The other less important reasons given for the Texan Revolution were that American Settlers were unwilling to abide by Mexican law and refused to assimilate into Mexican culture. The whole lesson was framed to leave the distinct impression that Texans were American settlers who pushed their way unlawfully into Mexican lands, saw their culture and race as superior to the natives, and fought a war against the lawful government motivated by racism and greed. Of course the lesson was more subtle then that but that was the point.
The Alamo is taught to students in Texas schools as a symbol of courage, sacrifice and the fight for liberty, but the historical facts that support this motivation for the Texan War of Independence had no place in my son's east coast classroom. There was no mention of Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna installing himself as dictator of Mexico and tearing up the 1824 Mexican Constitution, which provided for a republic, more like the US government. There was no mention of legitimate political grievances that Texan landowners had against the dictator. And there was no mention of the fact that defenders of the Alamo were of diverse ethnic backgrounds and nationalities.
The facts that support liberty as the primary motivation for rebellion against Santa Anna were conveniently omitted:
That fact that when Santa Anna seized power in 1833 and dissolved the country's legislature making himself a military dictator had NO part in the classroom discussion.
The fact that Texans of both Mexican and American decent were appalled and that Texans weren't alone in their outrage, that there were three popular uprisings put down by Santa Anna's tyrannical tactics in other parts of Mexico before the Texas rebellion was completely ignored.
The fact that the majority of Alamo defenders were not slave owners and most held views contrary to slavery was not mentioned. In fact, nearly 30% of the defenders of the Alamo were European immigrants and of those American born settlers only a quarter were from southern slave owning states wasn't mentioned. 8% of the defenders were of Mexican descent and there were 2 blacks who gave their lives in the defense of the Alamo but all such facts were conveniently omitted.
What motivation might they all have held in common that would have been strong enough for less than 200 to withstand the 13 day siege of 1500 well equipped Mexican troops? Certainly this diverse group of men fought for something gar more exalted than the desire to enslave others.
When the full historical facts are laid on the table it would be hard for students to conclude that the most passionately held grievance at the Alamo was the abolition of slavery as these fierce defenders faced certain death and would not flee.
A lesson on the Alamo that omits so many significant facts can hardly be considered educating our kids. Certainly the slavery question has muddied the image of the Texas revolution which was fought against a tyrant, but I believe the singular focus on slavery is part of a organized design to degrade patriotic love of country in the hearts of American school children. It is obvious to me that there is an agenda to lesson the honor of those who died at the Alamo and the principles of freedom they stood for.
The public school curriculum year to year sets the stage for this historical indoctrination. The foundation for this twisted lessons on the Alamo was set in my Son's 7th grade class. He was taught last year to view Santa Anna in a positive light.
General Santa Ana, "the Napoleon of the West," as he described himself, was the leading villain of Texas history. He determined that Mexico was not ready for democracy and pronounced himself dictator. Despite popular uprisings throughout his country in opposition to his brutal rule, my sons 7th grade teacher glorified him as a visionary leader who brought advancement to the Mexican economy. I see now that she was laying the foundation for the re-write of Alamo history he would be taught in 8th.
Though the Texan war for Independence was by no means singular in its purpose, our public schools are teaching that the Texans opposition to a power hungry dictator was in fact fueled by greedy slave holding white men who wouldn't assimilate into the Mexican culture. And what are the implications of such a lesson? That Santa Anna was a loved visionary leader who opposed slavery and was fighting to keep his country united, a Mexican Abe Lincoln, and dirty rotten American settlers fought to death to defend the scourge of slavery.
Santa Anna is widely held by historians as the principal inhabitant, even today, of Mexico's black pantheon of those who failed the nation. His centralist rhetoric and military failures resulted in Mexico losing just over half its territory. Thus the nation he supposedly fought so hard to "unite" he lost in war or turned around later and sold off to the US.
Santa Anna's government made and repealed slavery laws on and off for years. They never took a stand for or against it, and ironically, at the time of the Alamo Santa Anna came to San Antonio with his personal slave and used slave labor in mines and infrastructure projects as part of this "economic development" that my sons teacher applauded him for. In total abolishing slavery became a political calculation used to punish his enemies and reward his friends.
The history lessons in American public schools that make Santa Anna out to be Mexico's Abe Lincoln are par for the course these days. What could be the purpose behind teaching Gen. Santa Anna to be something he certainly wasn't if not to make centralized government good and make federalist fighters look greedy and racist?
The curriculum must hide an awful lot about the man to pull this off. Santa Anna consolidated power among the wealthy landowners and exploited the poor and American Natives, former slaves, and peasants shared little in the economic expansion of Santa Anna's empirical rule. So much for the benevolent socialist dictator who advanced his nation and fought those dirty greedy Texans.
How long will parents tolerate this indoctrination? How many parents are paying attention to what their children are being taught? And how many take the time to counter it at home?
It should be no surprise that we are raising generations of kids who have little love or loyalty to their country, who don't understand the value of a federalist democracy, and who see their country as inherently greedy and racist everywhere they look.
No comments:
Post a Comment