“Rosa Parks showed courage. One day, she rode the bus. She was told to move to a different seat because of the color of her skin. She did not. She did what she believed was right.”
“Rosa Parks showed courage. One day, she rode the bus. She was told to move to a different seat. She did not. She did what she believed was right.”
“In 1955 Rosa Parks broke the law. In her city the law said African-Americans had to give up their seats on the bus if a White person wanted to sit down. She would not give up her seat. The police came and took her to jail.”
These are three versions submitted by a text book publisher for approval in Florida. The quotes are from the textbooks, the article is WAPO.
This is patently ridiculous and clearly a reaction to DeSantis’ war on history. The second quote makes the gentle reader wonder if she had bad breath or anything other than than she was Black and not good enough to sit up front. Is this a threat to the psyche of children in a civics class so egregious that they need to be protected?
To be fair, the choice has not been firmed up yet. But just the idea smacks of indoctrination by the right wing.
ignorance is still ignorance.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
RE: “The second quote makes the gentle reader wonder if she had bad breath or anything other than than she was Black and not good enough to sit up front. Is this a threat to the psyche of children in a civics class so egregious that they need to be protected?”
Hard to tell without context. What does the reader know about Rosa Parks before reading the second quote?
I think the question more generally might be stated in a different way: Is there a perfect or ideal story about Rosa Parks that we should teach to children (K-12)?
I would argue that there is not. Consequently, the danger of indoctrination arises from picking one and forcing it to be used.
With that in mind, Rosa Parks’ story might belong in college-level coursework where it can be given more scrutiny. After all, the particular events involving her are interpreted differently by different scholars. Here, for example, is Thomas Sowell’s take:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/com-10_27_05_TS.html
LikeLike
Thomas Sowell’s take is interesting only because he blames judges and politicians for racist policies, not the businesses. And businesses were forced to abide by laws, judges rulings, and public policy. But he leaves out an explanation of whether the bus company was a city (political) or private (business) enterprise.
Rosa Parks got a ball rolling because she refused to give up her seat. It matters not that the “chicanery” had been taking place for decades. It started an actual movement to do away with the Jim Crow laws in place. To downgrade that to what Florida is attempting to do and whitewash the history is asinine and not a complete telling of history.
Teaching REAL history is NOT indoctrination. Covering up the facts is. – IMO
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “But he leaves out an explanation of whether the bus company was a city (political) or private (business) enterprise.”
Not really; he wrote: “Many, if not most, municipal transit systems were privately owned in the 19th century and the private owners of these systems had no incentive to segregate the races.”
RE: “To downgrade that to what Florida is attempting to do and whitewash the history is asinine and not a complete telling of history.”
You can’t teach everything to children. It wouldn’t be whitewashing history to reserve Rosa Parts’ story for college.
LikeLike
This happened in the middle of the 20th century, not sure with how municipal transit systems in the 19th century matters.
The Rosa Parks story (more based on the third example) is one of the few that I remember from primary school. Why should it not be taught. Lots of people don’t go to college. Lots of people don’t take 20th century American history in college. Learning about Jim Crow belongs in the schools where everybody goes.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Many, if not most, municipal transit systems were privately owned in the 19th century”…
You missed my point. He did not indicate one way or the other if the transit system was private or city owned. An important tidbit that would either support your (and Sowell’s) argument or prove it to be a moot argument.
LikeLike
How on earth does that change the fact that segregation was the law enforced by police courts and terrorism.
So profit kept the bus lines in line with the White supremacists’ racist agenda. That makes it more acceptable?
You are tap dancing around the obvious, making excuses for the racist apartheid we practiced until at least 1965. After that it became more subtle.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “You are tap dancing around the obvious, making excuses for the racist apartheid we practiced until at least 1965. After that it became more subtle.”
No. YOU want to teach anti-racism to children without regard to the approach.
LikeLike
What approach do you envision?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m not interested in teaching anti-racism to children. I’d rather use the time to teach them other things.
LikeLike
And there in lies the problem. As the twig is bent, so grows the tree. Racism, like bad manners, is best addressed early.
Why the backlash against integration of schools decades ago? I’ll bet fear of White parents’ children being “poisoned” by Blacks they befriended in Kindergarten was a big reason.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You don’t like anti-racism? How about ACCEPTANCE and NOT demonizing those who are different?
LikeLike