As goes atmospheric science, so goes American history

I haven't yet posted about the College Board's revision of the Advanced-Placement tests for US history, mainly because I was already OD-ing on manifestations - cultural, economic, and world-leadership-wise - of post-American infantilism, and I needed a decent outlook in order to meet my daily obligations.

But Daniel Henninger at the WSJ today has some great observations on the matter.

You no doubt know the basics by now. The College Board folks have come up with a system of "coding," an edict for declaring what will henceforth be the accepted criteria for determining what is important about the study of our nation's past:

“This coding helps teachers make thematic connections across the chronology of the concept outline. The codes are as follows: ID—Identity; WXT—Work, exchange, and technology; PEO—Peopling; POL—Politics and power; WOR—America in the world; ENV—Environment and geography—physical and human; CUL—Ideas, beliefs, and culture.”

An example: “Native peoples and Africans in the Americas strove to maintain their political and cultural autonomy in the face of European challenges to their independence and core beliefs. (ID-4) (POL-1) (CUL-1) (ENV-2).” 

Or: “Explain how arguments about market capitalism, the growth of corporate power, and government policies influenced economic policies from the late 18th century through the early 20th century. 3.2.II, 4.2.II, 5.1.II, 6.1.I, 6.1.II, 7.1.II, 7.2.II.”

And inevitably: “Students should be able to explain how various identities, cultures, and values have been preserved or changed in different contexts of U.S. history, with special attention given to the formation of gender, class, racial, and ethnic identities. Students should be able to explain how these subidentities have interacted with each other and with larger conceptions of American national identity.”

Poisonous indoctrination much?

And, as is the case with a certain breed of "scientist" with a vested interest (as in government grants) in portraying those who understand that the global climate is not in any kind of trouble as marginal wackos, so these manipulators of historical inquiry want to portray anyone who objects to their machinations as unserious.

Those who drafted this puddle of dog vomit want to talk a good game about how it fosters rigorous debate and a wide range of ideas.  Henninger is having none of it:

At one point the curriculum’s authors say: “Debate and disagreement are central to the discipline of history, and thus to AP U.S. History as well.” This statement is phenomenally disingenuous. From Key Concept 1.3: “Many Europeans developed a belief in white superiority to justify their subjugation of Africans and American Indians, using several different rationales.” Pity the high-school or college student who puts up a hand to contest that anymore. They don’t. They know the Orwellian option now is to stay down.

Zinn and Chomsky live.

Fortunately, there is a sizable backlash, including the 56 professors and historians who published a petition on the  National Association of Scholars website.

But don't assume that their effort will be sufficient.

It requires us as well.