Rob Rogers (Counterpoint) went there, and it’s courageous and effective. But how many people know where he went?
Again, it’s that darned median age: Half of Americans are under 38, and it’s been 66 years since 14-year-old Emmett Till was murdered for (allegedly) insulting a white woman.
His lynching was one of the major catalysts for the Civil Rights Movement, primarily because his mother insisted on an open casket, so that people could see what the racist barbarians had done to her almost-unrecognizable boy.
Rogers’ analogy is perfect: Critical Race Theory is the study of history with the coffin lid open, as opposed to the GOP’s Happy Face School of History in which nothing all that bad ever happened.
But his cartoon would have more impact if those too young to remember the story when it was news had not been taught Happy Face History in school, which may be why so many state governments are rushing to slam the lid on our past.
Some of this is overt racism, but much comes back to the overall problem of amateur experts: Most people realize that having eaten in a restaurant doesn’t qualify you to be a chef, but they still think having been a student makes you an expert in teaching.
It also includes problems with how we teach and qualify teachers, who ought not to “teach to the text,” but, then again, ought not to wander too far out of areas in which they are expert.
I’m a firm believer that history teachers should be history majors, then get their teaching credentials as a graduate degree, which, BTW, is not all that unusual an approach.
The same concept applies to those who regulate them: Not that you need an education degree to be on the school board, but why not make an effort to come observe a few classes, not furiously taking notes but just catching the vibe?
Then go have lunch in the faculty lounge, or in the cafeteria with the kids. And listen.
Florida Governor Ron deSantis says don’t worry, they’ll still teach black history.
Yes, out of the Separate But Equal Textbook Series, in which we pause in our teaching of the stuff that matters to learn about those people in the little boxes alongside the real history.
Boondocks nailed it 21 years ago, when more than half of us had been born, but apparently fewer than half of us were listening.
(Ooh — good time to check the reruns! They’re just at the start of the strip!)
Elsewhere among minorities, the body count at residential schools in Canada is likely to increase, and First Nations people are not the only ones disappointed in the Pope’s failure to apologize for the rampant sexual and physical abuse at schools run by the Catholic Church.
Bruce MacKinnon suggests the Church is attempting to avoid legal ramifications, and I’m sure there are plenty of advisors in the Vatican that offer that counsel.
But, simply from a theological/philosophical POV, you can’t build your church on the rock of a central authority if, when something hits the fan, he offers nothing more in leadership than tearful prayers.
Who among you, if his children asked for help, would give them thoughts and prayers?
Juxtaposition of the Day
There are a lot of G7 cartoons starting to hit, and I’m sure we’ll be looking at them, but, meanwhile, this pair dropped before the conference and offers a good look at America’s re-emergence on the world stage.
I suspect Biden’s approach was a combination of the flowers and champagne with which he hoped to charm and the serious clean-up he had to do. Having seen him in action so far, my guess is that the flowers were offered in public and the disinfectants emerged in the meetings.
We’ll look again, but initial impressions are positive. The main problem that won’t go away is the world’s fear that they’re only seeing a four-year break, after which the US will swing back into suspicion, distrust and underhanded connivance.
That should be our fear as well.
Elsewhere in foreign affairs, Patrick Chappatte cuts to the quick with this analysis of Benjamin Netanyahu’s departure from the role of Prime Minister and into the arms of the law.
Draw your own parallels, but at least he hasn’t got the Likud party claiming Israel’s elections were fixed. We’ll see how his promise to remain party head works out after the legalities have been concluded.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch
I think the Pulitzer Prize folks deserve some kind of award for getting Bob Gorrell and Clay Jones on the same side of an issue. Jones adds a number of things in his essay that I would not have said, but that I’ll confess to having gotten a kick out of.
As reported here, the AAEC’s official response to the no-decision decision included a demand for the return of entry fees, and, while I think that was made more in anger than in expectation of it happening, I’ll also reference my previous observation that, if you sold tickets in a lottery, you wouldn’t be allowed to cancel the drawing and keep the money.
Apparently, the deal is that the judges vote on the three finalists and one of the three must get 50 percent of the vote. A plurality won’t do it.
I don’t know how much debate goes on or many times they vote before declaring themselves deadlocked, but either they were each absolutely adamant in their favorite or they weren’t taking the job seriously.
Returning the entry fees seems an unlikely solution, but they should have declared a draw and divided the $15,000 prize among Alcaraz, Bolling and Two Bulls.
And then placed the medal next to Muhammed Ali’s Olympic one.
Can’t we talk about something more pleasant?
Clay Bennett (CTFP) spins conservative outrage over the offer of a free beer for those who get vaccinated into a hoot over the nation’s foremost lover of the stuff.
I laughed ’til I cried. Or, at least, until Brett cried.
And you know how sentimental he gets over a few brewskis.
Good job there from Gorrell. Among others.
So am I reading your post correctly that the only reason a winner wasn’t chosen is that none of the three finalists met the 50% vote threshold vote requirement among the judges, which is the committee, not jury?
That it was just a deadlock among the judges, and none of the other reasons speculated by the the AAEC or its members, like bigotry, racism or anti-alternative cartooning?
A true deadlock makes more sense than other speculated, assumed reasons. Especially since the jury included two traditional format/style editorial cartoonists, a Columbia University cartoon archivist and the Pulitzer for editorial cartooning was awarded to a Black cartoonist a few years ago, which make the accusations of bigotry and racism absurd.
I read this column every day in Australia. I learn a lot about the USA. You do a wonderful job.