Who can deny that there is propaganda war going on in this increasingly politically and religiously polarized society? I mentioned, in passing, the work of "the religious right's propagandists" in the comments of this post at the Jeff Blogworthy blog. That comment inspired Jeff Blogworthy to begin a whole series of posts about leftist propaganda, to show me that the propagandists of the religious right are not acting in a vacuum. From this post:

Welcome to the new Leftist Propaganda series. Readers have Smijer to thank, because of his passing crack about religious propagandists of the right (paraphrase). "You wouldn't know real propaganda if it hit you upside the head," I thought to myself. Well, I decided to show him. What an inspiration you are, Smijer. I intend to post a minimum of 10 examples of outrageous Leftist propaganda - and I may do more. There are so many to choose from, after all. When the Left does propaganda, they do it big.

Just a couple of clarifications:

• I made a crack in passing. I never pass crack. ;-)
  
• I'm actually pretty adept (if I do say so myself) at recognizing propaganda. One of the first examples I remember being exposed to was the rebranding by Reagan of the Nicarauguan Contra terrorists as "freedom fighters", equivalent to America's founding fathers. I remember as a child hearing a close family member coming home from church to speak sincere praise of the Nicaraguan "Freedom Fighters". I remember witnessing terrible indignation among my own family at the prosecution of Colonel Oliver North, the "American Hero". Readers of smijer & Buck know that I do my best to apply a smell test and do due diligence before I post anything to my own blog to be sure that my posts reflect my own values and conform to objective fact as closely as possible in this medium.
  
• I preferred my own phrasing to JB's paraphrase of my remarks. My own phrasing was to deal with a specific bloc of political and religious operatives known commonly as "the religious right". It is the propagandists of that bloc to whom I was referring, and I feel that my phrasing keeps the focus of my comments clear. Furthermore, lefty though I may be, I don't particularly like being lumped in with "the Left" for purposes of critique, unless the critique is specifically limited to the mainstream, modern, Western left. It's not hard to critique the "right" in general by taking shots at Timothy McVeigh, Eric Rudolph, or Adolph Hitler. But, it isn't helpful. Likewise, it isn't helpful to take shots at the "left" in general by airing grievances against Jane Fonda, Che Gueveras, or Chairman Mao. You can make just about any kind of accusation against "the left" or "the right", if you cast your net wide enough.
  

So, anyway... I learned something from Jeff's post. Previously, I had not heard of Rigoberta Menchu or her fraudulent autobiography. I may be in a minority on that, so I won't snark about the relative ineffectiveness of leftist propaganda. And I am truly distressed by seeing people on "our side" weakening our case by making us more susceptible to charges of dishonesty. In fact, I'm discouraged to see people on "our side" - or anyone for that matter - trying to deceive others. Life is hard enough without having to figure out when you are being lied to.

The reason I post is that I'm going to try to go head to head with Blogworthy. I intend to present an example of propaganda from the religious right, or possibly even the American right in general, each time he presents one from "the left". That way, both of us will have a shot at seeing how this propaganda looks from the other side. It should be enlightening for all concerned. So, Jeff, I see your Rigoberta Menchu with National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, who publishes a Bible curriculum and textbook for use in public school systems. The NCBCPS claims that 284 school districts in 35 states use its curriculum. With those numbers it can surely be said, "when the religious right does propaganda, they do it big."

The Texas Freedom Network asked religious scholar Mark Chancey to review the curriculum for overall appropriateness to the public school classroom. What he found was truly startling. Here's the link (PDF).

The simple purpose of this review was to determine if the curriculum passes constitutional muster as a non-sectarian text. Clearly, it does not. But, that's just the tip of the iceberg. The curriculum is not only fraught with religious doctrines portrayed as fact, it is also generously peppered with egregious errors of fact, poor research and outright plagiarism.

Here, we have layers of propaganda. Before we get into the actual propaganda going into our students' classrooms, I'd like to share a bit of about the methods of the NCBCPS itself. One propaganda technique, seemingly becoming a favorite of American conservatives, is that of doublespeak. The NCBCPS bills its curriculum as non-sectarian and will waste no time reassuring us of this. From their response to Chancey's review (PDF), we have these words:

As the TFN report concedes, the curriculum does not suggest, and the NCBCPS does not recommend, that any public school teacher ever take a personal position regarding the truth or falsity of any Biblical passage, nor commentator’s positions about such passages. The NCBCPS carefully instructs teachers of the course that public schools must remain objective and neutral in their treatment of religion.

Any course material, in any classroom or subject area, is subject to abuse by a rebellious instructor. NCBCPS recommends that this elective be periodically monitored for constitutional compliance.

Very noble, and non-sectarian... if only the curriculum itself did not take a position regarding the turth or falsity of Biblical passages, and the Bible as a whole.

Another note of propganda - demonizing the opposition, poisoning the well: this response is posted on NCBCPS' web-site under the heading, "NCBCPS RESPONDS TO ATTACK BY ANTI-RELIGION EXTREMISTS". Who are these "anti-religion extremists?" Well, they are the Texas Freedom Network whose executive summary of Chancey's report begins with this extremist language:

As a national debate rages over the proper place for religion in public education, more and more public schools are adding elective courses in Bible literacy. When taught with credible materials and from a nonsectarian perspective, such courses are an appropriate and even laudable way to help students learn about history and literature. This report, commissioned by the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund, reveals that what may be the country’s most aggressively marketed and widely used Bible curriculum fails on both counts.

In further describing the Texas Freedom Network, Director Elizabeth Ridenour says these things:

NCBCPS noted that it should come as no surprise that a small group of far left, anti-religion extremists like the Texas Freedom Network (TFN) is so desperate to ban one book – the Bible – from public schools. “It is ironic that a group which claims to be against censorship is now attempting to become the biggest censor in the State of Texas,” said Elizabeth Ridenour, president of NCBCPS. “At its root, TFN’s real objection to our curriculum is not the qualifications of our academic authorities, but the fact that we actually allow students to hold and read the Bible for themselves, and make up their own minds about its claims. This is something no other Bible curriculum does, and TFN can’t stand it,” Ridenour added.

“TFN is actually quite fearful of academic freedom,” Ridenour stated, “and is trying to deny local schools and communities the right to decide for themselves what elective courses to offer their citizens. This is not freedom, it is totalitarianism.”

What she fails to do is give a single example of an actual word or action from the TFN that would support her depiction of them. We must take her word for it... something which I will not willingly do, having seen the blatant disregard for truth and accuracy manifested in her Council's curriculum, especially knowing that she has a large financial stake in keeping her product in the classroom.

Of course, the real culprit here is not the TFN, but Mark Chancey, who compiled the report. Surely he is the real anti-religious extremist? No... From the report, about the author:

Dr. Mark A. Chancey teaches biblical studies in the Department of Religious Studies in Dedman College of Humanities and Sciences at Southern
Methodist University in Dallas. He attended the University of Georgia, where he earned a B.A. in Political Science with a minor in Religion (1990) and an M.A. in Religion (1992), and Duke University, where he received a Ph.D. in Religion with a focus in New Testament studies and early Judaism (1999). His research interests include the Gospels, the Historical Jesus, archaeology and the
Bible, and the political and social history of Palestine during the Roman period. He is a member of the Society for Biblical Literature, the Catholic Biblical
Association, the American Academy of Religion, and the American Schools for Oriental Research.

From Chancey's own introduction:

I write from the perspective of someone who is a proud product of public schools and who has fond memories of reading Job and Genesis in my
high school English class. I was first introduced to the academic study of the Bible at a public institution, the University of Georgia, and am a staunch supporter of public schools. I am also a professional educator who specializes in biblical studies and a person of faith who currently attends a United Methodist Church. This background and my experiences inform my belief that Bible courses
taught in a nonsectarian manner by academically qualified teachers can be an enriching part of a public education.

Maybe not a Bible-thumping fundie, but certainly no anti-religious extremist. But that's enough of the propaganda that targets adults... let's talk about the propaganda that targets children for a minute.

The report is rich in detail, and I would encourage you to read it in its entirety to see the scope of the propaganda directed at public school kids. But it's worth pointing out a couple of the more outrageous examples. Here goes:

The Cyrus cylinder, a sixth-century BCE clay cylinder with an inscription, is described in the curriculum as “confirmation of one of the most astonishing events in the pages of Scripture,” Ezra 1:1-3. This biblical passage asserts thatCyrus, King of Persia, announced that the god of the Jews had commanded him to allow captured Jews in Babylon to return to Jerusalem and rebuild their temple. The curriculum asserts that the inscription proves that Cyrus was a “moderate and God-fearing monarch” (p. 179). [The inscription on this cylinder does indeed corroborate Ezra’s account that the Persian king Cyrus treated some of his subjects well, though it does not mention the Jews, Jerusalem, or the temple. The cylinder also does suggest that Cyrus was god-fearing — but the god it mentions is not the Jewish god but Marduk, a Babylonian god.38]

Not much to add to that one... just ... "Ahem..."

The curriculum presents an urban legend as a scientific finding, claiming that scientists have confirmed the accuracy of the famous story in Joshua 10 of the sun standing still so that the Israelites would have sufficient time to defeat the Canaanites. Page 117 suggests that the class “note in particular the interesting story of the sun standing still in chapter 10. There is documented research through NASA that two days were indeed unaccounted for in time (the other being in 2 Kings 20:8-11).” Both this page and page 116 provide the address for a Web page that presents this “interesting story” and NASA’s alleged discovery of a “missing day” as facts.50 Folklorist Jan Harold Brunvand has documented the evolution of the rumor that scientists have found a missing day, tracing it from the original claim made by an army officer in 1890 to the updated version cited above, which emerged in the 1960s in the early heyday of space exploration. Brunand’s study verifies the nature of this claim as an urban legend with no basis in fact, as does a Web page posted on a NASA Web site.

To which I can only say "Holy cow!" I've known this was an urban legend since the first time I found a version of it in my e-mail and checked Snopes. And now, tens of thousands of students are being taught this as fact? Another question: what are they going to think of their leaders in the religious right if and when they discover they were lied to?

“Read ‘The Magnificat’ [Luke 1:46-55, not 1:48-55 as specified in the curriculum] and Hannah’s ‘Song’ in I Samuel 2:1-10. Compare and consider the simple monosyllabic words used by Mary to those of Old Testament poetry. How is this typical of the Hebrews?” (p. 138)

[The words in these passages may be monosyllabic (consisting of one syllable) in English translations, but they are quite different in Hebrew and Greek. How English syllabification provides insight into the ancient Hebrew mindset is not explained.]

Ok... these are just samples... examples abound. I'm not certain if this was the same curriculum, but my own stepsons brought home xeroxed assignments from their Bible Studies elective in middle school. I glanced through them and found that more than one question was "loaded" with a sectarian viewpoint, and - if I remember correctly - there were factual errors implied in one or more of the questions as well. At the time I thought it was just because we lived in Podunk, Tennessee, and the teachers didn't know any better. I certainly didn't take it upon myself to correct them. It's more important to me that the boys be able to work through a math problem, or understand their science. But the fact is that the propaganda from the religious right is so pervasive as to almost seem like background noise at times.

The good news is that I should be able to keep up with Jeff Blogworthy's leftist propaganda column pretty dang well...

Until then...

::

Posted by smijer at August 7, 2005 07:58 PM