Texas Board of Education Slights Thomas Jefferson

By Rational Nation USA

I have just completed reading (a day late) the article in The New York Times regarding the Texas Board of Education's approval to put a more conservative stamp on social studies (whatever happened to history) and economic text books.

The new curriculum standards will put a more favorable light on capitalism, pronouncing its superiority over other economic systems. At the same time the Founding Father's desires and commitment to the establishment of a secular government will be questioned. In addition to this the Republican philosophy with respect to politics and government will be presented more positively.

I suppose as an independent conservative it would seem only natural to be hopping up and down over these events. However, there are troubling aspects to what has taken place in Texas. As one who has always loved history I have a great disdain for revisionist history no matter form it takes.

There is no question that the curriculum in public schools has been pushed significantly leftwards. In the process the progressive movement has successfully changed how students are taught to look at America. The progressive movement in academia has, by and large taught anti capitalism, anti individualism, diminished the notion of self reliance in favor of reliance on government, and has attempted to indoctrinate students with an anti American view in favor of a multiculturalism global view. So, with respect to teaching a historical and economic perspective that favors capitalism over socialism and puts a more favorable light on America it is indeed a good thing and a move in the right direction.

What is troubling is the move by conservatives (I suspect they are really neo-cons) on the board to dampen the teaching of Darwin's theory of evolution, and the belief that because the founding fathers were guided by Christian principals (they were for the most part Deists) it somehow gives reason to question their commitment to the formation of a secular state. As an independent conservative I take issue with both both positions.

Darwin's theory of evolution is based on science and to refute its validity is, at least in my mind, telling. I shall leave Darwin with only this limited comment. The greater purpose it to look at the apparent impact the Texas Board of Education's decision will have on the teaching of Jeffersonian history. From my read of the New York Times article it will likely become revisionist, or merely overlooked in favor of the neo cons preferences and limited understanding of history.

Read more here.


  1. The only way to stop this is TAKE YOUR KIDS OUT OF GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS PEOPLE!! (Not shouting at you LCR, just making a point) The "education" is terrible and they don't care about the kids. All my nieces and nephew have been home schooled. They are light years ahead of Public School graduates in manners and knowledge. :)

  2. I agree with everything in this post except your support of the theory of evolution. There is little evidence to support the claim. Every so called "missing link" has been debunked. There is no fossil record of any type of evolutionary transition from one organism to another. Above all, the ideology that breeds from an extremist view of the theory, social Darwinism, is dangerous and was the driving force behind the Holocaust. I think the theory of evolution is an absolute myth and should be banned from all curriculum.

    But that's just my two cents.

  3. Sparky - I could not agree more with respect to home schooling. My niece is home schooled and she is one of the most inquisitive kids I have ever known. And way ahead of the norm as well.

  4. Hack - Evolution is a scientific fact. I am aware that there are those for have presented "questionable evidence" to dispute evolutionary theory.

    I am certainty fine with that. Perhaps the creator of all things actually took millions of years to prefect his creation.

    To believe it all occurred during a seven day period 6,000 + years ago is, at least to me, ludicrous and based on nothing but blind faith in scriptures that were written by fallible humans.

    Just one man's opinion. I realize the remote possibility I could be wrong. A chance I am willing to take.

  5. LCR:
    I could be wrong, but my understanding is that they moved him from Social Studies to History or maybe government. He isn't being eliminated, just moved.

  6. Rational Nation: I in no way claimed I believe the earth is only 6,000 years old. Carbon dating tells us otherwise.

    I'd love to hear some firm evidence to prove evolution as a proven scientific fact though.

    Feel free to email me anytime.

  7. Just a point of interest from the state where Mr. Jefferson lived and where I am 1/2 hour from his home. Texas at least made a more positive step in the right direction. A good thing that comes out of this is due to the size of TX, many text books are written to their curriculum. What will the government teachers do now? Whine about one more thing or better yet, protest and not go to work?

  8. Hack and Rational Nation:
    I agree with Hack, Darwin's theory of evolution is false and I believe it is limiting to teach this to our kids as true dogma. I do not come from a religious perspective.

    Darwinism is as much a hoax as global warming and our kids are being limited by programming them to believe it is the one and only truth.

    Sience is a limited religion and especially because I do not believe in basing beliefs on faith. I base my beliefs on personal experience. I wrote an article about The Problem with Science because of "herd" mentality and science's tendancy to supress evidence when it contradicts current “World View.”

    Rational Nation: after reading your article where you state, "As one who has always loved history I have a great disdain for revisionist history no matter what form it takes."

    Darwinism is revisionist history from only 150 years ago dumbing us down from the wisdom of our forefathers.

    We need to raise our kids with open minds and not limit their programming to false "truths." The facts are that no one has concrete evidence, so we must teach more than one point of view: and it should not be based on religion, it can be intelligent design exlained through physics (ie, gforce).

  9. Hack and Journalizer - I respectfully disagree with your assessment. Nonetheless I respect your opinion. I simply will continue to respectfully disagree.

    classicrider - It is indeed unfortunate, INMO that the beliefs of the founding fathers will now be twisted to fit a religious ideology as threatening to liberty and any government tyranny.

    A read of history bears this out. Particularity in Europe and America prior to the revolution..


Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.