Public Schools and Political Bullying: A Report Card from Utah

As reported in the New York Times today and the Salt Lake Tribune yesterday, our local school district (Nebo School District) in Utah reversed its decision not to allow the students to watch  President Obama's speech to the nation's children.

A group of us parents from our Springville neighborhood attended the local school district's board meeting, pleased to hear their formal apology and plan to show the video next week. I joined other members of the public in expressing to the board our strong feelings about their poor decision initially.

What was the main issue here? I believe Rebecca deSchweinitz, someone who spoke very passionately to the board Wednesday, hit the nail on the head: the issue is political bullying.

Political bullying is when people use intimidation or a climate of threats and fear to harass those who are not of their political bent. Two kinds of political bullying are happening in conservative Utah, each disturbing in its own way.

The first sort of political bullying being tolerated in Utah is that done by children to other children. This happens all the time around here. When my eighth-grade son returned to school after we had pulled him and his brother out for an hour to listen to President Obama's address, kids asked him where he had been. This provided another fresh occasion for them to mock Obama and make my son feel bad for committing the political heresy of appearing to be in favor of our president. Ms. deSchweinitz reported to the school board on far graver incidents: a first grader in the district was beat up because that child had some sort of connection to Obama, etc. Other parents I spoke with at the board meeting had similar stories. An Obama for President sign in front of the home made the children living there a target for constant ridicule.

The second sort of political bullying being tolerated in Utah (at least in Utah County) is parents bullying the schools. As board member Debbie Swenson admitted to the Times, the decision not to show the video came about in the wake of angry parents phoning the school. Now, to be fair, every school board has to make many decisions in the wake of angry parents phoning up. At Wednesday's meeting, an irate father brought his daughter's tennis uniform in order to protest the high costs of uniforms. That's life on the school board.

But when the Nebo School District chose to allow a few angry parents (or even many angry parents) to prevent the highest elected official in the land from addressing the assembled children of the public school system, they caved into political bullying. How was this bullying and not simply concerned parents expressing their right to be part of local school decisions? Because those parents' complaints were politically charged, filled with as much ideology as they were claiming Mr. Obama's speech was going to contain. The district allowed itself to be intimidated by the prejudices of local parents, plain and simple. Even when the full text of the speech was available (and Ms. deSchweinitz phoned all the board members the morning after it was, when it was still time for a decision to allow viewing the video) the board felt it would be safer not to enrage the partisan parents. They were very poor leaders to be intimidated in this way. They lacked integrity, or they agreed with the empty claims about potential ideological indoctrination. The students lost, and the parent-bullies won.

I don't think it is overstating things to say that those parents were bullies. They were using intimidation tactics, they did not appeal to reason, and they did not respect the school environment as a safe place where civics can and should be respected and where dispassionate debate about issues is modeled as a primary American value. This sort of political bullying is unAmerican, unfitting for the parents and unfitting for the school system that is set up to teach, preserve, and pass on the American value of allowing for political discussion and political difference. This political bullying not only denies free speech; worse, it creates social conditions that prohibit any kind of pluralism. It is the offspring of the sort of no-tolerance rhetoric propagated by talk show fear mongerers. You can fill in the names there. Those are the civics instructors for too many of the conservatives in this state and elsewhere. Who needs a school system to require one to listen to more than one side of an issue when you can wield the weapon of angered intimidation and manage to censor your political opponent altogether? Victory for the bullies, defeat for the American values (that conservatives so often pretend to uphold).

Bullying has become a prominent topic lately. Cyber-bullying, schoolroom bullying of the more traditional sort. President Obama addressed it in his speech, in fact, and there are school programs to teach kids not to be a bully or to allow bullying. My wife works in one of the elementary schools in the Nebo district. I've seen posters in that school making students aware that bullying is not right and not to be endured.

But that does not apply to political bullying. I agree with Ms. deSchweinitz: the Nebo district helped to contribute to a culture of bullying. They will show Pres. Obama's speech, but will they do anything to address the rampant mockery, cynicism, and dismissiveness that the more part of the students feel justified in maintaining? When I tried to be positive with my son about the district's reversed decision, he expressed his fear of how he would be treated on the day that the video will be shown. I think he would just rather have the whole thing go away now. He doesn't want to have to face the ridicule again. Will the Nebo district address the likelihood of general mockery of Obama and anyone who appears sympathetic to him? I wonder.

Parents should keep their children from becoming political bullies, not fuel that fire. But in Utah, among conservatives, there is a gleeful, open-season feeling among Obama haters. It shows up in the glib statements parents throw around on facebook and that their children readily pass along. Within hours of the district's decision not to show the Obama video, a 12-year old that lives in the neighborhood passed along this campaign button on facebook.

  A second, older student, felt emboldened by the day's events to advertise joining a facebook group called "Socialism Resistance Movement" that showed this reverse black-face image of our president ("Learn the lies of tyrannical President Obama.") Don't think for a minute that racism doesn't also fuel the anti-Obama sentiments in our area. 

So that's the climate in conservative Utah, or at least at the heart of American-values Utah Valley with its proud tradition of the Freedom Festival and its family values. Will the Nebo School District have the courage to stand up to the bullying of parents who have forgotten not only their manners but the manner by which we are able to conserve and foster political pluralism? There is such convenience in having demons. Such sport. But little education of the sort I want to have tax dollars pay for.

I want a school system that is able to educate students into the true meaning of totalitarianism so that the students recognize not only the ridiculousness but the harm of the "Socialism Resistance Movement" and its call to "Fight totalitarianism while there is still time." I want a school system that educates my children enough that they would stand up for someone else's right to believe differently -- politically, religiously, or whatever. I want a school system that dares to tell children that racism is a costly form of bullying that each generation must guard against. I just want to send my eighth-grader to school without him being afraid of mockery or physical abuse if he mentions he has listened to the President of the United States talk about trying to do your best in school.

Comments

[Don]

Bullying is wrong. I believe that. But is the object to hear the voice of all participants in the political debate or just clear the path so that all will hear the voice that you approve. Where is the outrage when attempts are made to silence those who disagree with your guy? Even in an article espousing the rights of the minority party, you couldn't resist tossing in a couple of jabs at your political opponents. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech for all, not just your guy. I'd love to see this adamant of a defense if the roles were reversed.

[Gideon Burton]

I believe adults and children alike can and should have strong political views, and we must have some tolerance for people being outspoken or even rude regarding other points of view. But in school people should be required to respect elected officials while still being able to disagree with them. I strongly disagree with Pres. Obama's fiscal decisions, but I respect his office. I deplored Pres. Bush's foreign policy, but I respected his office (and taught my kids to do the same). As a school teacher, I require my students to write arguments on both sides of the same question so that they build rational tolerance for alternative viewpoints. Political bullying isn't about rational debate; it's about short-circuiting the process. I'm grateful that you expressed an alternative point of view. If I were a political bully I wouldn't tolerate it or I would mock or intimidate you for disagreeing. Instead, I welcome your point of view or additional arguments.

[RecessionCone]

I moved from Provo to Berkeley a few years ago. I can tell you the political climate in Berkeley is just as stifling as it was in Provo (just substitute Obama for Bush, and you'll get the picture).

My point: don't be angry at conservative Utah County. This problem is not a conservative versus liberal problem. It is a human nature problem. All of us, when surrounded by too many people who agree with us, have the potential to become paternalistic, smug, and yes, even bullies. Open-mindedness is not a natural human trait, and all of us, even liberals in Berkeley, struggle with it.

[Bruce Young]

Thanks, Gideon. As a couple of the comments have suggested, liberals and Democrats can be intolerant too, when given the chance. But the fact is that in Utah, especially Utah Valley, one party and one political persuasion heavily dominate. That means that here and now, they are the ones doing the bullying. They are the ones who can, and because many of them feel so certain they are right and see themselves so close to having complete domination, it is easy for many of the dominant persuasion to demonize, demean, and intimidate those with different views.

It’s not unlike racism. Of course, people of various races are capable of all that is good or bad in human nature. But typically it is racial minorities that face persecution, because the majority has the power to persecute and, measuring everyone against itself, easily transforms racial difference into inferiority.

With race too, Utah Valley has far to go. I had no idea it had SO far to go until I became friends with lots of the valley’s blacks and hispanics and learned some of what they, including their school children, face. Some of the incidents--I’m referring to incidents right here in Utah Valley--were so bad that when they were reported to President Hinckley, he wept. In response, he gave a stirring address in the priesthood session of General Conference, April 2006, in which he denounced racism and intolerance and mean-spiritedness in general, asking, “Why do any of us have to be so mean and unkind to others? Why can't all of us reach out in friendship to everyone about us? Why is there so much bitterness and animosity? It is not a part of the gospel of Jesus Christ.” No one indulging in such behavior, he said, “can consider himself a true disciple of Christ, nor can he consider himself to be in harmony with the Church of Christ.” He called for efforts to “accommodate diversity” and called for any who were guilty of “racial hatred,” including “racial slurs and denigrating remarks,” to “ask for forgiveness and be no more involved in such.”

I wonder if we need such an address again, this time focusing specifically on political ridicule and bullying, especially directed against children. LDS Church leaders have long tried to persuade members that it’s OK to be a Democrat, that “various political parties,” including “all major” ones, have “principles compatible with the gospel.” Church leaders have deliberately, though quietly, encouraged political diversity in Utah. Just as previous Church presidents have met with presidents of the country, President Monson recently met with President Obama. President Uchtdorf and Elder Ballad attended the inauguration, and both felt encouraged by the spirit of unity they felt there. Pres. Uchtdorf said it was great “to see a unity there that I hope will last on and continue throughout the years of this administration.” He also said, “We pray for President Barack Obama’s success in these challenging times and join in his expressions of hope and optimism.” According to Elder Ballard, “We need to exercise our prayers and help him accomplish the great objectives that he has set.” All of this is vastly different in tone and spirit from much of what is heard in Utah Valley, where the great majority claim to be Latter-day Saints.

Simply being a citizen of the United States should impel you to listen to your president with respect, whether or not you agree with him. I don’t understand why so many in Utah Valley fail to meet even this minimal standard.

[Christopher Ganiere]

Public schools are by nature political. Notice that the issue of the president's speech did not make a big splash in private school circles, or home schools - only in schools funded primarily by tax dollars, run by unionized workforces, where attendance is not voluntary.

[Anton Tolman]

Gideon, you got it right and thank you for going to the school board meeting. Don also has some valid points -- we DO want various views represented in our democracy. But this was about the President of the United States speaking to kids about doing well in school. He is the epitome of that emphasis -- a mixed-raced person raised by a single mother and then his grandparents, who became President. This was not intended as a political speech, and it was NOT a political speech. The rhetoric and inflammatory arguments against it ARE political bullying. That is has happened before or that Democrats also do it doesn't excuse it being done here and now. We can do better than this. I applaud Nebo's decision to let the kids hear the President.

[Mark LDS Music Hansen]

Our school also declined to show the speech. I thought it was a very poor judgement on the part of the teachers and the school. That act was far more partisan and political than the speech ever was. If Bush had given a similar speech, I would have also encouraged the school to view it.

In the end, we gathered as a family, watched it on YouTube, and talked about it and the fuss afterward. Which probably made for a more meaningful experience anyway.

[Appledyl]

Its ridiculous what the school district did, when they were so one-sided, just because of his party. President Obama taught good things in his lecture and for the educational district (the district the lecture is being targeted at) ignores it, the whole purpose is defeated!

[Liz]

I think that the comments that address bullying on both ends of the partisan divide are spot on. What seems to be really lacking in our society is an understanding of subtlety-- neither side seems to be willing admit that most all political issues are very complex and that there are very valid feelings and reasonings on both sides.

I have both died-in-the-wool conservative and died-in-the-wool liberal family and friends, and find that they are generally all unwilling to consider arguments from the other side as remotely valid (although the conservatives tend to be a little less willing). They also are unwilling to consider compromise of any kind a valid option, and sometimes seem unwilling to even hear (let alone listen) to another point of view.

It is frustrating to see such intelligent people reduce such complex issues to such simplistic principles and not be willing to budge. I think it's this closed-minded tendency that comes across as bullying, especially since most people (at least that I know) that act in such a way have not really done enough reading, research and real hard-core contemplating about the issues to have such set opinions. I really feel that if you're going to take such a strong position on an issue, you better have done the research and sorting through the different views (on both sides).