View attachment 335405
Sorry, couldn't resist sprinkling in a little satire.
Admittedly, without being terribly familiar with Dennis Prager's content (I'm aware of who he is and have seen an interview or two he's been in), if this material is heavily biased toward a conservative viewpoint and/or employs the approaches of selective omission and abstraction, then I don't see how this is any better than what was done with programs like "BLM in School" like NYC schools did, or when a few schools in Cali and NY used "The 1619 Project" as course material.
Based on the material covered in that linked clip about slavery, it's not looking good with regards to what I mentioned above with regards to omission and abstraction.
That tactic has also been referred to as "factual, but not honest"
Putting all the emphasis on "here's the origin of the word slave" and "did you know slavery wasn't unique to America?" and "did you know slavery still goes on till this present day?" are factual, but not honest in the context of discussing American history and the impacts slavery had both at the time, and residual effects that occurred for decades and decades after the practice was legally stopped.
It would seem as if this content is no more useful to an honest discussion about slavery and it's impacts, than if I were to pop into a debate about the effects of gun violence, and start dropping irrelevant factoids like "did you know the word pistol originated in the Czech language?" and "Here's how gun powder is made"
Part of the idea behind the education system is to also educate people on things that with help them gain a little bit of contextual awareness along with historical facts (if the teacher is doing their job right). If you're simply presenting them with little random factoids (while completely ignoring social context), then you're not really giving them a comprehensive education, you're just preparing them for the Pub Quiz finals.
www.washingtontimes.com
