop WOKE Act, which bans the teaching of certain progressive racial theories, have both had a chilling effect on liberal teachers. He also held voluntary training sessions for civics teachers with the lure of a $700 stipend for those who attend and the chance to receive $3,000 if they complete an online course. <b>The sessions, reportedly developed in part by Hillsdale, had a distinctly conservative slant, according to several attendees. “It was very skewed,” one government teacher told the Miami Herald. “There was a very strong Christian fundamentalist way toward analyzing different quotes and different documents.”</b>

State and local governments traditionally observe some limits on their control of subject matter. DeSantis’s K–12 agenda has at least pushed that line. When it comes to universities, DeSantis has obliterated the line completely.

He began with a takeover of New College, a public university in the state, stacking its board with right-wing ideologues, several of whom have praised him, including Rufo.

The pretext for tearing down the school leaned heavily on its alleged budgetary woes, but DeSantis immediately allocated $15 million in state spending and the board hired Corcoran as president with a base salary above that of presidents of other Florida universities that have nearly 100 times more students. DeSantis hoped to turn New College into “Florida’s classical college, more along the lines of a Hillsdale of the South,” his chief of staff told the Daily Caller. “We are now over the walls and ready to transform higher education from within,” exclaimed Rufo.

Having supplied proof of concept, DeSantis is now turning to the other, vastly larger components of the state’s higher-education system. His allies have introduced legislation that would impose rigid ideological control over every state university. The original text of the bill held that no core American-history course could teach a narrative except one “based on universal principles stated in the Declaration of Independence” and shunted teaching any “unproven, theoretical, or exploratory content” to electives. The current version bars any general-education courses from teaching “theories that systemic racism, sexism, oppression, or privilege are inherent in the institutions of the United States and were created to maintain social, political, or economic inequities.”

To backstop these changes, DeSantis, who had already signed a law in 2022 scaling back tenure protections for faculty, is now considering all but doing away with them. DeSantis would additionally consolidate power over hiring and firing in the hands of university presidents, some of whom owe their appointments to DeSantis. Any professors wandering too close to his vague regulations on progressive thought could find their career at the mercy of political operatives.

 

Ken Burns, the documentary filmmaker, recently called the DeSantis education program Soviet, which is a tad melodramatic, given that the Soviets arrested or murdered millions and millions of people. But there does happen to be a comparison at hand that is chilling in its own right: the Hungarian strongman Viktor Orbán, whom DeSantis and the Republican Party have adopted as a model.

When he won his first election in 1998, Orbán identified the universities as the primary institutional source of opposition. Orbán placed most state universities under the control of close allies. He drove the prestigious Central European University, which had been founded by his enemy George Soros, out of the country — not by sending in troops to seize the school but through the blandly bureaucratic method of imposing new operating requirements.

At first, the scholar Kim Lane Scheppele noted at the time, his critics joked darkly that “since educated people don’t vote for Orbán, his long-term plan for staying in power in Hungary has been to create fewer educated people.” But Orbán’s vision turned out to be much more strategic than that. Universities cut back on academic departments with the most liberals and expanded funding for departments with conservative leanings. Orbán opened a lavishly funded new campus for conservative intellectuals. His supporters publicly invited students to submit the names of faculty who professed “unasked-for left-wing political opinions.”

Last September, Balázs Orbán, the political director for the Hungarian prime minister, visited Florida, where he praised DeSantis and likened his governing style to that of his own boss. Rufo just spent a month in Budapest as a fellow at the Danube Institute, a pro-Orbán group, where he gave speeches denouncing critical race theory and reportedly met with Orbán’s government. (Rufo declined to confirm whether they actually met.) The two men appear to be swapping notes.

DeSantis seems to have absorbed the notion that conservatives have an existential need to use their political power to seize the commanding heights of the culture, especially its schools. His new book argues against the old conservative notion of supporting academic freedom, warning that “elected officials who do nothing more than get out of the way are essentially greenlighting these institutions to continue their unimpeded march through society.”

Orbán’s example has shown the government’s power over the academy can be absolute. DeSantis is simply the first Republican to appreciate the potential of this once-unimaginable use of state power to win the culture wars. Even before DeSantis’s plan has passed, Republicans in North Carolina, Texas, and North Dakota rushed out bills to eliminate tenure for professors.

Trump, racing to catch up with DeSantis on the education issue, has vowed to eliminate federal funding for any school promoting critical race theory, “transgender insanity,” or “any other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content on our children.” He promises to fire existing college accreditors and appoint new ones who will implement his ideological dictates, and to back up this threat by imposing confiscatory taxes on the endowment of any university that resists.

Conservatives as a whole have fled from any pretense of respecting academic freedom. “To complain that the governor and the state legislature are interfering with” public universities “is, in effect, to complain that the governor and the state legislature are interfering with the government that they run,” editorialized National Review, neatly sweeping away any concern that a Republican state could ever go too far in dictating content to its universities.

With DeSantis and Trump now vying for supremacy with a boot on the neck of American education, the Republican Party appears to have quickly settled on this strategy. There is not any assurance that the campaign to control the ideology of the schools will remain confined to the public sphere. Representative Dan Bishop of North Carolina and Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas have put forth a bill that would deny federal funding to public and private universities that promote CRT concepts.

And what has been revealed in these early days of the Republican plan to conquer the academy merely represents the powers of state governments. Should Republicans win control of the White House and Congress, they would have far more authority at their disposal. Federal research dollars and tuition subsidies give the federal government leverage over every institution of higher learning, public and private alike.

There is little sign Democrats have grasped the ultimate ambitions they are confronting. When DeSantis began pushing through yet another expansion of his restrictions on gender instruction — a bill that would, among other things, require “certain materials” facing objections by any parent to be removed before they were vetted — his opponents dismissed it as mere pandering. Democrats “see it as an attempt by DeSantis to excite the conservative base and, ultimately, win the GOP 2024 presidential nomination,” reported Politico.

<b>This pat assumption fails to appreciate that seizing political control of the schools is not a campaign slogan. It’s a plan to turn power into more power.</b>

When Republicans last had control of government, admiration of Orbán was confined to a marginal fringe of right-wing intellectuals, and the whole idea of imposing their will on schools had yet to be invented. It was well into his final year in office before Trump glommed onto the issue. Trump called the George Floyd demonstrations “the direct result of decades of left-wing indoctrination in our schools.” That is when he brought Rufo in for a visit and began ranting on the campaign trail about the “wokes” in the classroom. In November 2020, to counter the narrative of “The 1619 Project,” Trump created a “1776 Commission,” which released its report on Trump’s penultimate day in office.

This futile departing gesture seemed at the time to signify the superficiality and ridiculousness of the Republican interest in the subject. But now members of the party elite have fully invested themselves in this objective. They have only just begun to explore their powers, and their statements on the matter recognize no theoretical limit as to how far they might go. In retrospect, Trump’s late embrace of the crusade to purify the schools was not a fleeting interest but a new turn, the first shots fired in what we now see is a full-scale war.