Want to Be Rich, Powerful, and Influential Today? Play the Victim.

Has there ever been another time in history when the powerful, moneyed, cosseted elites achieved and maintained that elite status by claiming to be despised, discriminated against and marginalized? The latest example of this fetishization of outcast status came from Yale University’s Council on Middle East Studies last Thursday, when it presented a discussion by associate professor Zareena Grewal on her book Islam Is a Foreign Country: American Muslims and the Global Crisis of Authority.

“At the talk,” reported the Yale Daily News, “Grewal spoke about her first book — which will soon have a second edition — and her next book.” So it appears that Grewal has done quite well: she holds a professorship at Yale, her first book was successful enough to warrant a second edition, and to make her writing attractive enough to publishers that she was able to sign a contract for a second book.

Zareena Grewal has, in short, been successful and prosperous. Her work has received accolades. She got a plum job at an Ivy League university. But to hear her tell it, she lives a terrifying life cowering in fear of the racist, redneck yahoos who are bent on denying her and others like her their just rewards for their labors. Grewal complains that “the pandemic impacts us in such uneven ways reflective of structural racism and disenfranchisement.” On top of that, “we have the escalation of state violence against Black and indigenous people, the climate crisis, the fascist suppression of protestors and voters, a rise in white supremacist movements, the collapsing of institutions, and the very threat of a coup.”

Wait, which side was doing the coup again? Never mind. You’ll be happy to learn that Grewal has learned to cope with all the many, many ways in which she has been victimized: “In these dark times, I rely on what I learned about the nature of crises in writing that book over ten years ago to help me slow down and metabolize all the things we are hit with every day.” Yes, metabolize. That’s how academics these days talk, you unwashed rube.

Grewal is an experienced player of the victimhood game. “During the talk,” says the Yale Daily News, “Grewal emphasized that she wrote her first book in the context of how the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and the Arab Spring Revolution affected Gen X Muslim youth.” The 9/11 attacks affected many people other than Muslims, but it has been commonplace for victimhood propagandists to claim that Muslims were the primary victims of the attacks. Several weeks ago, on the nineteenth anniversary of the attacks, the Los Angeles chapter Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued a press release to complain of supposed bias against Muslims in the teaching about 9/11 in schools. CAIR-LA Civil Rights Managing Attorney Amr Shabaik wrote that those biases primarily involved conflating “the entire religion of Islam with the tragic events of 9/11.”

Never mind that the 9/11 hijackers and plotters repeatedly conflated their actions with the religion of Islam. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and the other 9/11 plotters several years ago penned a lengthy Islamic defense for their actions, which included a closely reasoned explanation of why the 9/11 attacks were justified from the standpoint of Islamic doctrine and belief.

As far as Grewal, as well as CAIR is concerned, such material doesn’t exist. What we have instead is “the Trump Presidency, the possibility of a second term of the Trump Presidency, the transformation of a series of policies in the Middle East, the brutal suppression of those revolutionary movements that I am describing at the end of the book, and how has that impacted American Muslim communities.”

Associate Professor of Religious Studies Travis Zadeh, who hosted the event, highlighted the importance of Grewal’s work in light of efforts to police the borders and control who enters the United States. Zadeh noted that Grewal’s “writing on the containment and exclusion of Muslims takes on heightened meaning in the current context of ultranationalism. In this paramedic state of closed borders, the debate over who belongs where is all the more pressing.”

Who belongs where – that’s a good question. For all their talk of marginalization and exclusion, Zareena Grewal and Travis Zadeh are in the in-crowd, and their talk of how much they are victims is the ticket to success and adulation in today’s academic world and among the intelligentsia in general. In contrast, what about an academic who is not Marxist, anti-American, and obsessed with imagined racism and victimhood? Would such an academic get featured at Yale University’s Council on Middle East Studies? Would such an academic even get hired at Yale in the first place?

The answers are clear. And so in their most inmost of inner circles, Grewal, Zadeh and their ilk will continue whining about how they’re discriminated against, and will be rewarded with prestige, positions, money, fame, and influence for doing so, while genuine academics are genuinely excluded, and must hunt for jobs far outside the academic world. Today, if you can play the victim convincingly enough, how far can you advance? The sky’s the limit.


Miami: Muslim migrant father Emraan Ali and US-born son Jihad Ali charged with joining the Islamic State

France: Macron announces plans to fight ‘Islamist separatism,’ Muslim leaders claim victim status

UK: Christian convicted of ‘religiously aggravated harassment,’ fined $1189 for saying ‘all Muslims will go to hell’

Sharia UK: Muslims threaten Christian at Speakers Corner, cops remove Christian

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: How Cultural Marxism is Grinding Down America’s Public Schools

Cultural Marxism is the gradual process of grinding down western democracies by subverting the pillars of their culture, the structures and institutions of family, religion, education, politics, law, the arts and the media, as they provide the social cohesion necessary to a functioning society. Undermine the principles these structural institutions embody, and a capitalist society can be overthrown from within without firing a shot. Like termites eating away at the foundation of a house, cultural Marxists in our midst have plotted since the 1960s to radically transform every cultural institution in America, including its secondary education system.

Those who think the threat of communism ended when the Soviet Union collapsed would be shocked to know what’s being taught decades later in many of America’s schools. In “Bill Ayers, the Critical Pedagogy Movement and Cultural Marxism,” author Geoffrey Brittain wrote this:

In many of our public schools, young, impressionable children are no longer being taught to feel good about being Americans. Their school teachers, who traditionally embody socially approved values, are teaching them to be ashamed of being Americans. Spreading out from the schools that teach our teachers, this ideology is being inculcated into our nation’s K-12 schools and is anti-American in the most profound meaning of the term. It is a movement that is teaching future generations that capitalism and traditional American values are intrinsically evil. Critical pedagogy and its advocates, in their vehement antipathy toward capitalism, private property and traditional American values, is a classic fifth subversive column, no less dangerous to freedom than communism. Its advocates are seeking to radically transform our society by covertly indoctrinating the young through an essentially clandestine and subversive transformation of its culture.  

What follows are examples of how cultural Marxists in our schools are indoctrinating the young.

Caught on tape: Union teachers discuss pushing communism in the classroom

During a meeting of the Left Forum, two public school teachers were caught on video discussing how to slip communist dogma into classrooms. Wearing a “Tax the Rich” shirt, Sarah Knopp, a Los Angeles high school teacher and teachers union activist who contributes to “The Socialist Review,” and Megan Behrent, a New York City public school teacher affiliated with the International Socialist Organization, participated in a panel discussion about injecting Marxism into classroom instruction.

6th grade lesson plan: Design a flag for a new socialist nation

Across America, activist teachers, nearly all of whom vote Democrat, are pushing communist doctrine on captive young minds, often with the tacit approval of Democrat school administers, Democrat-controlled school boards and the modern Democratic Party.

A progressive-designed lesson plan for 6th graders in Texas public schools read as follows:

Note that socialist/communist nations use symbolism on their flags representing various aspects of their economic system.  Imagine a new socialist nation is creating a flag and you have been put in charge. Use symbolism to represent aspects of socialism/communism on your flag. What kind of symbolism/colors would you use?

If this type of thing is taught in a red state like Texas, the odds are off the charts that communist-themed lesson plans are also being used in other states.

6th grade teacher: “Republicans don’t care about anyone but the rich.”

After telling her 6th grade class that Republicans are stupid, Virginia public school teacher Kristin Martin went on to say that Republicans “don’t care about anyone but wealthy people and businesses,” an absurd claim designed to infect her students with Marxist class resentment.  Martin made her comments on Mar. 6, 2012 as Republicans filed into Powell Elementary School in Fairfax to vote on Super Tuesday.

Virginia 3rd graders required to perform Occupy Wall Street song

During an official event at an elementary school in Virginia, 3rd grade students were required to perform “Part of the 99%,’ a song with an unmistakable political overtone: support of the anti-capitalist Occupy Wall Street protests. In response to an outburst of criticism, school board officials defended the song, saying the district’s schools don’t censor songs children write or try to influence the subjects children write songs about. “It all came out of the kids’ own mouths and the kids’ own words,” said Albemarle County school board chair, Steve Koleszar. Does it appear the song was written by 3rd graders? You decide:

Part of the 99%

Some people have it all
But they still don’t think they have enough
They want more money, a faster ride
They’re not content, never satisfied
Yes, they’re the 1%
I used to be one of the 1%
I worked all the time, never saw my family
Couldn’t make life rhyme, then the bubble burst
It really, really hurt
I lost my money, lost my pride, lost my home
Now I’m one of the 99%

The song accomplished its decidedly anti-American purpose: planting the seeds of Marxist class hatred in the minds of 8-year-olds.

Using Legos to teach communism

Two teachers at a Seattle school banned Legos from the classroom to teach kindergarteners about the alleged evils of private property. Anxious to have the toys returned to the classroom, the children agreed to a new set of guidelines set by their teachers, including these: All structures must be public structures and all structures must be standard size.  Later, the teachers proudly quoted their newly indoctrinated students:

• “A house is good because it is a community house.”

• “We should all have equal houses.”

• “It’s important to have the same power over your building as other people.”

What the 5-year-olds were taught is explained in this Karl Marx quote: “The theory of Communism can be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property.”

Students at Florida college show signs of prior Marxist indoctrination

Valencia College economics professor Jack Chambliss asked his sophomore class two questions on an essay assignment: what does the American Dream look like to you, and how much do you expect the federal government to help you achieve that vision? Eighty percent of his students expect government to provide one or more of the following:

  • Free college education
  • Free health care
  • Guarantee of a good-paying job
  • Money for down-payment on a home
  • Money for retirement

Take money from rich people so more money can be given to them.

One student wrote, “As human beings, we are really not responsible for our own acts, and we need government to control those who don’t care about others.”  The students’ expectations about government’s role in helping them achieve the American Dream made it clear that many had been indoctrinated with communist propaganda fed to them at K-12 schools they attended.

Bottom line:

What children are taught in school today will determine what our country will be like in the future. In his best-selling book, “The Naked Communist,” former FBI Special Agent Cleon Skousen revealed 45 communist goals for destroying America from within.  Goal 17 mandates this: “Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for Socialism and current Communist propaganda.”  And that’s just what cultural Marxists in our schools have done. As a result, public-funded education is advancing communism in America one little Marxist at a time.

The 2020 elections will determine whether our Republic survives, or falls from within to single-party socialist rule. A PragerU video titled “Dangerous People Are Teaching Your Kids” shows how cultural Marxists are also subverting higher education. Please consider watching and sharing.

©John Edison. All rights reserved.

Here’s a List of White Liberals Caught Pretending to Be Black

Three different white liberals in authority roles within universities and activist movements have apologized this month for pretending to be black—and they aren’t the only ones to get caught lying about their racial identities.

Satchuel Cole, an Indianapolis racial justice activist, apologized on Wednesday for misrepresenting her racial identity.

“Friends, I need to take accountability for my actions and the harm that I have done. My deception and lies have hurt those I care most about. I have taken up space as a Black person while knowing I am white,” Cole wrote on Facebook.

“I have used Blackness when it was not mine to use. I have asked for support and energy as a Black person. I have caused harm to the city, friends and the work that I held so dear.”

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? Learn more now >>

Cole’s apology came after a local black news website wrote that she had been “exposed for posing as a Black Woman.”

Cole is just the latest white liberal woman to apologize for pretending to be black.

University of Wisconsin-Madison graduate student CV Vitolo-Haddad apologized and announced her resignation from her teaching position on Sept. 8, admitting that she is actually of Italian heritage, despite repeatedly claiming to be black.

George Washington University history professor Jessica Krug, who specialized in “Africa and the African Diaspora,” apologized on Sept. 3 for presenting herself as black for years.

“To an escalating degree over my adult life, I have eschewed my lived experience as a white Jewish child in suburban Kansas City under various assumed identities within a Blackness that I had no right to claim: first North African Blackness, then US rooted Blackness, then Caribbean rooted Bronx Blackness,” Krug wrote in a Medium post.

Former Spokane, Washington, NAACP President Rachel Dolezal admitted in 2015 that she’s white, despite publicly claiming to be black for years. “I acknowledge that I was biologically born white to white parents, but I identify as black,” she said in a November 2015 interview.

Dolezal had taught Africana Studies at Eastern Washington University before she was exposed as white.

Left-wing activist Shaun King faced accusations in 2015 that he misrepresented himself as black, though King has adamantly denied those accusations.

Both parents listed on King’s birth certificate are white, The New York Times noted in August 2015.

CNN anchor Don Lemon reported that King’s parents are white, citing one of King’s family members. “A family member tells CNN that both of King’s parents are white,” Lemon said.

Unlike Cole, Dolezal, Krug, and Vitolo-Haddad, King has denied falsely claiming to be black, insisting that the man listed on his birth certificate isn’t his real father, leaving the question of whether he lied about his race without a definitive answer.


Peter Hasson

Peter J. Hasson is a reporter for The Daily Caller. Twitter: @peterjhasson

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Trump’s ban on Critical Race Theory, explained

Does Critical Race Theory promote racial harmony or does it “sow division” as the Trump administration claims? And what is its relation, if any, to Marxism?

With the November election just around the corner, it’s only to be expected that President Trump would seek to rally conservative voters and drive his supporters to the polls. So, when his administration, on September 4, instructed the federal government to eliminate all training in “Critical Race Theory,” some thought it was just a red-meat stunt to excite the Republican base. Others saw it as an act of right-wing censorship and an obstruction of racial progress.

In truth, there’s much more to this development than mere politicization and censorship.

Here’s a breakdown of what the administration is doing and why it’s a welcome move.

The executive memo

“It has come to the President’s attention that Executive Branch agencies have spent millions of taxpayer dollars to date ‘training’ government workers to believe divisive, anti-American propaganda,” Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought wrote in the executive memorandum.

“Employees across the Executive Branch have been required to attend trainings where they are told that ‘virtually all White people contribute to racism’ or where they are required to say that they ‘benefit from racism,’” Vought explained. “According to press reports, in some cases these training [sic] have further claimed that there is racism embedded in the belief that America is the land of opportunity or the belief that the most qualified person should receive a job.”

The order instructed federal agencies to identify and eliminate any contracts or spending that train employees in “critical race theory,” “white privilege,” “or any other training or propaganda effort that teaches or suggests either that the United States is an inherently racist or evil country or that any race or ethnicity is inherently racist or evil.”

The exposé

How did it “come to the President’s attention,” and what press reports is Vought referring to?

Well, President Trump is known to watch Tucker Carlson’s show on Fox News. And days before the memo was issued, Carlson had on journalist Christopher Rufo to discuss his multiple reports uncovering the extent to which Critical Race Theory (CRT) was being used in federal training programs.

“For example, Rufo claimed, the Treasury Department recently hired a diversity trainer who said the U.S. was a fundamentally White supremacist country,” wrote Sam Dorman for the Fox News web site, “and that White people upheld the system of racism in the nation. In another case, which Rufo discussed with Carlson last month, Sandia National Laboratories, which designs nuclear weapons, sent its white male executives to a mandatory training in which they, according to Rufo, wrote letters apologizing to women and people of color.”

Rufo challenged President Trump to use his executive authority to extirpate CRT from the federal government.

The debate

CNN’s Brian Stelter (as well as Rufo himself) traced Trump’s decision directly to the independent investigative journalist’s self-proclaimed “one-man war” on CRT, of which the recent Carlson appearance was only the latest salvo.

Selter characterized Trump’s move as a reactionary attack on the current national “reckoning” on race. He cited the Washington Post’s claim that, “racial and diversity awareness trainings are essential steps in helping rectify the pervasive racial inequities in American society, including those perpetuated by the federal government.”

So which is it? Is CRT “divisive” and “toxic” or is it “rectifying” and “anti-racist”?

Intellectual ancestry

To answer that, it would help to trace CRT to its roots. Critical Race Theory is a branch of Critical Theory, which began as an academic movement in the 1930s. Critical Theory emphasizes the “critique of society and culture in order to reveal and challenge power structures,” as Wikipedia states. Critical Race Theory does the same, with a focus on racial power structures, especially white supremacy and the oppression of people of color.

The “power structure” prism stems largely from Critical Theory’s own roots in Marxism—Critical Theory was developed by members of the Marxist “Frankfurt School.” Traditional Marxism emphasized economic power structures, especially the supremacy of capital over labor under capitalism. Marxism interpreted most of human history as a zero-sum class war for economic power.

“According to the Marxian view,” wrote the economist Ludwig von Mises, “human society is organized into classes whose interests stand in irreconcilable opposition.”

Mises called this view a “conflict doctrine,” which opposed the “harmony doctrine” of classical liberalism. According to the classical liberals, in a free market economy, capitalists and workers were natural allies, not enemies. Indeed, in a free society all rights-respecting individuals were natural allies.

A bitter inheritance

Critical Race Theory arose as a distinct movement in law schools in the late 1980s. CRT inherited many of its premises and perspectives from its Marxist ancestry.

The pre-CRT Civil Rights Movement had emphasized equal rights and treating people as individuals, as opposed to as members of a racial collective. “I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character,” Martin Luther King famously said.

In contrast, CRT dwells on inequalities of outcome, which it generally attributes to racial power structures. And, as we’ve seen from the government training curricula, modern CRT forthrightly judges white people by the color of their skin, prejudging them as racist by virtue of their race. This race-based “pre-trial guilty verdict” of racism is itself, by definition, racist.

The classical liberal “harmony doctrine” was deeply influential in the movements to abolish all forms of inequality under the law: from feudal serfdom, to race-based slavery, to Jim Crow.

But, with the rise of Critical Race Theory, the cause of racial justice became more influenced by the fixations on conflict, discord, and domination that CRT inherited from Marxism.

Social life was predominantly cast as a zero-sum struggle between collectives: capital vs. labor for Marxism, whites vs. people of color for CRT.

A huge portion of society’s ills were attributed to one particular collective’s diabolical domination: capitalist hegemony for Marxism, white supremacy for CRT.

Just as Marxism demonized capitalists, CRT vilifies white people. Both try to foment resentment, envy, and a victimhood complex among the oppressed class it claims to champion.

Traditional Marxists claimed that all capitalists benefit from the zero-sum exploitation of workers. Similarly, CRT “diversity trainers” require white trainees to admit that they “benefit from racism.”

Traditional Marxists insisted that bourgeois thoughts were inescapably conditioned by “class interest.” In the same way, CRT trainers push the notion that “virtually all White people contribute to racism” as a result of their whiteness.

Given the above, it should be no wonder that CRT has been criticized as “racist” and “divisive.”

Reckoning or retrogression?

Supporters of CRT cast it as a force for good in today’s “rectifying reckoning” over race.

But CRT’s neo-Marxist orientation only damages race relations and harms the interests of those it claims to serve.

In practice, the class war rhetoric of Marxism was divisive and toxic for economic relations. And, far from advancing the interests of the working classes, it led to mass poverty and devastating famines, not to mention staggering inequality between the elites and the masses.

Today, the CRT-informed philosophy, rhetoric, and strategy of the Black Lives Matter organization (whose leadership professed to be “trained Marxists”) is leading to mass riots, looting, vandalism, and assault. The divisive violence has arrested progress for the cause of police reform, destroyed countless black-owned small businesses, and economically devastated many black communities.

Those who truly wish to see racial harmony should dump the neo-Marxists and learn more about classical liberalism. (FEE.org is the perfect place to start.)

So much for CRT being a force for good. Of course, even horrible ideas are protected by the First Amendment. The government should never use force to suppress people from expressing ideas, speech, or theories it dislikes.

Critics insist that President Trump is engaged in this kind of censorship by targeting CRT.

Not so.

No one is banning White Fragility, the blockbuster CRT manifesto. No one is locking up those who preach CRT or ordering mentions of it stripped from the internet.

The memo simply says that taxpayer dollars will no longer be spent promulgating this theory to federal government employees. As heads of the executive branch, presidents have wide latitude to make the rules for federal agencies under their control. Deciding how money is spent certainly falls under their proper discretion—and it is always done with political preferences in mind, one way or the other.

It is not censorship for Trump to eliminate funding for CRT, anymore than it was “censorship” for the Obama administration to choose to tie federal contracts to a business’s embrace of LGBT rights.

Elections have consequences, one of the most obvious being that the president gets to run the executive branch. If we don’t want the president’s political preferences to be so significant in training programs, then we should simply reduce the size of government and the number of bureaucrats.

In the meantime, stripping the federal government of the divisive, toxic, and neo-Marxist ideology of Critical Race Theory is a positive development for the sake of racial justice and harmony.

This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.


Dan Sanchez

Dan Sanchez is the Director of Content at the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) and the editor-in-chief of FEE.org. He co-hosts the weekly web show FEEcast, serving as the resident “explainer.” … 

Tyler Brandt

Tyler Brandt is a Senior Associate Editor at FEE. He is a graduate of UW-Madison with a B.A. in Political Science. In college, Tyler was a FEE Campus Ambassador, President of his campus YAL chapter, and… 

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and the Eugene S. Thorpe Writing Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education. He was previously a Media and Journalism Fellow at… 


STUDY: Black Lives Matter Accounts For Nearly 100% of Riots Across the Country Over 3 Months

Lest we forget, some US slave owners were honorable men

Helping our teens navigate gender ideology: ages 14-18

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: 4 Key Moments From Trump’s Speech on History, Critical Race Theory

President Donald Trump, in Constitution Day remarks, drew a direct connection between the riots and mayhem in the streets to what schools are teaching about America.

“Our mission is to defend the legacy of America’s founding, the virtue of America’s heroes, and the nobility of the American character,” the president said at the National Archives Museum Thursday for the White House Conference on American History. “We must clear away the twisted web of lies in our schools and classrooms, and teach our children the magnificent truth about our country.”

In his remarks, Trump announced actions to promote “patriotic education,” and unleashed an attack on several sacred cows of the left such as cancel culture, critical race theory, The New York Times’ 1619 Project, and the looting and arson occurring across the country.

Want to better access to more videos from The Daily Signal? Subscribe to our YouTube channel! Just go here: youtube.com/dailysignal

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? Learn more now >>

Delivering the speech on the 233rd anniversary of the Constitution, Trump praised the historical document as being “the product of centuries of tradition, wisdom, and experience.”

“No political document has done more to advance the human condition or propel the engine of progress,” Trump said. “Yet, as we gather this afternoon, a radical movement is attempting to demolish this treasured and precious inheritance. We can’t let that happen.”

Here’s four key moments from the speech.

1. Policy Actions for ‘Patriotic Education’

The president announced two actions to promote more pro-American education in schools.

“Our youth will be taught to love America with all of their heart and soul,” Trump said. “We will save this cherished inheritance for our children, for their children, and for every generation to come.”

Trump announced the National Endowment for the Humanities is awarding a grant to support a pro-American curriculum in schools. He also announced that he will be signing an executive order establishing the 1776 Commission to promote patriotic education.

“It will encourage our educators to teach our children about the miracle of American history and make plans to honor the 250th anniversary of our founding,” the president said of the 1776 Commission.

This is an important point to draw attention to, said Lindsey Burke, director of the Center for Education Policy at The Heritage Foundation.

“The president is right to shine a spotlight on the negative effects of critical theory, taught throughout colleges, particularly colleges of education, and which makes its way down through K-12 schools,” Burke told The Daily Signal. “And the administration is right to point to the inaccuracies of the 1619 Project, which should continue to be noted. More parents will now be aware of this content—which paints a negative picture of America—making its way into their children’s schools. America is a truly exceptional nation, and that’s a message that children should hear.”

2. Cancel Culture and the ‘Left-Wing Mobs’

The president added that a “radical movement” is attempting to demolish this treasured American history.

“The left-wing mobs have torn down statues of our Founders, desecrated our memorials, and carried out a campaign of violence and anarchy,” Trump said. “Far-left demonstrators have chanted the words, ‘America was never great.’ The left has launched a vicious and violent assault on law enforcement—the universal symbol of the rule of law in America.”

Trump added that politicians, establishment media, and even large corporations have sided with those causing the mayhem.

“Whether it is the mob on the street or the cancel culture in the boardroom, the goal is the same: To silence dissent, to scare you out of speaking the truth and to bully Americans into abandoning their values, their heritage and their very way of life,” Trump said.

“We are here today to declare that we will never submit to tyranny,” the president added. “We will reclaim our history, and our country, for citizens of every race, color, religion, and creed.”

3. 1619 Project, Howard Zinn, and ‘Warped, Distorted’ History

During his speech, Trump drew a correlation between the riots and education.

“The left-wing rioting and mayhem are the direct result of decades of left-wing indoctrination in our schools,” Trump said. “It has gone on far too long. Our children are instructed from propaganda tracts, like those of Howard Zinn, that try to make students ashamed of their own history.”

Howard Zinn is a liberal historian whose work has focused almost entirely on the negative aspects of American history.

Trump continued:

The left has warped, distorted the American story with deception, falsehoods, and lies. There is no better example than The New York Times’ totally discredited 1619 Project. …

America’s founding set in motion the unstoppable chain of events that abolished slavery, secured civil rights, defeated communism and fascism, and built the most fair, equal, and prosperous nation in human history.

The Times’ 1619 Project contends the United States was founded on principle of advancing slavery. The claims of the project have been challenged by historians on the right and left.

The president said the narratives pushed by the left resemble anti-American propaganda pushed by the country’s adversaries.

4. Teaching Critical Race Theory Is ‘Child Abuse’

Trump talked about critical race theory as an example, which he called a Marxist doctrine that says even children are complicit in racism and society must be radically transformed.

Critical race theory is a theoretical framework that contends individuals are either oppressed or are oppressors based on their skin color.

“Teaching this horrible doctrine to our children is a form of child abuse in the truest sense of those words,” Trump said. “For many years now, the radicals have mistaken Americans’ silence for weakness. They are wrong.”

“There is no more powerful force than a parent’s love for their children—and patriotic moms and dads are going to demand that their children are no longer fed hateful lies about this country,” Trump added. “American parents are not going to accept indoctrination in our schools, cancel culture at work, or the repression of traditional faith, culture, and values in the public square.”

Trump noted that he banned the promotion of critical race theory in the federal government through employee training programs that focus on “white privilege” or that the United States is an inherently racist country.

“Critical race theory, the 1619 Project, and the crusade against American history is toxic propaganda—an ideological poison that, if not removed, will dissolve the civic bonds that tie us together,” Trump said. “That is why I recently banned training in this prejudiced ideology from the federal government and banned it in the strongest matter possible.”

The president said such propaganda is a departure from the civil rights movement.

We embrace the vision of Martin Luther King, where children are not judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. The left is attempting to destroy that beautiful vision and divide Americans by race in the service of political power.

By viewing every issue through the lens of race, they want to impose a new segregation, and we must not allow that to happen.


Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is chief national affairs correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Lucas is also the author of “Abuse of Power: Inside The Three-Year Campaign to Impeach Donald Trump.” Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.



ROOTS OF BLACK COMMUNISM: Blacks were Labeled ‘Uncle Toms’ When They Turned Against Their Soviet Slave Masters

Is Beijing Funding Riots in America? It’s Time to Investigate

1776 Unites Curriculum Rejects 1619 Project’s Victimhood Narrative

A Note for our Readers:

Democratic Socialists say, “America should be more like socialist countries such as Sweden and Denmark.” And millions of young people believe them…

For years, “Democratic Socialists” have been growing a crop of followers that include students and young professionals. America’s future will be in their hands.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? One of their most effective arguments is that “democratic socialism” is working in Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway. They claim these countries are “proof” that socialism will work for America. But they’re wrong. And it’s easy to explain why.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation just published a new guide that provides three irrefutable facts that debunks these myths. For a limited time, they’re offering it to readers of The Daily Signal for free.

Get your free copy of “Why Democratic Socialists Can’t Legitimately Claim Sweden and Denmark as Success Stories” today and equip yourself with the facts you need to debunk these myths once and for all.


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Some Schools Don’t Want You to Know What They Are Teaching Your Kids. That’s a Problem.

Six months into the pandemic, some traditions will still not be upset by a virus. As approximately half of K-12 schools are only offering online instruction, parents will still know little, if anything, of what their children are being taught in school except by accident—or  unless they ask.

Recent fallout from such asymmetric information comes from Wylie, Texas, where a cartoon associating police with the KKK went from classroom to living room to the press room and on to the governor.

At Cooper Junior High, eighth-grade students were assigned to write about a political cartoon that depicts slave owners, then KKK members, and then police in corresponding panels. Furious parents, who only learned of the assignment because their children told them, contacted the school and wrote angry statements on social media.

Last week, Gov. Greg Abbott said the teacher responsible for the assignment should be fired.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? Learn more now >>

To be sure, there have always been disagreements about the content that students are taught in the classroom. From the introduction of “new math” and alternative ways of teaching reading in the 1950s and ’60s, to the arrival of Common Core textbooks over the last decade, changes in school curriculum always sparks debate, and will continue to do so long as schools enroll more than one student.

But in a period that historians will mark less for its civil discourse than for the birth of cancel culture and vicious riots, parents should be wary of projects that want to reframe history or train children to see injustice all around them.

For example, the New York Times Magazine and Pulitzer Center’s 1619 Project includes a school curriculum that would change how U.S. history is taught, marking 1619, the year slaves arrived in the Virginia colony, as “our nation’s foundational date.”

Reviewers, including decorated historians, have found multiple errors within the 1619 Project, starting with the date: slaves arrived via Spanish ships in North America a century before 1619. And despite the project’s claim, American colonists did not use the preservation of slavery as the primary reason to fight the American Revolution.

Noted academics including Gordon WoodJames McPhersonAllen Guelzo, and Sean Wilentz, to name a few, have catalogued the errors.

Meanwhile, Black Lives Matter also has a school curriculum, if one can call a list of  progressive policy demands the basis for a course of study. Considering that instructions for hosting a week of action precedes the list of actual learning materials, it’s no surprise to find politically charged titles as “Open Secrets in First Grade Math: Teaching about White Supremacy on American Currency” on the list.

This material goes beyond teaching students the dangers of racism and ventures well into the misuse of journalistic license and a philosophy of perpetual victimization.

What can be done? For parents, pandemic pods are all the rage right now, in which a small group of parents pool their resources to hire private instructors for their children.

But for generations, isolated groups parents have gathered to educate themselves on what their children are learning and become active with their school board. Today we might call these “textbook pods,” but “concerned citizens” will do. For all parents now, the pandemic offers a unique opportunity to review what your child is learning while content is being delivered online for all or part of the school week.

This may sound simple, but there are startling examples of schools attempting to prevent parents from finding out what is being taught. For example, in Rutherford County, Tennessee, school officials asked parents to sign forms stating they would not watch their child’s online classes while the district remains closed for in-person learning. The district released different guidance, but only after parents complained and the policy made headlines.

State and local policymakers should help parents’ efforts by requiring that public schools provide descriptions of their curricular materials online and make copies of assigned reading or written tasks available upon request.

Goldwater Institute research explains that Arizona, Texas, and Tennessee lawmakers have already enacted provisions that allow parents to see instructional content before it is taught to students, though even some of these provisions come with caveats (and considering the incident in Rutherford County, state legislators should make sure districts follow through).

In Arizona, for example, parents only view the content on school grounds. State lawmakers should require that districts bear the responsibility for providing instructional content to parents either in physical form or online.

Finally, state and federal lawmakers should affirm a parent’s right to choose how and where their child learns. Parent choice in education became a reality for everyone this year when nearly every school in the world closed due to the pandemic, and then only certain schools re-opened for in-person learning in time for the current school year.

Again, it may seem commonsensical to say that parents should be allowed to make choices about their child’s education, but some state and local policymakers have tried to stop parents from moving their child out of an assigned school.

Last month, Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan overruled Montgomery County officials’ decision to require private school buildings to remain closed while district schools were closed to in-person instruction.

Officials in North Carolina recently blocked virtual charter school enrollment, following similar decisions from lawmakers in Oregon and Pennsylvania earlier this year.

Lawmakers must maintain a consistent message that parents should be allowed to know what their children are taught, and can choose how and where their children learn.

For federal lawmakers, delivering this message without expanding the federal footprint will take legislative restraint. But such a visible show of support for parents trying to find a quality education for their child would be a welcome one, and would restore a vital tradition for everyone involved in K-12 schools: The pursuit of truth.


Jonathan Butcher is a senior policy analyst in The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Education Policy and a senior fellow for the Goldwater Institute and the Beacon Center of Tennessee. Twitter:

A Note for our Readers:

Democratic Socialists say, “America should be more like socialist countries such as Sweden and Denmark.” And millions of young people believe them…

For years, “Democratic Socialists” have been growing a crop of followers that include students and young professionals. America’s future will be in their hands.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? One of their most effective arguments is that “democratic socialism” is working in Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway. They claim these countries are “proof” that socialism will work for America. But they’re wrong. And it’s easy to explain why.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation just published a new guide that provides three irrefutable facts that debunks these myths. For a limited time, they’re offering it to readers of The Daily Signal for free.

Get your free copy of “Why Democratic Socialists Can’t Legitimately Claim Sweden and Denmark as Success Stories” today and equip yourself with the facts you need to debunk these myths once and for all.


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘OPEN THE SCHOOLS’: President Trump Calls For Defunding Schools That Remain Shuttered

President Donald Trump demanded that Democrats assist him in re-opening public schools on Thursday, saying schools that remain closed should lose government funding.

Trump has pressed for reopening schools for weeks, making several threats to limit or cut funding altogether if children continue to be forced into distance learning. The main opposition to reopening comes from teachers unions, which consistently align with the Democrats.


Trump first began his push to reopen schools in July, arguing that his Democratic opponents were halting the reopening process for political reasons.

“We have to open our schools. Open our schools. Stop this nonsense,” Trump said Thursday. “It’s only political nonsense. They don’t want to open because they think it will help them on November 3rd. I think it will hurt them on November 3rd.”

Governors across the country ordered schools to close for the final months of the 2019-2020 school year, but states and districts disagree on when classrooms should reopen. The Trump administration released a set of eight recommendations in August for how schools can safely reopen.

The White House recommendations are as follows:

  • Educate teachers and students about the symptoms of COVID-19
  • Require students and teachers to “self-assess” their health each morning
  • Encourage frequent hand washing
  • Minimize large, indoor gatherings
  • Maintain high levels of ventilation in classrooms
  • Require students and teachers to socially distance from “high-risk individuals”
  • Encourage the use of masks
  • Post instructions for hygiene and social distancing around the school

Trump maintains that distanced learning is not an adequate replacement for schooling.

“When you sit at home in a basement looking at a computer, your brain starts to wither away,” Trump said when announcing the recommendations. “We have a lot of good experience at that just by taking a look at what’s happening in politics.”

Trump’s comments echoed those of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which came forward last month to urge state governments to reopen schools in the fall, saying risk of COVID-19 spread among students is low. The group also said dangers of keeping students home and away from learning outweighs the potential risk of spread.

“Lengthy time away from school and associated interruption of supportive services often results in social isolation, making it difficult for schools to identify and address important learning deficits as well as child and adolescent physical or sexual abuse, substance use, depression, and suicidal ideation,” the group said according to U.S. News.



White House correspondent.


White House Praises SCOTUS For Striking Down State Law Banning Aid To Religious Schools

‘Stop This Political Nonsense’: Trump Calls For Schools To Reopen, Blames Democrats For Closures

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved

The Dangers of “Sexxx Ed”

Because of the virus, there is a current debate between opening up the schools or only using online instruction. Online instruction allows parents to hear what is being taught to their children. But that has some liberals up at arms because they want to teach a more radical curriculum than most parents would wish.

Perhaps the largest bone of contention in this respect is in the realm of sex education, which in our day has become more radicalized.

Christian attorney Brad Dacus, the president of Pacific Justice Institute, even calls today’s curriculum “Sexxx ed.”

Dacus told D. James Kennedy Ministries: “With the new sex-ed curriculum revolution taking place in public schools, it is a literal spiritual genocide….It is so twisted with a radical LGBTQ taught to young children all the way down to kindergarten, convincing them that they can change their gender—be a boy on the inside, girl on the outside.”

The Family Research Council (FRC) has recently released a booklet laying out the shocking facts about all this. It is entitled “Sex Education in Public Schools: Sexualization of Children and LGBT Indoctrination.” The author is Cathy Ruse, a Senior Fellow at FRC and Georgetown Law grad.

Ruse notes, “Most of us remember what sex education was like when we were in school. A couple of uncomfortable hours….Things are very different today.”

  • Children are taught they could be born “in the wrong body.”
  • Teens are shown videos of techniques to pleasure their sex partners.
  • Students are told how to have abortions without telling their parents.
  • Schools in Indiana send teens out to shop for condoms.

And on it goes.

Tony Perkins, the president of FRC, told me in an interview: “When most parents hear about sex education, they immediately think back to their gym teacher giving them some of the basic facts of human biology. But that’s not what is being taught today in our schools.”

He noted that for the most part much of today’s teaching is “a tutorial on sexual activity.” He also said, “It has expanded to where in some cases it is 70 hours of instruction.”

Planned Parenthood is now the nation’s largest sex educator in our public schools. And they profit off of the abortions they provide to sexually active teenagers. This reminds me of the old phrase, “Follow the money.”

In an interview on Christian television, Cathy Ruse told me, “There is a story out of a rural Virginia county where parents learned that their 9th grade daughters had been shown a Planned Parenthood sex ed video…focusing on certain sexual organs of their partners, and the video promoted the use of sex toys.”

As noted earlier, response to the coronavirus has shut down many schools, which now provide only virtual classes. And some educators do not welcome parental involvement.

Last week, the DailyWire.com (8/20/20) noted that parents have to sign a waiver “agreeing not to monitor virtual instruction.” Why? Does the school have something to hide? This particular story was out of Murfreesboro, Tennessee—not some liberal metropolis.

On 8/10/20, washingtonexaminer.com wrote of a Philadelphia teacher who fretted that “conservative parents” who listen in on their children’s instructions might interfere with teachers who are involved “in the messy work of destabilizing a kid’s racism or homophobia or transphobia.” The teacher assumes that teachers know what’s best for the children, not the parents. Who is responsible for the children? The parents or the teachers?

The Bible tells us that the parents are responsible for rearing their children. And God will hold parents accountable for the type of education they provide for their children. This is why school choice is such a hotly debated topic today.

One byproduct of the COVID-19 pandemic is that some parents learned that they actually could homeschool their children. Homeschooling has a long and rich tradition in American history. Some of our founding fathers and great leaders were homeschooled for at least part of their education. This includes George Washington, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and Abraham Lincoln. Homeschooled children today often succeed well beyond their public school counterparts.

Parents are responsible for their children, even if they delegate the teaching to the school. Our TV ministry once covered a story about a young girl in a California high school who had an abortion apart from her parents’ permission or knowledge. When she developed an infection (because of the abortion) that caused her to be paralyzed, it was the parents, not the school, who had to pick up the pieces of her shattered life. Schools should work with parents, not against them.

If the schools are teaching dangerous things, including falsehoods about sex—and purposely excluding the parents from knowing what’s going on—parents might want to consider other educational options for their children.

©Jerry Newcombe, D.Min. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Planned Parenthood wants schools to teach ‘Pleasures of Sex’ to 10 yr old kids



Kinsey, Father of Comprehensive Sexuality Education

”Sex Ed” is NOT Comprehensive Sexuality Education

Early Sexual Activity is not Safe or Healthy

Scientific Studies show the brain does not mature until age 25…or later

Teaching Consent…is wrong

Sex Trafficking

Let Parents Decide

Planned Parenthood

Sex Change Transitioning for Minors

Antisemitic Content Voted into California Public School Curriculum

The unmasked face of ‘critical ethnic studies’

A new bill passed by the California legislature mandates that all high school students must complete an “ethnic studies” course to graduate.

However, many Jewish voices have raised an alarm over the proposed curriculum of the course, which, among other issues, accuses Jews of possessing “racial privilege.”

The bill, AB-331, is currently on Governor Gavin Newson’s desk awaiting his signature. Last month, Newson signed a similar bill, AB-1460, requiring all California State University students to complete an ethnic studies course in order to graduate.

What the Curriculum Includes and How It Evolved

The plans essentially began as an extension of The 1619 ProjectThe New York Times‘ account of race history in America which follows the narrative of what is known as “critical race theory.”

A report by The Wall Street Journal explains how The 1619 Project found a nesting space in California’s Department of Education:

  • In 2019, California State Assembly passed an ethnic studies bill with a 63-8 vote ratio
  • The model curriculum that came out of that bill was halted as result of bipartisan opinion that the curriculum was extreme
  • 2020 riots offered a new leverage to supporters in favor of the bill and curriculum

The original curriculum, which was proposed in 2019, was assailed by Jewish groups as outright antisemitic.

It included sections such as “Direct Action Front for Palestine and Black Lives Matter,” “Call to Boycott, Divest, and Sanction Israel,” and “Comparative Border Studies: Palestine and Mexico.”

The Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) movement against Israel has been deemed an outright antisemitic movement as per the U.S. State Department’s (and 34 other countries’) definition of antisemitism.

Tammy Rossman-Benjamin, co-founder and director of the California-based AMCHA Initiative, which protects Jewish students from antisemitism, criticized the proposed ethnic studies curriculum in 2019 for its attempt to “politically indoctrinate students with the view that Israel and its Jewish supporters are part of ‘interlocking systems of oppression and privilege.’”

The California Legislative Jewish Caucus (comprised solely of Democrats) responded to the curriculum proposed in 2019 by stating that although they have “consistently prioritized efforts to promote inclusion and have strongly supported efforts to ensure that California students understand our state’s complicated history and rich diversity,” they could not “support a curriculum that erases the American Jewish experience, fails to discuss anti-Semitism, reinforces negative stereotypes about Jews, singles out Israel for criticism and would institutionalize the teaching of anti-Semitic stereotypes in our public schools.”

The 2019 curriculum also included units studying national figures such as:

  • Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)
  • Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.)
  • Islamist activist Linda Sarsour
  • Actress Alia Shawkat
  • The late White House correspondent Helen Thomas

All of these figures are associated with antisemitic and anti-Israel rhetoric, and, in the case of the congresswomen, a push to enact legislation punishing Israel.

The 2019 curriculum also presented students with classic Islamist talking points that included:

  • The concept of nakba, (Arabic for “catastrophe”), the term that is used by Islamists to describe the establishment of a Jewish nation in 1948

Due to public outcry, Governor Newsom apologized to California’s Jewish community, vowing that the curriculum would “never see the light of day.”

The revised curriculum does not include sections on the BDS movement. While an improvement, it still “remains incredibly problematic and concerning,” Rossman-Benjamin said.

“The ethnic-studies movement, known as ‘critical ethnic studies,’ which is what this curriculum is a product of, is based on an ‘us vs them’ model,” she told JNS. “It views Jews as white and privileged, and not part of the ‘us,’ and is blatantly anti-Zionist.”

Rossman-Benjamin added, “The goal of ‘critical ethnic studies’ is not to educate, but to indoctrinate students into adopting certain political views and engaging in specific forms of political activism, including those that vilify and harm Jewish students.”

The new curriculum specifically calls out Jews as a privileged white racial group. One model suggests that students “will write a paper detailing certain events in American history that have led to Jewish and Irish Americans gaining racial privilege.”

Large sections of the course detail the experience of Arab/Muslim Americans and other minorities, yet give very little attention to the experience of Jews and even less to the recent phenomena of antisemitism.

Jews are consistently the victims of the most religiously-motivated hate crimes perpetrated in America by a large margin.

The new curriculum calls for content that criticizes capitalism as a form of oppression, and highlights movements for study that were started and run by socialists and Marxists, such as the Third World Liberation Front and the Black Lives Matter movement, both of which hold anti-Israel and antisemitic views.

Sarah Levin, executive director of JIMENA: Jews Indigenous to the Middle East and North Africa, commented in a statement that while the 2020 curriculum proposal is an “improvement over past versions, some of the supplemental materials that have been included are deeply problematic and exclusionary [regarding this group of Jews].”

Levin noted that the curriculum “[portrays] the Arab American experience as a monolith to represent the [Middle East and North Africa] region,” yet 60 percent of all Californians who originate from the Middle East and North Africa are Jewish.

At the end of August 2020, the California legislature approved the new curriculum.

However, according to the law, the curriculum is offered as a model, but teachers are free to deviate from it, meaning that any part of the objectionable 2019 curriculum or other antisemitic material could theoretically make its way into the classroom.

Hate and Extremism in American public schools

This isn’t the first struggle against what many would classify as extreme curriculum in the public school system.

Yet, Covid-19 lockdowns and remote learning have given parents new awareness of these curriculums.

Astonishingly, when American schools resumed this fall, a recent poll showed that millions of families chose not to re-enroll their children in the public education system, but rather opted for home schooling or charter schools.

While studies have not been conducted as to the reason for this move away from public education, one thing is clear: Remote learning placed tremendous oversight power into the hands of parents.  

A Cease and Desist on Institutional Indoctrination

On Sunday, September 5, President Trump announced that the Department of Education would investigate whether or not California schools are using The New York Times’ 1619 Project in public school curriculum.


The previous Friday, September 4, the administration put out a memorandum aimed at the heads of executive departments and agencies in the federal government.

Addressing federal funding for a growing number of (often forced) critical race theory trainings, the memo detailed the president’s order to “ensure that Federal agencies cease and desist from using taxpayer dollars to fund these divisive, un-American propaganda training sessions.”

While the measure is aimed at federal government and critical race theory, it is a decisive and bold step that could impact other institutions and how public funding is diverted, especially considering we haven’t even seen the tipping point in the public school crisis.


The narrative of oppression as a tactic of ideological indoctrination has no place in the neutral field of childhood education. Rather, it only encourages students to walk down the path of hate by first making the student feel unequal and undervalued and then pointing to the “oppressor” as a target.

In short, this narrative does not educate children; rather it weaponizes them.

Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center accurately points out that if left unchallenged, the curriculum would “be a disaster for all Jews in California.”

He is right. However, the curriculum would not only be a disaster for Jews in California, but a disaster for the children themselves and the type of futures they will go on to build.

Children, when left to their own devices, do not approach the world as either being oppressed or as an oppressor. It is something that must be learned.

The role of identity destabilization is a well-documented radicalization strategy cited in several research papers, including the June 2018 U.S. Department of Justice paper on “How Radicalization to Terrorism Occurs in the United States.”

Radicalization often occurs long before the point of the first contact with recruiters with indoctrination in hate. Whether it’s a child in the Middle East conditioned to hate by community programming or an American child at his or her public school, the abuse is the same.

Moreover, it is that abuse that serves as a primer that fertilizes the landscape for radicalizing elements the child will face in later years through social media, peer pressure and pressure-cooker politics.

EDITORS NOTE: This Clarion Project column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Harvard Hires PLO Executive to Mentor Students

Clarion discovers over $2.6 million in donations from the Palestinians to Harvard

Harvard University named Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat — who serves as secretary general of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) — as a fellow at the Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.

Erekat, a man who called random stabbing attacks on Israeli citizens by Palestinian terrorists “self-defense,” will be charged with mentoring students and giving seminars in the school’s “The Future of Diplomacy Project.”

PLO member Erekat is one of four new fellows appointed by the school to the project. Commenting on the appointments, faculty chair Nicholas Burns said that the new fellows “will strengthen our capacity to learn the lessons of effective diplomacy and statecraft.”

In the course of research to our new documentary film Covert Cash (see below), Clarion Project discovered that the Palestinian Authority (PA), which essentially serves as the governmental arm of the PLO, made six donations to Harvard between the years of 2017 and 2019. The donations totaled $2,625,000.

The film asks, among other questions, what type of return on their investments are these foreign governments getting from their donations to American universities?

Since its inception, the PA has pleaded poverty and solicited donations from the world community. As of December 2018, the U.S. government had given the Palestinian Authority $5 billion in taxpayer dollars since 1994 (post the Oslo Accords). The European Union is one of their largest funders of the PA as well. Besides being used to line the pockets of top PA executives, Israel maintains that a good portion of this donated money has been used for terror.

The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964 with the purpose of “liberating Palestine” through armed struggle. Most of the enormous amount of violence perpetrated by the group over the years has been aimed at Israeli civilians.

The PLO was considered by the United States to be a terrorist organization until the Madrid Conference in 1991.

In 1993, the PLO ostensibly recognized the right of Israel to exist, yet continued to perpetrate terror attacks against Israel. It coordinated those attacks during the 2000–2005 Second Intifada and afterwards with the Palestinian Authority, its governmental arm.

Erekat has been involved in every Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiation since 2000 – all failed endeavors (most likely due to the fact that he explicitly stated in a 2014 interview with Al Jazeera, “I will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state”).

Nevertheless, Erekat will now bring his “expertise” – both as a diplomatic and as the author of 14 books on foreign policy, oil, conflict resolution and negotiations – to Harvard, where students at one of the most prestigious foreign policy schools in the country will be educated by him.

More facts about Erekat:

  • In 2015, Erekat compared Israel to ISIS saying, “There is no difference between the terrorism practiced by the group led by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and Israel’s terrorism”
  • He called Israel’s expansion of settlements “terrorism” at a time when settlements had seen nearly zero physical expansion for 25 years. In negotiations with then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Erekat admitted that the settlements took up only 1.1 percent of the areas Palestinians wanted for a state
  • Erekat denies archaeological evidence of the Jewish history in Jerusalem
  • Erekat claimed his family had lived in Israel for 9,000 years, yet evidence shows that the family comes from the Huwait region of Arabia

EDITORS NOTE: This Clarion Project column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Want to clean up public education? Put cameras in classrooms!

Want to clean up public education?

I say put cameras in every classroom that allows parents to see and hear what is being taught!

©Bill Finley. All rights reserved.

Parents Sue School System for Discriminating Against High-Achieving Asian Kids

A group of parents filed a lawsuit Tuesday alleging that the public school system in Montgomery County, Maryland, discriminates against Asian American students in the admissions process for gifted and talented programs.

The group of mostly Asian American parents, organized as the Association for Education Fairness, is asking a federal court in Maryland to find that changes to the admissions process violate the Constitution’s equal protection clause and to prohibit continued enforcement of the changes.

After the parents had petitioned the Montgomery County Board of Education for several years, Pacific Legal Foundation filed the suit on their behalf against both the school board and Superintendent Jack Smith in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.

“If you have a neutral and fair admissions process, we shouldn’t care what the racial outcome is. And we shouldn’t be manipulating it to get to the point where we want a racial outcome,” Chris Kieser, one of the foundation’s lawyers on the case, told The Daily Signal on Wednesday morning.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? Learn more now >>

Without court intervention, the parents say in the suit, their children “will be denied the opportunity to compete for admission to … magnet middle school programs on an equal footing with other applicants on the basis of their race.”

A spokesman for Montgomery County Public Schools acknowledged The Daily Signal’s request for comment on the suit Tuesday evening, but had not responded at publication time.

Montgomery County is an affluent, Democrat-run jurisdiction just outside the District of Columbia.

In 2017, Montgomery’s school system implemented major changes in the admissions process on the recommendation of an education consultancy called Metis Associates.

Administrators replaced the old process of admissions, which was based on a combination of cognitive test scores, grades, and teacher recommendations, with a new “field test” that automatically screens a student’s qualifications using a secret formula that takes into account his or her “peer group.”

MCPS so far has refused to release the full data on the variables used in the field test to determine admissions.

In the one-year span between 2017 and 2018, the percentage of Asian Americans participating in several gifted and talented programs in MCPS middle schools dropped.

In 2017, 40% of the students admitted to the selective Takoma Park Middle School were Asian; in 2018, that percentage dipped to 31.4%.

In each of the other gifted and talented programs that conducted the field test, the results were the same across the board: a steep decline in the proportion of Asian students accepted, while the numbers rose for all three other races.

“Now, the county is entitled to and should take steps to help boost the opportunity of those who are underperforming to attend the magnet program,” said Kieser, the Pacific Legal Foundation lawyer, adding:

But it’s one thing to increase opportunity by offering test prep or increasing programs in the low-performing schools. It’s another thing to change the admissions process to prioritize low performers because you don’t like the racial balance of the school.

Eva Guo, one of the leaders of the Association for Education Fairness, said she suspects implicit racial balancing is going on.

“The Board of Education and Superintendent Jack Smith have made no secret of the fact that the changes they have implemented to the magnet program admissions policy … are intended to reduce the proportion of Asian American students enrolled in these programs,” Guo said Monday in an email to the Daily Signal, “because they thought Asian Americans are ‘overrepresented’ in the programs.”

Montgomery County Public Schools has made no secret of desiring to increase the percentage of black and Hispanic students in admissions for gifted and talented programs.

“We’re not doing a very good job of bringing in African American and Latino students,” school board member Patricia O’ Neill said about the gifted and talented programs in 2016.

As the battles in school board meetings grew more tense, however, board members, who are elected without party affiliation, appeared to show hostility toward Asian American rights and dreams.

“Your pursuit of the American dream is not necessarily everyone’s pursuit of the American dream,” then-board member Jill Ortman-Fouse said in 2016 in response to the Association for Education Fairness.

“In our country, we have experienced decades of horrors and atrocities against our African American families,” she said, seeming to imply that the value of the African American narrative in this educational context outweighs the Asian American one.

Parents involved in the Association for Education Fairness say the school board’s rhetoric grew more confrontational and dismissive of Asian American concerns about the fairness of allowing the school district to exercise more expansive control over admissions in the name of race.

In 2016, then-school board member Chris Barclay commented to the local Bethesda Beat newspaper:

In this region, [which] unfortunately is very addicted to power and ranking, there is a reality of folks wanting to be on top or have more than others. … How are we going to have this conversation so it’s not just again the usual suspects that end up knowing everything and then end up being able to leverage their knowledge to being able to get what they want for their children.

Barclay’s reference to “the usual suspects” meant the local Asian American community, the Association for Education Fairness says.

After the school board made the changes in the admissions process, the school system turned down Asian kids in for the gifted and talented program in middle schools despite their scoring as high as the 99th percentile in the tests administered for admissions.

The Asian American parents’ suit alleges this is due to the school system’s stated principle of considering a person’s score “within the context of his or her peer group.”

This was another way of saying that the school system applied local norms to its schools, pledging to select similar numbers of students from each school despite the vast differences in academic excellence among schools in Montgomery County.

The schools with more Asians enrolled tended to do significantly better across all metrics than the schools with fewer. However, Asian enrollment also tended to cluster in a small number of schools, parents say, so “local norming” the students would allow the school administrators to systematically exclude large numbers of high-performing Asian kids.

In the end, the parents who brought the suit allege, the Montgomery County school system’s intended result was to suppress Asian admissions, and those efforts largely were successful.

At least, that is, until the Association for Education Fairness sued.

“In my humble opinion on academic admissions, all students are supposed to be treated equally and judged by their characters and academic performance regardless of their race,” Guo told The Daily Signal in the Monday email.

“If we win this case,” she said, “it means that our justice system is still alive and effective; if we win, my son will not have to worry about being denied by [gifted and talented] programs just because of his race.”


Kenny Xu

Kenny Xu, who works for Young America’s Foundation, writes on race and identity politics from Washington, D.C. Follow him on Twitter at @kennymxu and Facebook at @thekennethxu.

A Note for our Readers:

Democratic Socialists say, “America should be more like socialist countries such as Sweden and Denmark.” And millions of young people believe them…

For years, “Democratic Socialists” have been growing a crop of followers that include students and young professionals. America’s future will be in their hands.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? One of their most effective arguments is that “democratic socialism” is working in Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway. They claim these countries are “proof” that socialism will work for America. But they’re wrong. And it’s easy to explain why.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation just published a new guide that provides three irrefutable facts that debunks these myths. For a limited time, they’re offering it to readers of The Daily Signal for free.

Get your free copy of “Why Democratic Socialists Can’t Legitimately Claim Sweden and Denmark as Success Stories” today and equip yourself with the facts you need to debunk these myths once and for all.


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Court Win for Professor Sued by Muslim Student, Punished by College Over Terrorism Course

A federal court has ruled in favor of a professor thrown under the bus by his public college after a Muslim student claimed the Islamic terrorism portion of a world politics class violated his Constitutional rights. The course is offered at Scottsdale Community College (SCC) in Arizona, which is part of the Maricopa County Community College District. It is taught by Nicholas Damask, a veteran professor who organizes the course into six modules that cover world politics. One is dedicated to defining and analyzing Islamic terrorism. Students are required to read excerpts from a book called “Future Jihad” written by a Lebanese-born Middle East expert who has worked with the U.S. departments of Justice, Defense and State.

A Muslim student, Mohamed Sabra, sued Professor Damask and the Maricopa County Community College District in June for violating his First Amendment right by supposedly condemning his religion. In the complaint, filed by the terrorist front group Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Sabra demands that Damask stop teaching the materials in question until they “do not have the primary effect of disapproving of Islam.” Founded in 1994 by three Middle Eastern extremists (Omar Ahmad, Nihad Awad and Rafeeq Jaber) who ran the American propaganda wing of Hamas, CAIR was named as a co-conspirator in a federal terror-finance case involving the Hamas front group Holy Land Foundation. In a statement announcing the lawsuit against the Arizona college district, CAIR alleges that Sabra “was punished for refusing to agree with an anti-Muslim professor’s unconstitutional condemnations of Islam during a Political Science class” and that he was forced to disavow his religion.

Like many taxpayer-funded academic institutions nationwide, SCC caved into the left’s demands and administrators quickly apologized and tried to pressure the professor into signing an apology letter written by the college’s marketing team. The Maricopa County Community College District also caved in, launching an investigation and warning that the content of Damask’s course would be reviewed for “insensitivities.” Damask, who has taught world politics for more than two decades, stood up to his employer and refused to apologize. He eventually contacted a group dedicated to defending rights such as freedom of speech and religion, due process and legal equality at America’s colleges and universities. The nonprofit, Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), sent a letter to SCC’s president pointing out that the school’s actions—as well as the district’s—were flatly inconsistent with the college’s First Amendment obligations and the basic tenets of academic freedom. “Further, the implication that Damask is being investigated by the college’s governing board will have an impermissible chilling effect on faculty expression and teaching,” the letter states. Publicly committing Damask to apologizing and a mandate that the content in question will be removed from his course is alarming and inconsistent with his rights to freedom of expression and academic freedom under both the First Amendment and Arizona law, according to FIRE.

This month a federal court settled the issue, dismissing the lawsuit against the professor and the community college district, which has 10 campuses. In the ruling Judge Susan Brnovich writes that a curriculum that “merely conflicts with a student’s religious beliefs does not violate the Free Exercise Clause.” She also writes that the Muslim student was not required to adopt the views expressed by the professor or the course’s required reading, but only to demonstrate an understanding of the material taught. “Mr. Sabra was simply exposed to attitudes and outlooks at odds with his own religious perspective,” the ruling states. Appointed to the bench by President Donald Trump in 2018, Judge Brnovich also writes this in her order: “Examining the course as a whole, a reasonable, objective observer would conclude that the teaching’s primary purpose was not the inhibition of religion. Only in picking select quotes from the course can one describe the module as anti-Islam.”

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Watch Clarion’s New Short Film ‘Covert Cash’

What American universities don’t want you to know about their foreign funding

Watch Clarion Project’s latest film, Covert Cash: What American universities don’t want you to know about their foreign funding.

This short film exposes hidden money – sometimes up to the billions –and investigates the strings this money has, as well as its effect on America’s future leaders.

The film asks: Why would American universities accept money from corrupt regimes who actively work against American interests? Why would they accept money from regimes whose human rights records clash with every American value we hold sacred?

Covert Cash exposes the corruption and lack of transparency in U.S. universities which accept this cash and allow foreign governments to gain influence and a nefarious foothold in the United States.

RELATED ARTICLE: Clarion Finds Another $3 Billion in Undisclosed Foreign Financing of Universities


EDITORS NOTE: This Clarion Project video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

1776 Initiative Is Helping Turn Civics Education Around

Entrepreneur and civil rights movement veteran Robert L. Woodson Sr. believes that American civics can help save our country—and that’s the mission of 1776, a major initiative launched earlier this year by the Woodson Center, which Woodson founded to give local leaders the training they need to improve their communities.

Featuring essays by notable scholars and writers such as Clarence PageJohn McWhorter, and Carol M. Swain, and eventually a curriculum and multimedia resources, 1776 offers “perspectives that celebrate the progress America has made on delivering its promise of equality and opportunity and highlight the resilience of its people.”

A recipient of the Bradley Price and the Presidential Citizens Medal, Woodson began 1776 to counter The New York Times’ 1619 Project, a series of essays launched a year ago this month with a very different focus: It teaches that America is defined, now and forever, by slavery. As Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote in the 1619 Project’s lead essay: “Anti-black racism runs in the very DNA of this country.”

In Woodson’s view, the 1619 Project inculcates the “diabolical, self-destructive” idea that “all white Americans are oppressors and all black Americans are victims.”

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? Learn more now >>

“Though slavery and discrimination undeniably are a tragic part of our nation’s history,” Woodson notes, “we have made strides along its long and tortuous journey to realize its promise and abide by its founding principles.”

Woodson continues: “People are motivated to achieve and overcome the challenges that confront them when they learn about inspiring victories that are possible and are not barraged by constant reminders of injuries they have suffered.”

He points to the surprising number “of men and women who were born slaves” but “died as millionaires,” the existence of famous black business districts in cities such as Durham, North Carolina, and Tulsa, Oklahoma, in the midst of oppression and segregation, and heroes like baseball Hall of Fame slugger Hank Aaron as powerful examples for black uplift.

And it’s a lesson that Woodson knows firsthand.

Born in a low-income Philadelphia neighborhood, he rose up beyond his circumstances through hard work, the support of his family, and a good peer group. He entered the U.S. military, where he flew aircrafts for the space program; attended the University of Pennsylvania; and worked for the American Enterprise Institute, before starting the National Center for Neighborhood Enterprise in 1981. (It was rebranded as the Woodson Center in 2016.)

The Woodson Center’s mission is to seek out “individuals and organizations” already present in communities and help them “build their capacities,” in part by helping them “in linking to the resources they need.”

The center has helped more than 22,000 adults reach financial literacy and has trained over 2,600 grassroots leaders in 39 states, helping them “attain more than 10 times the funding expended by the Center.”

Though the center works on the “whole range” of issues associated with the “problems of poverty,” Woodson notes a “particular emphasis on those dealing with youth violence,” since “the restoration of civil order is a necessary foundation for civic health.”

In “The Triumphs of Joseph: How Today’s Community Healers Are Reviving Our Streets and Neighborhoods,” Woodson writes that low-income black communities are “dying from self-inflicted wounds.” He calls it a “moral free-fall,” one that “penetrates beyond all boundaries of race, ethnicity, and income level.”

In light of violent protests in the wake of George Floyd’s death in Minneapolis, Woodson has been active in print and on television, arguing that though Floyd’s killing was unconscionable, the violent protests that have ensued are “devastating the people in whose name they demand justice.”

Another way the Woodson Center combats civic breakdown is through its Violence Free Zone initiative, which aims to reduce youth violence by providing mentors to young students to “encourage their personal, academic, and career success.” The center reports that this initiative has led to a 50% reduction in crime, a 23% reduction in truancy, and a nearly 10% improvement in both student GPA and graduation rates.

Woodson views the 1619 Project and Black Lives Matter as major contributors to the growing belief that the foundations of America itself must be torn down. Against what he sees as defeatism and a denial of moral agency, Woodson preaches an ethic of self-reliance and personal resilience.

As Woodson sees it, “Nothing is more lethal than a good excuse for failure.”

His vision, a deeply American one, should be heeded by his countrymen of all colors.

Originally published by RealClearEducation


Mike Sabo, formerly a research assistant for the B. Kenneth Simon Center for Principles and Politics at The Heritage Foundation, is the editor of Real Clear Public Affairs: American Civics. Twitter: .

A Note for our Readers:

Democratic Socialists say, “America should be more like socialist countries such as Sweden and Denmark.” And millions of young people believe them…

For years, “Democratic Socialists” have been growing a crop of followers that include students and young professionals. America’s future will be in their hands.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? One of their most effective arguments is that “democratic socialism” is working in Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway. They claim these countries are “proof” that socialism will work for America. But they’re wrong. And it’s easy to explain why.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation just published a new guide that provides three irrefutable facts that debunks these myths. For a limited time, they’re offering it to readers of The Daily Signal for free.

Get your free copy of “Why Democratic Socialists Can’t Legitimately Claim Sweden and Denmark as Success Stories” today and equip yourself with the facts you need to debunk these myths once and for all.


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.