I am a teacher at Grace Church High School in Manhattan. Ten years ago, I changed careers when I discovered how rewarding it is to help young people explore the truth and beauty of mathematics. I love my work.
As a teacher, my first obligation is to my students. But right now, my school is asking me to embrace “antiracism” training and pedagogy that I believe is deeply harmful to them and to any person who seeks to nurture the virtues of curiosity, empathy and understanding.
“Antiracist” training sounds righteous, but it is the opposite of truth in advertising. It requires teachers like myself to treat students differently on the basis of race. Furthermore, in order to maintain a united front for our students, teachers at Grace are directed to confine our doubts about this pedagogical framework to conversations with an in-house “Office of Community Engagement” for whom every significant objection leads to a foregone conclusion. Any doubting students are likewise “challenged” to reframe their views to conform to this orthodoxy.
I know that by attaching my name to this I’m risking not only my current job but my career as an educator, since most schools, both public and private, are now captive to this backward ideology. But witnessing the harmful impact it has on children, I can’t stay silent.
My school, like so many others, induces students via shame and sophistry to identify primarily with their race before their individual identities are fully formed. Students are pressured to conform their opinions to those broadly associated with their race and gender and to minimize or dismiss individual experiences that don’t match those assumptions. The morally compromised status of “oppressor” is assigned to one group of students based on their immutable characteristics. In the meantime, dependency, resentment and moral superiority are cultivated in students considered “oppressed.”
All of this is done in the name of “equity,” but it is the opposite of fair. In reality, all of this reinforces the worst impulses we have as human beings: our tendency toward tribalism and sectarianism that a truly liberal education is meant to transcend.
Recently, I raised questions about this ideology at a mandatory, whites-only student and faculty Zoom meeting. (Such racially segregated sessions are now commonplace at my school.) It was a bait and switch “self-care” seminar that labelled “objectivity,” “individualism,” “fear of open conflict,” and even “a right to comfort” as characteristics of white supremacy. I doubted that these human attributes — many of them virtues reframed as vices — should be racialized in this way. In the Zoom chat, I also questioned whether one must define oneself in terms of a racial identity at all. My goal was to model for students that they should feel safe to question ideological assertions if they felt moved to do so.
It seemed like my questions broke the ice. Students and even a few teachers offered a broad range of questions and observations. Many students said it was a more productive and substantive discussion than they expected.
However, when my questions were shared outside this forum, violating the school norm of confidentiality, I was informed the head of the high school that my philosophical challenges had caused “harm” to students, given that these topics were “life and death matters, about people’s flesh and blood and bone.” I was reprimanded for “acting like an independent agent of a set of principles or ideas or beliefs.” And I was told that by doing so, I failed to serve the “greater good and the higher truth.”
He further informed me that I had created “dissonance for vulnerable and unformed thinkers” and “neurological disturbance in students’ beings and systems.” The school’s director of studies added that my remarks could even constitute harassment.
A few days later, the head of school ordered all high school advisors to read a public reprimand of my conduct out loud to every student in the school. It was a surreal experience, walking the halls alone and hearing, simultaneously, the words emitting from each classroom: “Events from last week compel us to underscore some aspects of our mission and share some thoughts about our community,” the statement began. “At independent schools, with their history of predominantly white populations, racism colludes with other forms of bias (sexism, classism, ableism and so much more) to undermine our stated ideals, and we must work hard to undo this history.”
Students from low-income families experience culture shock at our school. Racist incidents happen. And bias can influence relationships. All true. But addressing such problems with a call to “undo history” lacks any kind of limiting principle and pairs any allegation of bigotry with a priori guilt. My own contract for next year requires me to “participate in restorative practices designed by the Office of Community Engagement” in order to “heal my relationship with the students of color and other students in my classes.” The details of these practices remain unspecified until I agree to sign.
I asked my uncomfortable questions in the “self-care” meeting because I felt a duty to my students. I wanted to be a voice for the many students of different backgrounds who have approached me over the course of the past several years to express their frustration with indoctrination at our school, but are afraid to speak up.
They report that, in their classes and other discussions, they must never challenge any of the premises of our “antiracist” teachings, which are deeply informed by Critical Race Theory. These concerns are confirmed for me when I attend grade-level and all-school meetings about race or gender issues. There, I witness student after student sticking to a narrow script of acceptable responses. Teachers praise insights when they articulate the existing framework or expand it to apply to novel domains. Meantime, it is common for teachers to exhort students who remain silent that “we really need to hear from you.”
But what does speaking up mean in a context in which white students are asked to interrogate their “white saviorism,” but also “not make their antiracist practice about them”? We are compelling them to tiptoe through a minefield of double-binds. According to the school’s own standard for discursive violence, this constitutes abuse.
Every student at the school must also sign a “Student Life Agreement,” which requires them to aver that “the world as we understand it can be hard and extremely biased,” that they commit to “recognize and acknowledge their biases when we come to school, and interrupt those biases,” and accept that they will be “held accountable should they fall short of the agreement.” A recent faculty email chain received enthusiastic support for recommending that we “‘officially’ flag students” who appear “resistant” to the “culture we are trying to establish.”
When I questioned what form this resistance takes, examples presented by a colleague included “persisting with a colorblind ideology,” “suggesting that we treat everyone with respect,” “a belief in meritocracy,” and “just silence.” In a special assembly in February 2019, our head of school said that the impact of words and images perceived as racist — regardless of intent — is akin to “using a gun or a knife to kill or injure someone.”
Imagine being a young person in this environment. Would you risk voicing your doubts, especially if you had never heard a single teacher question it?
Last fall, juniors and seniors in my Art of Persuasion class expressed dismay with the “Grace bubble” and sought to engage with a wider range of political viewpoints. Since the BLM protests often came up in our discussions, I thought of assigning Glenn Loury, a Brown University professor and public intellectual whose writings express a nuanced, center-right position on racial issues in America. Unfortunately, my administration put the kibosh on my proposal.
The head of school responded to me that “people like Loury’s lived experience—and therefore his derived social philosophy” made him an exception to the rule that black thinkers acknowledge structural racism as the paramount impediment in society. He added that “the moment we are in institutionally and culturally, does not lend itself to dispassionate discussion and debate,” and discussing Loury’s ideas would “only confuse and/or enflame students, both those in the class and others that hear about it outside of the class.” He preferred I assign “mainstream white conservatives,” effectively denying black students the opportunity to hear from a black professor who holds views that diverge from the orthodoxy pushed on them.
I find it self-evidently racist to filter the dissemination of an idea based on the race of the person who espouses it. I find the claim that exposing 11th and 12th graders to diverse views on an important societal issue will only “confuse” them to be characteristic of a fundamentalist religion, not an educational philosophy.
My administration says that these constraints on discourse are necessary to shield students from harm. But it is clear to me that these constraints serve primarily to shield their ideology from harm — at the cost of students’ psychological and intellectual development.
It was out of concern for my students that I spoke out in the “self-care” meeting, and it is out of that same concern that I write today. I am concerned for students who crave a broader range of viewpoints in class. I am concerned for students trained in “race explicit” seminars to accept some opinions as gospel, while discarding as immoral disconfirming evidence. I am concerned for the dozens of students during my time at Grace who shared with me that they have been reproached by teachers for expressing views that are not aligned with the new ideology.
One current student paid me a visit a few weeks ago. He tapped faintly on my office door, anxiously looking both ways before entering. He said he had come to offer me words of support for speaking up at the meeting.
I thanked him for his comments, but asked him why he seemed so nervous. He told me he was worried that a particular teacher might notice this visit and “it would mean that I would get in trouble.” He reported to me that this teacher once gave him a lengthy “talking to” for voicing a conservative opinion in class. He then remembered with a sigh of relief that this teacher was absent that day. I looked him in the eyes. I told him he was a brave young man for coming to see me, and that he should be proud of that.
Then I sent him on his way. And I resolved to write this piece.
I am extremely proud to publish this piece by Paul Rossi. If you are a teacher who finds yourself in a similar situation; if you want to speak out but are afraid to risk your job; if you believe that political indoctrination has no place in schools, Paul would love to hear from you.
Write to him at: firstname.lastname@example.org
The above comes from an April 13 story sent by Common Sense with Bari Weiss. Weiss, a writer and editor for the opinion department of The New York Times, resigned from the paper on July 14, 2020, citing “bullying by colleagues” and an “illiberal environment.”
This really is 1984. SMH.
Anti-racism *is* racism. Martin Luther King Jr., who obviously spent his whole life fighting racism, would vomit to see what is being done today.
There is only one way to deal with racism. As Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. would say, “love thy neighbor.” He taught that Love and non-violence is the one and only way, to combat racism. This school should dump its ridiculous “over-intellectualized baloney”– and change to the teachings of Jesus Christ (especially if the school is run by a church). And follow Christ’s teachings, straight from the Holy Bible, to deal with any kind of discrimination problems– racism or ableisn, or whatever.
I find it odd that the school is trying to root out racism by being racist. I think Mr. Rossi should be quite righteous about this.
“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
-Theodore Dalrymple (aka Anthony Daniels, MD)
If half of what this teacher says is true, we should be worried for our country. It is true that within a decade or two that whites will be the minority in the nation, but so what? The school has bought into the anti-white to the point of the extreme. There is no doubt whatsoever that the nation was founded on principles of white European thought popular at the time. It is those core principles that have allowed the nation to prosper. Individualism, hard work, meritocracy has been our aim and should continue to be so. We are not close to achieving our goals, but we must try harder every day. We can do that by leveling the playing field for all people, not by separating them into racial and cultural sects. From many one!
Upon further thought, I think Mr. Rossi might solve most of his problems if he declares that he’s black and that he intends to transition in the near future.
“Every student at the school must also sign a ‘Student Life Agreement’, which requires them to aver that ‘the world we understand it can be hard and extremely biased . . .” At the moment any student signs this, he/she surrenders their own right to think critically and, as time passes, the capacity to do so. They become drones, worker bees whose vowed task is to repeat, without questioning, the Woke culture concepts imposed on them by their instructors.
The philosopher Rene Descartes was right: I THINK, therefore I am. True humanity cannot exist without critical thinking. Yet we consent to raising a generation of automatons.
Most of the people involved in public education are morons.
What a complete fraud. If I were this teacher, I would simply resign and find better work, in a sane, normal place. You can’t fight a sick, “politically-correct,” “communist-style” regime, full of over-intellectualized “baloney,” like what is going on in this sick “school.” Not worth one more day on the job. And I wouldn’t fight for my students, either.
Instead, I would tell them and their parents, in plain English, the truth, and just quit. The parents all ought to pull their kids out of this hellhole. I bet this school won’t last long.
Look how long the Democrat Party has lasted, and it’s growing in size and power. Don’t underestimate how long this metaphysical and anthropological insanity can continue. It’s taking over America. Conservatives should be very afraid of persecution in our lifetimes. Christians are facing persecution now, and it will intensify as the insanity joined to a totalitarian mindset and Big Tech surveillance and tracking becomes ubiquitous.
Stalin consolidated his power in the 1930’s by eliminating family farms and family businesses, calling them “kulaks”, having them brought before sham trials, and then executed or sent to labor camps in the Siberian gulag. The subsequent “follow the science” Soviet 5 year plans “collectivized the land”, especially the bread basket that Ukraine was, resulting in mass starvation, up to 30 million people dying. In a similar way, Mao’s Cultural Revolution of the 1960’s did the same, again, resulting in mass starvation, this time, government bureaucrats “following the science” of collectivization, would lie on their reports to superiors, fearing being put before a tribunal, which only made worse the decline in food production, and made starvation worse. Notice how Biden’s “Infrastructure Plan” has these multi year targets, especially on green economy subsidized products. Corporations now realize, “you can’t fight the Fed”, are all in on getting subsidies to “go green”, or medicare for all. Yet, like the Communist era, it is not about these perceived benefits. It is about creating a planned economy run by Big Tech, international investment fund gnostic elites who “know better”. If you go against this Animal Farm some are more equal than others mentality, in the past you were labeled a “kulak” or a “counter-revolutionary” and eliminated or sent to a labor camp. Today, these elites use race and pandemics and threats of violence to divide people, cancel dissenting, evidence based opinion, and out of fear, give up their independence. We as a church must look to what Eastern Europeans did during the Communist Era then, and come to the aid of those standing up to this oppression now, especially what Cardinal Zen and Jimmy Lai and the many jailed right now in Hong Kong are asking us to do. Boycott the CCP/Wall Street/Big Tech/Political-Entertainment Industry alliance and develop localized economies with the local churches as centers for home schooling and youth activities,
Here is the school’s page on antiracism.
Education’s take it or be forced to leave attitude with regards to critical race theory is the pseudo-intellectual counterpart to rioting and looting.
Anonymous: For the record, the school Mr. Rossi teaches at, Grace Community School, is a private school affiliated with Grace Church in New York City. It is not a public school and this kind of nonsense has not filtered down to the public school in Orange County, California where I teach life science.
So-called “critical race theory” and “intersectionality” is a big pile of fraudulent intellectual garbage. Sick, incompetent, liberal college professors– over-educated, radicalized idiots– who invent such garbage, ought to all be fired and dumped out of the field of education! A student is certainly not a “statistic” to be identified merely, on paper, as a convenient collection of labels for social science-ascribed “identities”– — race, ethnicity, gender, religion, social class, income, disability, age, etc. etc. Everyone is a unique individual! The role of a good teacher is to take an interest in each student, and guide students to develop their potentials. These incompetent, demented, “ivory tower” liberal idiots are not really interested, anyway, in sincerely helping underprivileged people, such as Blacks. Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., would laugh at them all.
Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s church, the Southern Baptist Convention, has rejected “critical race theory” and “intersectionality,” as being wrong. Some Baptist pastors have left due to that fact, but most remain true to their Baptist faith. Racism is combatted by Christ’s Love for all mankind–not by worldly, secular political movements. “Hate” is wrong, unChristian, towards anyone– including white people. Get out your Bibles.