In a wide-ranging article for the New York Review, education historian Diane Ravitch considers what is likely to come under the Trump administration. In one section, she considers what we can learn from the priorities of the America First Policy Institute, the think tank that has been a holding space for former and future Trump administration members. AFPI has been led by Linda McMahon, the secretary-designate for education under Trump.
The AFPI is affiliated with the so-called parental rights movement, a loose association of right-wing activists who originally organized in opposition to pandemic measures such as mask mandates and school closings. As those issues faded, the movement redirected its energies to the cause of pressuring schools to remove books about racism and sexuality from their curricula and libraries. The largest of these “parental rights” groups, Moms for Liberty, originated in Florida with the encouragement of Governor Ron DeSantis and now claims more than 100,000 members across the country. The group has had quick success influencing government, starting in its home state, which in 2022 passed legislation designed to prevent teaching about sexuality, gender identity, or the history of racism. One of those laws, widely known as “Don’t Say Gay,” is officially called the Parental Rights in Education Act. Trump spoke at both of Moms for Liberty’s two most recent national conventions; when news broke of McMahon’s appointment, the group congratulated her on social media for planning “to work in service of American parents and their children.”
The AFPI’s statements offer some insight into what the parental rights movement thinks is ailing the country’s education system. “Education activists,” it asserts, “have sought to introduce factually inaccurate and damaging teachings into our Nation’s schools” and worked to wall off their handiwork from public scrutiny. Full transparency, the group claims, would reveal that “many children are being taught to see white supremacy everywhere, indoctrinated to believe America’s foundation was built on racism, talked to about sex and gender identity in developmentally inappropriate ways, and presented with other questionable curriculum.” If parents only knew what was happening, they would fight against it—but “teachers’ unions and the ACLU have fought viciously against increased transparency measures.” The AFPI therefore demands that every parent be given the right to “see all curriculum materials in every class their child attends.” Its proponents never explain what should happen when parents disagree about what should be included or excluded.
It’s not exactly indoctrination that bothers these parents: many of them, after all, want public money to pay for tuition at religious schools, whose very purpose is indoctrination. They want their kind of indoctrination. When the AFPI says that it wants “honest teaching about America’s history in our schools, not a political agenda,” it means insulating children from shameful aspects of their country’s past like lynchings, targeted murders of civil rights workers, segregation, unequal justice, and the denial of voting rights. (The group’s prime example of “radical political advocacy masquerading as ‘journalism’” is The 1619 Project, led by Nikole Hannah-Jones and published by The New York Times, which put Black experience at the center of US history, and which a number of schools have adopted into their curricula.) “Instead of promoting inaccurate and unpatriotic concepts,” the institute’s policy agenda declares, “our schools should teach the true story about our Nation’s incredible yet imperfect history.”
The AFPI feels certain that “accurate” history will produce “patriotic” citizens. If students learn “the true story” about our nation’s founding, the group suggests, they “will be proud to be Americans and will have a greater appreciation for their freedoms and the importance of defending them.” Trump, for his part, seems to agree that the less American citizens know about the country’s past, the more patriotic they will be.
