Britain’s ruling Labour Party is planning on “decolonizing” its science curricula in order to “highlight discoveries by other cultures.”
Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson has set up an “independent review” to “refresh” what students learn and “reflect the issues and diversities of our society,” notes the Daily Mail.
The review is headed by University College London professor Becky Francis. Her so-called “academic expertise” is in “social identities (gender, ‘race’ and social class) in educational contexts, social in/equality, and social identity and educational achievement, and gender theory.”
The Royal Society of Biology praised the review, saying “It is essential that all children feel included in the sciences.” It says there should be a “no more heroes” approach to teaching science, meaning “avoiding prescriptive lists of historic figures” like Isaac Newton. The Royal Statistical Society also supports the review, calling for more focus on “gender inequalities or migration – in the teaching of maths and statistics.” The Daily Mail says that “teaching unions” also have made submissions to the review, complaining that “the current curriculum ‘prioritises a somewhat monocultural worldview.’”
The main opposition party, the Conservative Party, criticized the planned changes. “Tory MP Laura Trott, the shadow education secretary, said: ‘Labour’s curriculum changes will drive down educational standards. ‘Instead of continuing with a rich, knowledge-based curriculum which has led to our children being the best readers and mathematicians in the Western world, they are tearing it all up. ‘Pure education vandalism once again.’”
The right-wing Reform UK party also criticized the planned changes. Its deputy leader Richard Tice criticized the decolonization plans as “a ludicrous proposal from the wokerati.”
Textbooks already tend to overstate contributions by “marginalized peoples” to be woke and appease progressives.
In the United States, advocates of “decolonization” believe that Americans should return land to the indigenous peoples who once lived on the land, claiming that the land was all stolen. In reality, much of the land transferred by Native Americans to whites was purchased by whites, not taken by force.
The Native American population was so depleted by disease in the 17th Century that Indian tribes could afford to sell some of their land to whites, because they weren’t using most of it. Selling land they didn’t need made sense — they could use the money they got for the land to buy firearms or metal-tipped arrows to defend themselves against hostile tribes, and to buy other useful things, like pots and pans, cotton and wool cloth, and metal tools needed to improve their agricultural output. Transfers of land were often entirely voluntary. Legal historian Stuart Banner’s book “How the Indians Lost Their Land” explains this.
In the U.S., the Biden administration has promoted the use of “indigenous knowledge” to decolonize policymaking. The Biden administration has hosted “indigenous knowledge” seminars that warned scientists against “disrespecting” spirits. In December 2022, the Biden administration released guidance designed to promote the use of indigenous knowledge and beliefs in federal agencies’ decisions. After the administration illegally withheld records about its policies on “indigenous knowledge,” it was sued in court.
Textbooks already are woke enough, even in most red states. A textbook in the U.S., used in some red and purple states a decade ago, depicted a nation in Africa that had little effect on the world as one of the world’s three great civilizations. Its portrait of seven great Americans included relatively insignificant black and Hispanic activists in order to make a majority of the seven be black or Hispanic. It depicted the relatively short-lived Empire of Mali in West Africa as one of the world’s three great civilizations, along with ancient Greece and Rome. It ignored far more historically significant China, Egypt, India, and Persia. By ignoring China and India, it understated the contributions of Asians in world history. It featured seven great Americans, but two of them were historically relatively insignificant figures chosen to make it look like most historically-significant Americans were non-white. In addition to three white males included because they were indispensable in creating and preserving America (George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln), it also listed four black and Hispanic people, most of whom were of much lesser importance, such as a Hispanic union leader who had little effect on public policy or the course of American history.
Today’s textbooks are often much worse, due to the Great Awokening, which made the progressives who write textbooks much more obsessed with race and marginalized peoples.
