Thursday, September 6, 2012

Constant Battle of Ethnic Studies

San Francisco State's strike in 1968 was a major turning point for minority rights and a rise to ethnic studies being recognized as a legitiment class. Too this day many students take the Ethnic Studies course San Francisco State offers to learn about the different lifestyles and histories of different cultures and races. Unfortunately, there is a constant debate to whether Ethnic Studies is an appropriate class for students to take. People believe ethnic studies is only meant for certain ethnic groups causing a division between ethnicity and races. It is confusing how people can believe this. Back in 1968 the students were striking to make a strong, visible stand for minority rights. The students wanted to create equality among themselves and others. I believe ethnic studies was created to teach, inform, and enlighten students who take it, not create division ethnic groups. Everyone can benefit from ethnic studies to create an understanding and tolerance of diversity in the world.

The issues regarding ethnic studies in 1968 differs a little bit from the issues of ethnic studies in our current time. Back in 1968 students were fighting to bring ethnic studies up as a class and now students are fighting to keep ethnic studies a class, but why would anyone want ethnic studies banned? In Arizona a house bill was passed that banned any class that promotes the overthrow of the United States Government, promotes resentment toward a race or class of people, designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group, and advocates ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupil's as individuals. How ethnic studies falls under this house bill depends on how the person views the class. A 1968 striker would argue to a legislator of HB 2281, that banning ethnic studies would be considered racist and unjust. The legislator would argue back saying the class is targeted for a certain ethnic group. In my opinion anyone could take the class to come together as humans, with an understanding for adversity in the world.

In a debate on Anderson Cooper 360 Dyson, a supporter of ethnic studies, believes that ethnic studies has made America a better place, making the idea of democracy real. Horne, a protester of ethnic studies, believes students should learn about all ethnic races and not a specific ethnicity. This is contradicting to say the least, how can you want all students to learn about different ethnic races if you ban classes focused on certain ethnic groups? It is as if the legislators of HB 2281 want to cover up the mistakes and "the ugliness" of America's history. These mistakes are crucial to understanding how America became the way it is today and should not be held back from students.

Word Count: 448

1 comment:

  1. Hi Joseph,
    I really appreciate how cohesive you make your blog responses- you try to relate all of the questions under a theme and it makes reading your posts very enjoyable!
    I think you illuminate one of the main contradictions in Horne's argument: how can you expose students to the histories and experiences of major ethnic groups while banning the classes that seek to do so? I hadn't seen this contradiction so clearly before you stated it so clearly.
    Dyson does make the point that it is important to know about the oppression that People of Color in the United States have faced, however, he also says that the histories of these communities cannot only be contained to 'responses to oppression, but also the rich culture and heritage that they bring to the tapestry of the United States'. As a teacher of Ethnic Studies, I find it really important to try and bring both of these things together- I hope we are able to hit on both in this course!

    ReplyDelete