A few months ago, mass graves were discovered in Canada that were associated with residential schools. This discovery sparked outrage across the country. Native American activists, scholars, and survivors were long aware of abuses that occurred in residential schools, but the extent of the deaths shocked many. When I was working with the Gwich’in years ago, I heard many stories about residential schools. One elder we worked with was hidden by his grandparents and thus, spared the experience of the schools. His wife however, was not so lucky. Often, she would share her experiences and describe the long-lasting effects of the residential schools on subsequent generations.
I introduce this dark chapter for a reason. I was surprised that so many individuals were unaware of the abuses that took place. Acts of arson directed against the Catholic Church this past summer further shed light on the anger and frustration that people felt. It is imperative that people are aware of these events. As a child growing up in rural Alberta, often times near reservations, I wasn’t aware of residential schools. It was until I started attending university, and then, working with elders, that I learned more. It is a sad state of affairs that countries have dark chapters. It is more tragic when those chapters are obscured or manipulated. Isn’t it the right of a people to learn of their collective experience?
That right was not the sole purpose of creating ethnic studies programs in the US. Ethnic studies programs sought to engage students in ways outside of the dominant Euro-American educational curricula. The resources used demonstrated the collective experience that may or may not have been known. However, what occurred from 2010 onwards reveals a systemic attack on the First Amendment Rights of students.
HB 2281, was a law banning ethnic studies in Arizona, particularly Mexican American studies. The bill was to prohibit materials that promote the overthrow of the US government, create ethnic solidarity and resentment towards another race or class of people. Mexican-American studies were targeted because it was believed by proponents of the bill that the classes were used to indoctrinate students. The materials used in the classroom, such as books, were also feared to be inflammatory.
The purpose of this analysis is to explore the ways in which proponents of HB 2281 discussed the rationale of the bill. This exploration will be paired with how opponents spoke of the bill, particularly in regard to book banning. Placed within the larger political context that was occurring from 2010 through the present, particularly regarding immigration, it is interesting how these sources articulated their arguments.
Why Ethnic Studies?
White students make up approximately 20% of the Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) population. However, a predominant Euro-American perspective in curricula serves to make non-White students disengaged from learning. Ethnic studies classes, in particular Mexican-American classes, sparked intellectual curiosity amongst students and demonstrated that school was not, and should be, a foreign place. The proof was evident: 100% of the students who were enrolled in Mexican-American studies classes were graduating and 85% were going to college (Palos & McGinnis, 2012). Surveys were demonstrating that scores in math, reading, and writing were improving. For all intents and purposes, Mexican-American studies classes were a positive impact.
The Ban
To fully understand why the ban occurred, we must place it within a national political context. Post-9/11 xenophobia was, and is, still very present. In 2010, SB 1070 was passed, allowing local police to question citizenship. In Maricopa County, Sheriff Joe Arpaio was using racial profiles in traffic stops and conducting immigration raids. It was not a good time for Latinos in Arizona.
And while ethnic studies classes were seen to be beneficial, Mexican-American studies were targeted as they were seen to be propagating anti-American sentiment. Indeed, it wasn’t so much the program itself, it was the message that was dangerous. As Doug MacEachern, editorial journalist for the Arizona Republic, noted: “Until these ideologues got their claws in them, these kids actually had a good chance at an education. I try to stay away from these terms, but you can’t: They were turning them into Marxist foot soldiers” (Stephenson, 2021). At the time, MacEachern was writing a lot about HB 2281. It’s not hard to see how his commentary was typically directed and received.
Arizona Daily Independent Coverage
My first source of analysis comes from a right wing news source, the Arizona Daily Independent. In the summer of 2011, L. Hunnicutt wrote “TUSD appeal to save “Ethnic Studies” reveals “cult” (2011). The quotes are telling and try to indicate neutrality: is it a cult? Is the program truly “ethnic studies? The article opens with a quote on mass movements and the first sentence being: “Over the years, one of the most common complaints by objective observers of TUSD’s Mexican-American Studies classes is the anti-intellectual nature of the scatter shot curriculum. The frequent references to the fantastical place called Aztlan, migration theories that have no scientific foundation, and the easy to swallow, simple minded analysis provided by critical race theory have caused more serious educators to question the educational value of TUSD’s Mexican American Studies classes” (Hunnicutt, 2011). I’m not sure how that can be taken as neutral. The reference to Aztlan for example, is highly confrontational and attempts to negate the power of the term used by Mexican-American and Chicano/a intellectuals. In regard to migration, Aztlan is thought to be, in some circles, the original homeland of contemporary Mexicans, and thus migrants are simply returning to their rightful place.
The article then goes on to describe the visit of “respected” Economics professor, Mark Stegeman, to Curtis Acosta’s class. Stegeman felt the class was more of a political rally with ritualized clapping that referred to the unity of Caesar Chavez. In summary, the class was a cult.
The article gets tricky at this point. The second section, “TUSD’s “Ethnic Studies” appeal highlights fear of retaliation and indoctrination”, opens with the following statement by Romero and Arce: “The critical educator cannot wait for the dominant group or the American structure to correct itself. The critical educator must understand that the oppressors cannot see the nature of their ways. Given this understanding, it is my belief that the dominant group is incapable of critical reflection or redemptive remembering…” (Hunnicutt, 2011). The article then goes into detail of TUSD’s audit, which it calls “highly irregular”. For example, auditors only reviewed 9 of 180 lesson units. Now the article appears to be more neutral. However, if one was only to read the first few pages, it would appear that the article, and indeed the news source, was critical of the ethnic studies program. After all, a professor from the University of Arizona, who had read a book on mass movements, sat in one of the classes and noted cult-like behavior. But, you had to read quite a bit before getting into this section.
Politico Coverage
At the other end of the political spectrum lays Politico. Journalist Hank Stephenson recently places the ban within the context of another hot topic this summer: critical race theory (2021). The opening image is that of teens wrapped in chains, their arms in the air, wearing T-shirts emblazoned with “We Will Not Comply.” Throughout the article are large photographs of students protesting at hearings. The article appears to be more balanced (however, I’ll admit to the role of my own political leaning in making that observation). For example, it describes “Raza Studies” as literally translated to “Race Studies”, much used by Republican proponents of the bill. Stephenson, however, notes that “Raza” is better translated as “the people.” He also properly explains the meaning of “Aztlan” in comparison to Senator Paton, who says its use in the classroom was “wackadoodle” (incredibly disparaging and insulting). Stephenson’s portrayal, while leaning more to the role of the students in the ensuing protest, appears to be balanced with much more historical neutrality, as well as placing the ban and protest within the larger national political context of racial profiling and anti-immigration rhetoric.
The article then describes the “retraining” of teachers. Mexican-American studies were reinstated, however the program needed to comply to the state law. “Mexican-American” studies was dropped in favor of “culturally responsive” classes. Indeed, a cursory look at the TUSD social studies curricula is peppered with key words such as “multicultural”, “diversity”, etc.
The article also describes the ban of certain books. And this is when we tread on dangerous ground. Zoot Suit, for example was one of the books. At the time, I was teaching MASV/ANTV 319 (Mexican American Anthropology) at UASouth. We spent at least two weeks discussing the “Zoot suit” riots that took place in 1943, as well as watching one my favorite Edward James Olmos movies, Zoot Suit. The movie recalls the trial of a group of young Mexican-Americans unfairly accused of murder during the riots at Sleepy Lagoon. The novel by Luis Valdez and the movie are phenomenal examples of the level of racism experienced by Mexican-Americans. It should be noted that in 2019, the film was selected by Library of Congress as culturally significant. I remember at the time wondering, rather fearfully, about the fate of particular programs at the University. The reading list of 319 would definitely not pass muster in TUSD.
Remezcla and High Country News Coverage
Two other websites, Remezcla and High Country News, also reported on the banned book lists for TUSD. It is interesting however, that the former listed 12 books that were focused on Mexican-Americans. High Country News listed 12 books that were banned spanned beyond Mexican-American studies, such Shakespeare’s The Tempest and Baldwin’s The Fire Next Time. A book I was using for my graduate work, Los Tucsonenses by anthropologist William Sheridan was also pulled.
Yara Simón of Remezcla wrote this article as the ruling of Judge Tashima was sent back to the Arizona Supreme Court. She presents a very brief summary of HB 2281, followed by a summary of 12 TUSD-banned books (2017). The opening illustration is of the Statue of Liberty, reading a book, while surrounded by flames. Remezcla is an American media company whose primary audience are Latino/a millenials. A cursory view of the website, similar to Buzzfeed, reveals it is progressive. Simón’s summaries of the 12 banned books are just that: summaries. They do not explain why the books were banned by TUSD. However, judging by the tone of the article and opening illustration, the author’s intent is to spark outrage.
High Country News appears to be more neutral though according to mediabiasfactcheck.com, the website favors left leaning causes (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/high-country-news/). The article, written by Kapoor (2017), also presents a very brief summary of HB 2281, with the clarification that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that removing the books violated the First Amendment Rights of students, but teachers must now request the books. As mentioned above, rather focusing on books with a Mexican-American focus, she provides a list of 12 books that go beyond ethnic studies. I was quite surprised by these examples and I imagine the intent was, perhaps, to show how “backwards” TUSD is. As with Simón, Kapoor briefly summarizes each book, without explaining why it was banned.
Both Remezcla and High Country News cite Librotraficante (http://www.librotraficante.com/) which maintains a site with 80 books banned by TUSD. The website is a hodge-podge with various links associated with ethnic studies bans in other states. It has the crusader feel of an activist and one could easily spend hours going through the articles and links. Clicking on the “banned” link in the banner takes you to the blog “American Indians in Children’s Literature” (https://americanindiansinchildrensliterature.blogspot.com/2012/01/mexican-american-studies-department.html). This blog includes all the books banned by TUSD as of 2012. Interestingly, there is also a link to read various author’s comments on their banned books.
NPR Coverage
In 2017, a federal judge ruled that the ban violated the constitutional rights of students. Julie Depenbrock of NPR describes the ban in detail and along similar lines found in the Politico article (2017). The article begins with other examples of ethnic studies, particularly one found in San Francisco. Written after the 2016 election of Donald Trump, the article notes that ethnic studies programs are gaining momentum throughout the country. Those states with substantial native populations, such as Montana and Alaska, have already had some sort of ethnic studies programs in place much longer. What I enjoyed the most of this article was a quote by Curtis Acosta (see above). In his words, the classes were not hateful. If anything, “hate” was the antithesis of what seen in the classroom. And, each class would begin with a Mayan precept that translated to “You are another me.” Students would also recite a Luis Valdez poem:
“Tú eres mi otro yo. You are my other me. Si te hago daño a ti, If I do harm to you, Me hago daño a mi mismo. I do harm to myself. Si te amo y respeto, If I love and respect you, Me amo y respeto yo. I love and respect myself” (cited in Depenbrock, 2017).
Hardly, the manic clapping, cult-like behavior noted by observers. Within this context, classes were interactive and taught respect and love. One student noted that before she took Mexican-American studies, she was disengaged but fell in love with The Devil’s Highway. At the time of the article, the student was a PhD student at the University of Arizona.
This article was written after the federal ruling but with enough hindsight to be informative and somewhat balanced, as to be expected from NPR. Both this article and the one found in Politico cast the proponents of HB 2281 as misguided and, well, racist. Opponents of HB 2281 argue that education, particularly ethnic studies is important. It serves to create an identity, and not necessarily an identity that is attempting the overthrow of the government.
Positionality, Power, Privilege
It is important to note here who the proponents of HB 2281 are. John Huppenthal was the Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction from 2011 through 2015. He and Tom Horne argue that Mexican-American studies fueled racial tension and the teachers were indoctrinating students. Augustine Romero, who changed the name from “Hispanic Studies” to “Mexican American Studies” in 2002, recalled Huppenthal saying in Senate to him: “What upsets me is you talk about the idea of race and racism, and you talk about oppression. It means there are oppressors out there, and I don’t think it’s the case” (cited in Stephenson, 2021). Romero stated that he thought Huppenthal was the oppressor. Huppenthal found this laughable, given that he grew in the southside of Tucson and had many Mexican-American friends.
Positionality, power, and privilege are clearly evident here. The proponents of HB 2281 are Anglo-Americans who appear to be incredibly out of touch with the history and experiences of Mexican Americans. So much so that they attempted to ban anything that served to educate them. The constant reference to Marx and Marxism goes to show just how out of touch these individuals are. History is replete with people who make decisions for the under-priviliged and those who lack power and a voice.
Whether it’s the Catholic Church hiding the bodies, and therefore memories, of indigenous children who died in residential schools or education superintendents making decisions about the education of children, power is visible. Banning books is the same as silencing the voices of those children. Both acts seek to remove their history.
References
American Indians in Children’s Literature. Retrieved August 17, 2021.
Depenbrock, J. (2017, August 22). Federal Judge Finds Racism Behind Arizona Law
Banning Ethnic Studies. Retrieved August 15, 2021.
Hunnicutt, L. (2011). TUSD appeal to save “Ethnic Studies” reveals “cult”. Retrieved
August 10, 2021. https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2011/08/29/tusd-appeal-to-save-ethnic-studies-reveals-cult-2/
Kapoor, M. (2017, June 27). 12 books expelled from Tucson schools. High Country
News. https://www.hcn.org/articles/education-tucsons-mexican-american-studies-ban-goes-back-to-court
Librotraficante. Retrieved August 15, 2021. http://www.librotraficante.com/
Media Bias Fact Check (2020, April 14). High Country News.
High Country News – Bias and Credibility
Palos, Ari Luís & McGinnis, Eren Isabel. (2012). Precious Knowledge.
Simón, Y. (2017). These are 12 Ethnic Studies Books Arizona Doesn’t Want You to
Read. Retrieved August 16, 2021. https://remezcla.com/lists/culture/banned-books-arizona/
Stephenson, H. (2021, July 11). What Arizona’s 2010 Ban on Ethnic Studies Could Mean
for the Fight Over Critical Race Theory. Politico. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/07/11/tucson-unified-school-districts-mexican-american-studies-program-498926
derekhoneyman 