Debate prompts scrutiny of history
“Activists rebel over U.S. history class” (News, Feb. 21) deserves every reader’s attention. It should raise the basic question, “What is history? ” It should encourage readers to ask whether a given textbook is mainly accurate narrative about what actually happened, or ideological propaganda setting forth merely an author’s personal opinion.
Probably, no historical narrative is ever entirely free of ideology. Everyone who thinks has a personal bias. But two potent forces are discernible in contemporary history discussions. One is the force of ignorance. American history is increasingly marginalized in our high schools. It is seldom well taught, and its texts are too often scrutinized by inadequately informed school boards. The other is extremist ideology. We should be on the alert when we encounter phrases such as “anti-American,” “liberal bias” and “critical of American exceptionalism.”
JOSEPH D. HERRING, JOHNS CREEK
With taxes, smaller isn’t always better
I am a Southerner who lived in New Jersey for six years. That particular state has already done what many are working toward accomplishing here in Georgia. Almost the entire state of New Jersey is split up into tiny little towns that all have their own school districts. In 2002, when we left, the taxes on our $190,000 house were almost $26,000 per year. As a gay couple with no children, we picked a “cheap” district, and we considered it a bargain.
I realize Georgia doesn’t allow small towns to have their own districts, but it’s just one legislative vote away sometime in our near future. This entire movement feels like it’s tinged with a pinch of racism and a dash of classism, and ultimately, it’s going to hit us all in the pocketbook — rich, poor and middle class. It’s going to remove one of the most excellent reasons to live in the Atlanta area. If you like higher taxes on your homes, splitting up into small towns and cities is a wonderful idea.
DALE DUNCAN, ATLANTA
It’s silly to ask if Ala. can defy feds
Why did USA Today on Feb. 12 ask the irrelevant editorial question, “Is Alabama judge right to defy federal ruling”? This (maybe) could have been a relevant to antebellum Southern Democrats on the eve of the Civil War. But is it relevant for today’s Alabama GOP that has exceeded the procedural and policy radicalism of John C. Calhoun?
B.J. PASCHAL, PIGEON FORGE, TENN.
