A Response to Arthur Schlesinger’s: The Disuniting of America: Reflection on a Multicultural Society

Finally, somebody who gets it! Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. attempts to shed light upon the massive push to include more multiculturalism in education today, acknowledging the benefits of such a curriculum, while eloquently arguing that the obsession with celebrating diversity has been overemphasized, in effect damaging the composition of an American unity. Schlesinger begins with a brief history of immigration to America and the injustices various groups of people endured, followed by a explanation of the push to include more multicultural history in the curriculum of U.S. schools, the unscientific reasoning behind it, and America’s obsession with diversity that has backfired and nourished a corrosion of American unity. My review seeks to analyze Schlesinger’s major messages, and provide an agreeing response, reflecting upon my own multicultural and educational experiences.

“In the beginning America was…an entry into a new life, an interweaving of separate ethnic strands” – Schlesinger (29).

Schlesinger begins by reminding educators and citizens that at the beginning of colonization and throughout the industrial revolution, there was little interweaving taking place. The United States was becoming “an asylum of all nations” built on the précis that civic participation and community schooling molded ideal citizens, cleansed of original roots, memories, and ethnicities (30). Possession of national character meant taking an active role in society, supporting and defending the constitution of the United States and adopting the New Race as one’s own. Though the original thirteen colonies were population by a diversity of European emigrants, enslaved persons from African nations, in addition to Asian and Mexican Immigrants, British immigrants and Protestantism established the majority of American governmental culture. A prejudice against non-Protestants, and non-whites specifically was clearly felt. “Either a man is an American and nothing else, or he is not an American at all” raged President Theodore Roosevelt during the outbreak of World War I (41). During a period when the United States was fighting racial purification in Germany, American leaders were sending a similar message to our nation’s ethnic citizens, which was “you cannot become thorough Americans” if you continue to embrace your particular group (ethnic, racial, or religious group) – President Woodrow Wilson (41).

“History becomes a means of shaping history” – Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. (52)

As our nation moved to fight and end racial purification in Nazi Germany during World War I, ethnic groups in the U.S. were “struggling for power, and in desperate cases, for survival” (54). At the same time, “all Hitler was doing was imitating genocidal policies invented by Stalin” (57). As Schlesinger presents these truths, he reminds readers that American history has always been written in the “interests of White Anglo-Saxon Protestant males” (58). This is partly the reason why a barrage of U.S. states have passed “pure history” social studies curriculum laws, dedicated not only to accurately retell the facts of some of America’s ethnic heroes, but also to provide an accurate account of how minorities played important roles in U.S. history.

“186,000 blacks served in the Union Army” (65)

In the chapter, History the Weapon, Schlesinger enlightens readers by recognizing that a more pluralistic American culture has made a significant impact on the curriculum and teaching of American history. “Scholars now explore long-neglected fields as the history of women, of immigration, of blacks, Indians, Hispanics, [and] homosexuals” (71).

“History as a weapon is an abuse of history” – Schlesinger, (77)

While it is imperative to present a multicultural perspective on the history of America, Schlesinger repeats that we are in America and thus history still must be American, and it must be accurate. “The issue is the teaching of bad history under whatever ethnic banner” (81). Schlesinger then presents us with some questions: How do historians determine which cultures to celebrate in particular aspects of American history? Is it really the schools’ job to teach ethnic and racial pride? Lastly, “when does our obsession with differences begin to threaten the idea of an overarching American nationality?” – a concept our founding fathers theoretically sought to start our nation by implementing (81). The Battle of the Schools is Schlesinger’s concern that a multicultural education may be filled with half-truths, and outdated information. Secondly, what evidence is provided of a positive correlation between ethnic pride (specifically pertaining to American history) and of academic performance in school? Schlesinger points out that it is rather difficult to teach ethnic pride even in urban cities, where a particular school may comprise larger than the familiar twelve percent black population, though students have little to no ethnic ties to their long-ago African roots, and/or trace themselves back to a hundred or more ethnic tribes and nations. Surely, a course on black American history will cater to only a handful of students, and even then what evidence is there that this history lesson will raise their self-esteem?

In the Decomposition of America Schlesinger reveals an enlightening picture of our school systems far too concerned with meeting the multicultural needs of all students, for the unscientific reasoning that a greater understanding of one’s ethnic history equals a higher self-esteem and thus a higher performance in the world of academia. Our continued focus on low self-esteem through a multicultural account of accurate history is decomposing America. There are far too many other “hard and expensive challenges of our society – the need for safer schools, better teachers, better teaching materials, greater investments in education…stable families…jobs and income that can nourish stable families; and the need to stop the ravages of drugs and crimes” (105); these are the real needs of our society, and I tend to agree with Schlesinger.

A diverse education will always be important, but our obsession with catering to ethnic students’ backgrounds is beginning to make an individualized education impossible. Diversity should always be celebrated, but picking and choosing which specific diversities to officially celebrate, teach, and learn is near impossible. Black history month, for example, was established to celebrate the accomplishments of Black American leaders, but where is Japanese American history month? When is Chinese American history month? Surly we cannot group all Asian Americans into one celebration, just as it is ridiculous to assume that all Black students will relate to a Black American leader, simply because they may all have long-ago roots from Africa, and this will boost their self esteem and scholarship? As a native American (I call myself native because I was born in the U.S. and can trace my ancestry back 11 generations on all sides, having been also born and raised in America), I cannot say that I have an emotional connection to my long-ago ethnic roots of Ireland and Scotland. I have never visited either of these countries and no one in my family has as well. I am not particularly interested in Scottish American heroes, and don’t care to celebrate St. Patrick’s Day, though rest assured my self-esteem is normal, and I did well enough in school by embracing the national American culture. As Schlesinger points out, where is the evidence to support that an immense understanding of one’s ethnic background correlatives with a heightened level of self esteem, which equates to greater academic success? The real issue should is understanding what will continue to hold the United States together, and as a leader on the world stage?

Moral & Ethical Framework

“Your Values Become Your Destiny” -Mahatma Gandhi

Religious values motivate all aspects of our lives, and our afterlives. My own multicultural religious background deeply affects the role I play as an educator, and the teaching approach I bring to the classroom. While I do not agree that there is only one path to understanding God and reaching the Kingdom of Heaven, I do believe that most religion is good and its main purpose seeks to produce good people. In this article, I will address how I have arrived at these beliefs, the critics that challenge me, and my defense for translating my personal values into guiding principles used in my role as an educator.

Core Values

I am fortunate to have had a diverse religious upbringing. I was born and raised Roman Catholic, yet I acknowledge my parents’ open-mindedness for encouraging me to experience other denominations under the umbrella of Christianity, as well. Growing up I had friends that were Jewish, Mormon, Buddhist, as well as Atheist, therefore I also had the opportunity of learning about religions outside of Christianity. As an adult now, I truly appreciate my parents’ unprejudiced views and encouragement to discover a diversity of religions. I credit my parents’ guidance for shaping my core religious values, though I recognize that my confirmation to Catholicism was ultimately my choice, and one that was not pushed upon me. In my adult years, my faith in God had allowed me to determine that most religions have good aspects to them, and their main purpose is to teach what they believe to be good, and produce good people. Whether or not the parishioners of such religions has been exposed to our Lord Savior, hold a belief in God, and/or act in a way that imitates Jesus’ life, I believe that God will recognize good people, whatever their religion may be, as He is the ultimate judge.

When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them from another…Then the king will say to those on his right, “Come, you are who bless by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. – (Matthew 25:31)

As it is evident that I consider myself both a follower of God and of Catholicism, it is true that there are philosophical values of Christianity with which I do not agree. For example, I disagree with the Christian conviction that one must accept God into their life in order to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. “All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation…to enter the joy of heaven” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 291). I disagree with this principle because I know many good people that have simply not been exposed to a belief in God, and therefore, have absolutely no knowledge of what it means to be His follower. These people include my students lacking any sort of religious upbringing, indigenous people of Ethiopian tribal regions (also children), and my friends, many of which are followers of Mahayana (Chinese) and Theravada (Thai) Buddhism. “The indigenous tribal people of Ethiopia have not a single organized religion but include several traditional African beliefs and philosophies (such as) voodoo” (Intercultural Competence, 80). All of these people are virtuous, though they may not believe in my God.

My faith that there are good non-Christian people in this world helps shape the core philosophical values by which I live my life. These are made of various approaches to decision making, including a bit of ethnical egoism, deontology, and spiritual soul searching. “Almost all Christians recognize that ethical egoism is a poor way to live life and that a life lived merely in the pursuit of self-gratification is an impoverished one” providing more evidence that although I am a follower of God, I do not have to agree with every Christian belief. I believe the same values that inspire the way I live my personal life also motivate me as an educator. As a teacher, I try to educate my students to look out for themselves beyond all else. A good person shows concern for their own physical, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual well-being, which in turn is part of caring for others. In fact, “concern for one’s own (self) is part of caring for God’s gift” (Exploring Christian Ethics, 15). I encourage my students to be truthful with themselves and one another, and that honesty is the best policy. “A deontological method of doing ethics stresses that certain actions are inherently right or wrong” (Exploring Christian Ethics, 16). Most importantly, we need to look at family and our

cultural upbringing, to make the best decisions that will affect the greater community and ourselves.

“By Christian understanding, truth is neither “out there” nor “in here”, but both. Truth is between us, in relationship, to be found in the dialogue of knowers and knowns who are understood as independent but accountable selves…The community consist of more than other human selves. We are also in community…with God.” (To Know as We Are Known, 56-57).

My experiences living in a third-world country are partly responsible for shaping the values by which I live my life as a person and as an educator. During my summers, I have the opportunity of living and teaching among the natives of Southeast Asia, where various branches of Buddhism are the mainstream religions. In Bangkok, Thailand and throughout much of the regions I have traveled it is often difficult for me to identify with the belief system twenty-six centuries old, and with over 376 million followers. Yet Buddhism, ranked sixth among the world’s largest religious hierarchies, continues to grow along with Islam, Hinduism, and the Chinese Folk Religions such as Taoism, and Confucianism. When compared with Christianity that comprises the largest population of followers (approximately 2.1 billion), still more than two-thirds the world’s population follows a religious belief system that is non-Christian in faith (Wikipedia). Yet does this mean that only one-third the world’s population is worthy of being saved by the grace of God, and that two-thirds the population on this Earth are not good people? Of course, not, religions are social organizations, a focus on the sacred, spiritual journeys, and cultural in meaning, yet the main goal of all religions, in my belief, is to lead its followers in the direction, which they believe to be good. Therefore, if 4.4 billion people on this Earth have chosen not to believe in my God, I have to accept their right to choose and believe that they are following what they know to be true.

Critics Challenge My System of Values

It is essential for me, an educator, to embrace an outlook of cultural understanding and religious acceptance because my classroom is a united nation. The students in my classroom U.N. represent a multitude of backgrounds, ethnicities, nationalities, and denominations both in and outside my umbrella of Western Christianity. As a teacher, it is essential I model acceptance of inter-relationships whether to encourage befriending a classmate who looks, speaks, or has different religious beliefs from you, working cooperatively with our neighbors, or simply acknowledging that we all share commonalities yet have differences too. “The starting point for developing intercultural competence in the educational context is to understand one’s own cultural background” (Intercultural Competence, 316).

Defense

In my role as a public school educator, I think I have done a good job of modeling this belief system to our future world leaders, though I do have my critics. I am generally not too public at work or school with my private life, though I make a point of advertising my partnership with a husband who is all nationally, ethnically, and religiously different than myself. I think this is something both my coworkers and students view as different, yet feasible. There are those, however that find it a direct conflict of values that I have committed my worldly life with someone who shares drastically different outlooks on the afterlife, than I do. In my defense, I communicate that we must show cultural acceptance if our world is ever to heal itself from warfare, poverty, racism, and the everyday prejudices so many people encounter. An educator of our future United Nations leaders, it is my job to promote public inter-relationships, transferable to a secular context.

Religious acceptance is important so that we may be one. Just as it is important that good Christians go to church and good Catholics attend Mass; it is important that we show tolerance of others’ religious beliefs. We do not have to agree with them, but we need to accept each and everyone’s right to their own views. My purpose for attending Mass is to worship with a support system of other believers, though imagine how large that support system would be if we could learn to show tolerance of all people’s religious views. It is possible, because this is something my students, in their classroom united-nation, do day in and out for 185 days of the school year. Yet, in our world, not a day passes without conflict initiated by religious warfare. It is a sad thought that our children have mastered virtue ethics, thought adults are still struggling with this concept.

Classroom Code of Ethics

I am someone who teaches from a multicultural perspective. I translate my values of acceptance, particularly denominational, ethnical, and national acknowledgement, into a moral principles approach to teaching life’s lessons through character education. In my classroom, this looks like teachers modeling respectful behaviors, using positive statements, and holding daily class meetings. It includes implementing and interpreting climate surveys throughout the year, and the presentation of student-selected citizenship awards for problem solving, and making good decisions, to name a few things. Though there is not one particular character education program with which I completely agree, my experiences working with numerous curriculums has allowed me to self-select the attributes, materials, and approaches that best fit my community of students.

The professional code of ethics in my classroom is on display in a pictorial collage of shoes. On the first day of school, each student is responsible for creating a replica of their shoe; compete with real laces and eyehooks. Each eyehook represents that particular student’s personal values. The students decorate their shoes with graphics of what we value; mine portrays God, family, friends, my students, school, water representing a healthy lifestyle, and books illustrating intelligence and hard work ethic. Each shoe is different in appearance, yet they all serve the same basic function, and the collage reminds us throughout the year of what it would feel like to walk in another person’s shoes. The code phrase for our first-day project is “Common Courtesy” and it remains in use throughout the year as a behavior management strategy. When I say the code phrase “Common Courtesy”, the students respond with the phrase “Showing Consideration for Others” and all eyes are respectfully on me.

Challenges of the Code

The challenges of implementing any character education program are such that the chosen attributes may not be characteristics of a particular student’s culture. For example, respectfully showing all eyes on me, the teacher is an oxymoron for young Asian students, where it is inappropriate to look at your elders on the same hierarchical level. Similarly, the very value I impel of accepting all regardless of religious beliefs, sexual orientation, nationality, et cetera, is a difficult value for those who do not accept God as the only and ultimate judge of how we choose to live our lives. There are those that despite understanding God’s will to analyze our worldly life on Judgment Day, seek to imitate the Lord by attempting to do his job for him, on Earth.

Overcoming the Challenges

My belief is that through educating our students when they are young, this is the best method by which to overcome the challenges and critics of our systems of faith. We cannot defend ourselves completely, to do so is suicidal. In a world where there are too many sects of religious beliefs, and every war in the history of the world has been rooted in religious cleansing, the only way history has learned to defend oneself completely is by picking up sword and shield and preparing oneself for religious warfare. But if we can all commit to educating the young of tolerance, accepting both one’s differences and commonalities, it may be possible that our future united nations will grow, and all men will be recognized for their strive to act as they believe to be good.

My multicultural life experiences have influenced my role as an educator. I know that my understanding of multiple ethnicities and religions has positively affected the way in which I strive to create a community that encourages cultural appreciation and seeks to produce virtuous citizens that will make good decisions for the future of our world.

SOURCES

Catechism of the Catholic Church. New York: Doubleday, 1995.

Fedler, Kyle D. Exploring Christian Ethics. Louisville: Westminster John Knox,

2006.

Lustig, Myron W. and Jolene Koester. Intercultural Competence: Interpersonal

Communication Across Cultures. New York: Longman, 1999.

“Major Religious Groups” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. 2007. Major

Religious Groups 11, March 2007 <http://en.wikipedia.org/

wiki/Major_world_religions>.

The New American Bible. Nashville: Catholic Bible Press, 1987.

Palmer, Parker J. To Know As We Are Known: Education as a Spiritual

Journey. San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1993.