Community Views
Opinion
The Revisionists
And The Media
Charting The Educational
Future Of Our Children
I
he National Council of
Jewish Women, the
American Jewish Com-
mittee, the Anti-Defama-
tion League and the Jewish
Community Council strongly
support public education. Pub-
lic schools are the best able and
most likely to provide an equal
educational opportunity for all
of our children. Public schools
are the vehicle to provide citi-
zens with the ability to partici-
pate in the democratic process.
While it may fail some chil-
dren in some areas, Michigan's
public education system is suc-
cessfully educating the vast ma-
jority of students. In many
places — urban, suburban and
rural — students are receiving
outstanding preparation for
both post-secondary education
and the world of work. Success-
ful magnet schools, governed by
local school boards, already ex-
ist in many districts. Efforts to-
ward educational reform need
to be directed first and foremost
at identifying and helping those
schools where students are not
being well served.
Arguably, the greatest suc-
cess of Michigan schools is
found in how well they edu-
cate all of their diverse and di-
vergent students. No child is
refused. Are parents essen-
tial to successful education?
Yes, especially when parents
are working in tandem with
caring, qualified teachers who
deserve our trust.
Schools that are succeeding
are continually improving. The
avenues for innovation already
exist within our schools, but are
repeatedly blocked by unstable,
unpredictable funding (millage
votes, "Robin Hood" measures,
state aid acts); cumbersome, un-
funded state mandates; and the
bashing of public education for
a political agenda. Mandates
and regulations often impede
our schools; ability to progress
must be lifted. Full funding of
schools must be restored so that
education can continue to move
forward, and changes can be im-
plemented where necessary.
The autonomy of local school
boards must be preserved, with-
in a context of high standards
and expectations. All commu-
nities must be allowed to main-
tain their right to
self-determination, including
their right to tax themselves.
Market forces, vouchers, pri-
vatization, charter schools and
choice are falsely represented
as cure-alls. The definitions vary
and the goals are unclear, par-
ticularly since there is not una-
nimity with regard to the
problem. Some plans even sug-
gest ultimately overturning our
state constitution so that pub-
lic funds can flow into private
schools. As Jews, we abhor this
position. If public dollars flow
out of the public system and into
private schools, then separation
of church and state is in jeop-
ardy.
A well functioning educa-
tional system, however, is the
result of a balance between ed-
ucators, parents and the com-
munity. Free market theory has
not been documented as a viable
educational reform anywhere.
Of the nations we hold up as ex-
amples of excellent education —
Germany, France, Sweden,
Switzerland, Japan and Aus-
There are too
many unknowns.
tralia — none employ market-
drive choice.
Choice within the public
schools is one small component
of any educational reform. Ob-
jective data demonstrate that
parents, if given a choice, over-
whelmingly choose their neigh-
borhood schools. This clearly
indicates the need to concen-
trate all efforts on the local
school system.
Charter schools are now tout-
ed by their proponents as a way
to infuse choice into the public
system, largely because they
may circumvent the constitu-
tional prohibition
against the state's es-
tablishment of private
schools. Under some
plans, charter schools
would be considered to be
public schools. In the
new finance structure,
dollars would follow
each child, setting
up a pre-voucher
mechanism.
Charter schools may
or may not have to com-
ply with state regula-
tions, including teacher
certification require-
ments; may or may not
be acquired by religious
groups; may or may not
be restricted to secular
instruction during the
school day.
There are too many
unknowns in the char-
ter school concept
which may present
real dangers: It does
not address the
needs of all chil-
dren. It pro-
.'" vides an easy
structure for pri-
vatization; it has
the potential to
siphon dollars
from the pub-
lic system;
and it ob-
scures other,
better reforms that exist.
Meaningful reform will not
be divisive or competitive. It will
take a great deal of time. Stu-
dents, parents, educators, school
boards, communities and busi-
nesses must work together in
the best interests of all of our
children. Political agendas must
be separated from the debate
over education reform and fi-
nance reform; these are moving
targets, and will continue to be
through the 1994 election sea-
son.
The Jewish community,
which so highly values quality
education and democratic
ideals, believes that the debate
must move beyond politics. Our
children's future is at stake.
Ann Zousmer
president, NCJW,
Detroit Chapter
Laurence R. Imerman
president, AJComittee,
Detroit Chapter
Fran Gross Linden
president, Michigan Regional
Advisory Board, ADL
Jeannie Weiner
president, Detroit Jewish
Community Council
BERL FALBAUM SPECIAL TO THE JEWISH NEWS
Holocaust revi- they themselves decide to pub-
sionists appar- lish.
All major media outlets have
ently have
discovered the policies and restrictions on what
weakness of the news and advertisements they
Jewish estab- will publish and these are not vi-
olations of freedom of the press.
lishment.
They frequently reject ads
They know
and are taking which are not "politically correct"
advantage of the or do not meet the criteria of the
silence which meets their ongo- institution.
For instance, even the liberal
ing campaign in placing adver-
tisements in college and high Metro Times, ironically, states,
school papers that the Holocaust near its personal classified ad
column, that it reserves the right
never occurred.
In mid-October, the revision- to reject submissions to the pa-
ists "struck again," placing an ad per.
Thus, the Michigan State
in the Michigan State News.
As usual, their ad denied the News had every right to reject
Holocaust and articulated other the revisionist ad on the Holo-
blood libels which are a dese- caust and the Jewish communi-
cration not only to the Jewish ty has an obligation to make that
people but to all those who died point as strongly as it can — and
do so publically.
and suffered in that hell.
Not only did the MSU News
But where were the public
voices of protest? There were have a constitutional right to
turn down the ad, but it had a
none, and that is a disgrace.
Many Jewish organizations,
in the face of these attacks, have
argued that so-called hate
speech, under the U.S. Consti-
tution, must receive protection
as well.
The other argument raised
continually is that to attack the
revisionists gives them publici-
ty.
Neither argument has any
merit.
First, no constitutional prin- moral, political and philosophi-
ciple is involved. Hate speech is cal obligation to do so.
The revisionists are making
protected by the U.S. Constitu-
tion which means that the gov- headway in their campaign.
Polls show an ever increasing
ernment cannot interfere.
The Skokie, EL, incident is not percentage of the American pub-
applicable. There, neo-Nazis lic do not believe the Holocaust
marched in a Jewish neighbor- ever occurred.
What will happen in a decade
hood on a public street.
That is totally different from or two when survivors and wit-
a news institution deciding what nesses are gone?
As to giving revisionists more
it will or will not publish. Each
American and organization has publicity, the strategy should not
the right to do just that. The be to challenge the validity of the
general media along with spe- Holocaust. Indeed, that would
cial interest publications have be an obscenity. Those in Cana-
a right to control their editorial da who sued revisionists to prove
the truth of the Holocaust not
and advertising content.
The First Amendment pro- only demeaned themselves but
tects individuals and groups played into the hands of their ad-
from government edicts as to versaries. As they said, they had
what can and cannot be pub- never received international
publicity.
lished.
The strategy instead must be
The revisionists have a right
to stand on any public street cor- to assure that, in this case, uni-
ner and shout their obscenities. versity and high school publica-
They can even print them — as tions understand that they have
they do in the Spotlight, a right- no obligation to publish such
wing publication which denies moral vulgarities and, if they do,
the Holocaust while continually they will be held accountable —
publishing anti-Jewish and anti- and pay a price.
There is another significant
Israel stories. That is their right
argument. Unlike the commer-
under the Constitution.
But the First Amendment cial general media, university
does not relate to decisions made publications are subsidized ei-
by news institutions as to what ther totally or in part with tax-
payer dollars. Thus, a sound
Bed Falbaum is a Detroit public argument can be made that pub-
relations specialist and free- lications on campus should be
REVISIONISTS page 8
lance writer.
What will happen
in a decade or two
when survivors and
witnesses are
gone?