Thank you for your continued coverage on this, Steve. I worry that this “partnership” will be waved away as innocuous because the videos are “optional” and no teacher is required to use them… yet.
I braced myself for some hot garbage before watching a video about colonization. I teach Spanish and find that most of my students have been taught very little about Latin America before high school, which is much the same experience I had 30+ years ago. They hear about the Aztecs, Mayas, & Incas (all in past tense), several conquistadors, and then fast forward 450 years or so and maybe learn about the Cuban missile crisis/communism in Cuba. This creates a vacuum of knowledge that gets filled with all sorts of faulty assumptions & ideas about migration, settlement, culture, economics, government, language, and ethnicity.
The video posed the question of whether it would be better to be colonized by the Spanish or the Aztecs and reached the conclusion that living under the Spanish would be preferable because of their “noble purpose” of bringing Christianity— getting rich apparently wasn’t the primary focus. 🙄 The Aztecs practiced human sacrifice as they displaced and subjugated other smaller tribes so they must be the nastier oppressors. Ugh🤮
There are videos about countries linked to human geography. After I get the bad taste out of my mouth, I’ll see what kinds of nonsense there is about Colombia, Peru, & other countries.
Thanks again for all you do to share research and updates!
I have serious questions about why the document lists the character and story of Moses as an accompaniment to the elementary school requirements for human migration. There has been no historical evidence that Moses existed or that the events described in the book of Exodus ever happened. It's only documented in the Torah and the Bible. That's a HUGE constitutional red flag.
Most of the religious content I’ve seen from the list is thrown in so haphazardly I think it’s either deliberate trolling or an attempt to provoke a court challenge.
Excellent article!
Thank you for your continued coverage on this, Steve. I worry that this “partnership” will be waved away as innocuous because the videos are “optional” and no teacher is required to use them… yet.
I braced myself for some hot garbage before watching a video about colonization. I teach Spanish and find that most of my students have been taught very little about Latin America before high school, which is much the same experience I had 30+ years ago. They hear about the Aztecs, Mayas, & Incas (all in past tense), several conquistadors, and then fast forward 450 years or so and maybe learn about the Cuban missile crisis/communism in Cuba. This creates a vacuum of knowledge that gets filled with all sorts of faulty assumptions & ideas about migration, settlement, culture, economics, government, language, and ethnicity.
The video posed the question of whether it would be better to be colonized by the Spanish or the Aztecs and reached the conclusion that living under the Spanish would be preferable because of their “noble purpose” of bringing Christianity— getting rich apparently wasn’t the primary focus. 🙄 The Aztecs practiced human sacrifice as they displaced and subjugated other smaller tribes so they must be the nastier oppressors. Ugh🤮
There are videos about countries linked to human geography. After I get the bad taste out of my mouth, I’ll see what kinds of nonsense there is about Colombia, Peru, & other countries.
Thanks again for all you do to share research and updates!
I have serious questions about why the document lists the character and story of Moses as an accompaniment to the elementary school requirements for human migration. There has been no historical evidence that Moses existed or that the events described in the book of Exodus ever happened. It's only documented in the Torah and the Bible. That's a HUGE constitutional red flag.
Most of the religious content I’ve seen from the list is thrown in so haphazardly I think it’s either deliberate trolling or an attempt to provoke a court challenge.
I hadn't considered the court challenge provocation route. I bet you're right. It is so blatantly illegal that it's comical.