A Speech Every American High School Principal Should Give

[Big Don]

A Speech Every American High School Principal Should Give

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Dennis Prager.com EXCERPT:

If every school principal gave this speech at the beginning of the next school year, America would be a better place.
To the students and faculty of our high school:
I am your new principal, and honored to be so. There is no greater calling than to teach young people.
I would like to apprise you of some important changes coming to our school. I am making these changes because I am convinced that most of the ideas that have dominated public education in America have worked against you, against your teachers and against our country.
First, this school will no longer honor race or ethnicity. I could not care less if your racial makeup is black, brown, red, yellow or white. I could not care less if your origins are African, Latin American, Asian or European, or if your ancestors arrived here on the Mayflower or on slave ships.
The only identity I care about, the only one this school will recognize, is your individual identity -- your character, your scholarship, your humanity. And the only national identity this school will care about is American. This is an American public school, and American public schools were created to make better Americans.
If you wish to affirm an ethnic, racial or religious identity through school, you will have to go elsewhere. We will end all ethnicity-, race- and non-American nationality-based celebrations. They undermine the motto of America, one of its three central values -- e pluribus unum, "from many, one." And this school will be guided by America's values.
END EXCERPT
I wouldn't limit this to High Schools.

 

[Bruno@MT]

This is one of the occasions where I agree wholeheartledy with Don.
Now if he also gets rid of the no-child-left-behind nonsense and encourages kids to be smart and achieve, then he'll be the superman of education.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

The basic concept is laudable. I could absolutely do without the jingoistic bullroar.

Here, I fixed it:

First, this school will not discriminate based on race, creed, color, or religion. We will treat all students equally, and we will not give preference to any group for any reason. We will not authorize any after-school clubs that discriminate on the aforementioned basis.

Second, we will require proficiency in English as a requirement for graduation. To eliminate the potential for cultural bias and intimidation of students based on clothing, there will be a dress code.

Fourth, no obscene language will be tolerated anywhere on this school's property -- whether in class, in the hallways or at athletic events.


Fifth, because excellence is recognized, there will be one and only one valedictorian.

Sixth, we will not teach 'values', but we leave that to your parents.


The worst part of the 'speech' was item six.

"Sixth, and last, I am reorienting the school toward academics and away from politics and propaganda."

Pardon me, but that screed was 80% politics and propaganda. I trimmed out the parts that were actually important and dumped the rest.

I suspect what the estimable Mr. Prager meant was that we should no longer have liberal politics and propaganda taught in the schools (which I agree with), but we should instead have conservative politics and propaganda taught (which I disagree with).

But what really bothers me is that in Detroit, 25% of high school students graduate. School boards are the decision-makers and policy-setters for local schools. Parents will read screeds like this and email them to each other, call in to talk radio to piss and moan about it, demand action from their elected officials, but will they run for the school board? No. Will they even attend school board meetings? They will not.

So screw 'em. They get what they deserve, good and hard. The problem is, we all get the fruits of their poor parenting skills.

 

[MBuzzy]

I'm pretty sure that in today's climate if a principal ACTUALLY gave that speech, he probably wouldn't be principal for long. You're right though, Bill, this is the kind of thing that everyone forwards around in e-mails endlessly saying how great it is, but no one will ever do anything. Plus, I'm not sure that I agree with the whole "melting pot" idea presented. Even kids should be allowed to honor their ethnic and cultural heritage. The beauty of America is not that we take everyone and force them to abandon their heritage, but that we allow them to retain it.

Now the speaking English and calling yourself an American part...that I agree with.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Plus, I'm not sure that I agree with the whole "melting pot" idea presented.

The concept of America as a 'melting pot' has many dimensions; it means many different things to many different people and it has changed definitions over time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melting_pot#United_States

The quote most often flung by those who seem to be in favor of everyone being forced to leave their ethnic heritage behind and become 'no hypen' Americans only is this one:

“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American … There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag … We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language … and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people." - Teddy Roosevelt

What he was speaking of was the subject of assimilation. Assimilation does indeed mean speaking the language of the country in which you live, being loyal to that nation, honoring only that flag. I absolutely agree with his statement regarding divided loyalty.

I find myself in agreement with this quote:

"The metaphor of the melting pot is unfortunate and misleading. A more accurate analogy would be a salad bowl, for, though the salad is an entity, the lettuce can still be distinguished from the chicory, the tomatoes from the cabbage." - Carl N. Degler

I think of America as a gumbo. Every ingredient in a gumbo gives its flavor to the whole, and yet every ingredient has its own texture and flavor by itself.

We're a quilt; no part the same, but all part of the whole, each linked inextricably with the others by bonds that tie closer than those from which each patch originally came.

We are not a melting pot, with all due respect to Teddy Roosevelt. We're not homogeneous and alike. We share much, but we also come from different cultures, different backgrounds, and we have a different heritage.

How about if all dogs were bred to look alike; no more breeds but just a generic 'dog'. And people? Once upon a time, the concept of a melting pot implied eugenics, which was part of what Teddy Roosevelt opposed. He may not have said it in a manner I agree with in his famous quote, but he very much opposed those who would urge us to lose our own culture and our own distinctiveness in order to become a race of whitish, vaguely European-derived generic 'Americans' with no background, no history, and no culture other than 'American' culture (whatever that is).

I agree very much with the notion that all Americans should speak English. I do not, however, share the viewpoint that they should not be allowed to speak other languages; even predominantly if they prefer. I would prefer if all Americans loved America; but our own freedoms dictate that we are also free NOT to love America. I would therefore draw the line only at loyalty; hate all you like, but do not work against America.

Chairman Mao wanted all of China to become one melting pot, one nation, one culture. No races, no distinctions, no differences. Even to the clothes worn by citizens during the Cultural Revolution, he wanted everyone to be the same. This, he felt, would bring harmony and peace to the people of China. Note how well it has worked in Tibet.

And this is what we would want for ourselves?

Frankly, I like hamburgers, but I also like Chinese food and Mexican food and Italian food. I don't want to be a bland, nothing-but-American American. My family comes from lots of places, but mostly from Wales. I'll celebrate that, and anyone who thinks I'm not loyal to the USA because of it can...well, you know.

 

[Sukerkin]

My family comes from lots of places, but mostly from Wales. I'll celebrate that, and anyone who thinks I'm not loyal to the USA because of it can...well, you know.

That's the difference between multi-ethnic and multi-cultural, in the meaning as the term has come to be used in politico-speak. Bill is ethnically Welsh (predominantly) but is culturally American.

Britain used to be multi-ethnic with a variety of cultures that wove together to make us a mongrel breed that went out and kicked butt all over the world (in accordance with the rules of the Great Game at the time). We were riven with class and regional inequalities but 'we' were all British.

Now we have a raft of cultures that willfully refuse to 'blend', with people being Indian/Pakistani/Chinese/Polish/Welsh/Scottish/Irish who just happen to spend their lives on British soil.

I am somewhat as guilty of this as many others as, if you ask me what nationality I am, I shall tell you I am English. If people call me British, I wont get upset about it but, in my self-image, I am English, always have been and always will be.

Because I live in England, that perhaps doesn't seem particularly strange but it is symptomatic of the 'problem' our society is facing.

Not all emigres/immigrants think or feel that way, indeed I have heard the most stirring of discourses on this matter from people whose culture heritage is not British. I well recall hearing an elderly Polish lady talking on the radio about this very thing and she was eloquent and clear and strongly spoken on the values of British society that she found to be something worthy of passion and praise.

Indeed, relatively recent history has shown us that it is not those from other cultures who settled on our shores that are where the 'problem' has put down roots. It is in their grandchildren, who have grown up in our society, reaping all the advantages it's relative wealth and freedom gives them but being blind to that fortune (as indeed many of we 'indigs' are).

Anyhow, I'm getting off-beam here, for which I apologise - it is a subject that I feel very strongly about, as is probably very evident .

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Now we have a raft of cultures that willfully refuse to 'blend', with people being Indian/Pakistani/Chinese/Polish/Welsh/Scottish/Irish who just happen to spend their lives on British soil.

The problem of course is that while there are people for whom their ethnicity is their primary identity, there are also people who use this as a wedge to drive people apart.

As I've stated here (my own pet rant, eh?), many are the times I have heard "they refuse to assimilate!" or words to that effect used with regard to illegal aliens (mostly Hispanic, and predominately Mexican).

I am sure that there are Mexican-Americans (or Americans of Hispanic descent, whatever the correct term is these days) that speak Spanish better than they do English, don't care, and refuse to correct the situation. I'm sure there are those who fly the Mexican flag instead of the US flag. I'm sure there are those who should "Viva La Raza!" or burn the US flag in protests against roundups of illegal aliens in the US. But that is not the same as saying 'they' (meaning all) refuse to assimilate.

I have noted under such circumstances that there are many areas of this country where people choose to live and to associate with people as much like themselves as possible. I'm talking about historical areas like Detroit's Corktown and Greektown and Mexicantown and NYC's Little Italy and Chinatown and so on, but I am also talking about Mennonite and Amish communities in the USA, Native American Indian reservations, Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities and yes, Muslims who all choose to associate mostly with each other, who do not partake of the full range of American 'culture' and for whom their identity is at least visibly that of another nation, religion, or culture.

Where is the anger, resentment, and agitation against them? Ah, with the possible exception of Jews, and lately, Muslims, it doesn't exist. "THEY REFUSE TO ASSIMILATE!" is a charge leveled only against those we hate, even though we can point to a number of groups of whom that is even more true.

So while there are people who do indeed choose not to assimilate, I always get my back up when I hear it thrown about as an accusation.

First, I tend to doubt it is true (as a blanket condemnation) and second, even if it is, so what? So what? So what?

Ultimately, one of the prerogatives of freedom is that one does not have to assimilate at all if they do not wish to. Freedom of speech, for example, means I can speak English if I wish, or another language. Now, if you ask me if the government should cater to my desire not to speak English, then I would say no.

 

[Sukerkin]

Interesting point, Bill {and, for the record, it doesn't get any the less relevant just because you've posed it before :tup:}.

As with anything, balance is the key. Extreme's, whether in opinion or in action, generally result in less than stellar outcomes.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Interesting point, Bill {and, for the record, it doesn't get any the less relevant just because you've posed it before :tup:}.

As with anything, balance is the key. Extreme's, whether in opinion or in action, generally result in less than stellar outcomes.

I've often wondered what would happen if, in the next 100 years or so, the predicted 'Hispanization' of America happens?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-02-11-population-study_N.htm

I mean, if someday the President is of Hispanic descent, the leaders of all the major businesses are Hispanic, Spanish is commonly spoken, etc...is that a bad thing?

If someday a school kid places his hand over his heart and recites the Pledge of Allegiance in Spanish instead of English, does that matter? Isn't America an ideal of freedom, and not an ideal of color or language?

As long as the USA is still the same free nation, protecting the same rights, the "Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave," does it matter if most US citizens eat tacos instead of hot dogs?

Sometimes I worry that for too many of us, our concept of America and American culture is tied to our images of ourselves. If we're white and middle-class and surburban and we have 2.5 kids and a mini-van and a mortgage and are saving for the kid's college, that's what we think of as America, and that's what we want to imagine America will be like in 50 years, or 100 years. I'm not exempting myself from that, I think in those terms too. Perhaps everyone does.

But I look at the history of America and I realize that I would hardly recognize the state I live in 100 years ago. Families were different, practices were different, traditions were different. In some cases, even languages, food, ways of making a living, all of it was different. We're separated by generations that were only a little bit different than our own, but those small differences add up over the decades and centuries. There is no reason to suppose that America of 2110 will be anything like America of 2010. And no reason to suppose that's a bad thing, either.

Are we in favor of preserving 'American' culture, or do we really just want to put our culture on ice and never let it change because change is threatening to us? I think the true culture of America *is* change. The core values - freedom and opportunity - those are what should never change.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

I think you are perhaps overly optimistic as to the prospect of there still BEING an America by 2110 (or at least an America that DOESN'T look like the one from "Fallout 3") but that's just me........

Speaking for myself, I have had no problem whatever classifying myself as a "nothing-but-American American", for I can nowhere find myself anywhere resembling my Irish forebears--I don't consume alcohol, I'm neither Catholic nor Protestant( or for that matter any organized religion at all), I don't trample people to death after my soccer team wins or loses, I don't have tricolor or shamrock tattoos, I've never flown nor worn, nor ever will fly or wear, an Irish flag, I'm not a stereotypical cop, prizefighter, or town drunk, I don't dance, I do not speak with an Irish accent, i *can* get foulmouthed on occasion, and I happen to have inherited a genetic code which dictates pale white skin, blue eyes and reddish brown hair. That's it.

My ethnic background was Irish/Scottish. *I* am American and nothing else. And it HAS to be that way because without an agreed upon national norm of SOME kind, you then in fact have no nation at all but a rabble collapsing of its own weight.

 

[ajury]

Good points but there is another choice.

Homeschooling. My wife is the principal and I am the teacher. I also check American in any race box I have to check.

 

[billc]

Big Don, you can't go wrong with Prager. Good find.

 

[Blade96]

well i don't agree with don, but thats cause i dont see anything wrong with honoring where you or ancestors came from or what you are.

 

[billc]

I don't mind honoring my ancestors, I just see myself as an American. Simply that. I used to use the german/irish notion when people would ask me, but I find that doesn't really fit. Even though I was born in West Germany, my parents are American as were their parents. So, I'm simply an American, as is anyone who comes here and becomes a citizen.

 

[K-man]

Bill, I'm just a little worried.

Fourth, no obscene language will be tolerated anywhere on this school's property -- whether in class, in the hallways or at athletic events. If you can't speak without using the f-word, you can't speak. By obscene language I mean the words banned by the Federal Communications Commission, plus epithets such as "******," even when used by one black student to address another black, or "*****," even when addressed by a girl to a girlfriend. It is my intent that by the time you leave this school, you will be among the few your age to instinctively distinguish between the elevated and the degraded, the holy and the obscene.

Isn't this an infringement of the children's rights? ( ... as he ducks for cover knowing the consequences of opening the mouth at an inopportune time!)