Comments Submitted for Final Draft of Minnesota Social Studies Standards

Karen R. Effrem, MD – President, Education Liberty Watch

The following comments were submitted individually at the end of the second public comment period for the Minnesota Social Studies standards as written to conform with the requirements of the online submission form.

It is a good improvement that the Declaration of Independence is now mentioned and discussed at the high school level and that the Declaration principle of popular sovereignty is also explicitly mentioned. However, I am still very concerned that other key principles from the Declaration are still missing.  The most important one is unalienable rights – rights that are inherent or God given, exemplified in the Declaration as “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  Students must understand that individual rights are not from men or governments, but are from God.

As stated in the following benchmark, the idea that the US Constitution is a changeable, living, breathing document, instead of a set of fixed principles that have made this republic the longest enduring, most stable government in history is promoted:

“Evaluate how constitutionalism and the federal, state and local governments preserve fundamental societal values, protect individual freedoms and rights, promote the general welfare, and respond to changing circumstances and beliefs.”

While there are mentions and descriptions of markets in a neutral sense or negative sense, there continues to be no mention of the benefits of free market economics and the resultant prosperity that that system has produced, especially for the United States as the freest, most prosperous, and most generous nation in the history in the world.

While capitalism is at least mentioned in a neutral context instead of a negative one as cited above in economics and world history, it is mentioned as problematic in US history.  Students are only required to compare and contrast capitalism to communism or “planned economies” and socialism. There is a moral equivalency between the various economies and political systems. There is neither guidance about the evils, deprivation, and death that communism and socialism have caused nor any discussion of the benefits of capitalism.

It is good that the Second Amendment is specifically mentioned. Although states’ rights are mentioned, it is only in the context of the Civil War. There is no discussion of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution, whereas other amendments such as the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments are specifically mentioned.  The Ninth and Tenth Amendments are the bedrock liberties that states have to stand against an ever encroaching federal government, such as in the health care or education debates, for example.

Although religious freedom is now mentioned in this draft, it is only in the context of the indigenous people in America before the European settlers arrived.  Religion is mentioned once in high school world history as a “motivation” for European “exploration and expansion.”  However, the quest for religious freedom is never mentioned at all in American history as an integral part of the American founding.  Despite the apparent and significant anti-religious bias of this committee, that is a huge historical error.

The anti-religious and anti-traditional BCE/CE convention continues.

My previously mentioned concern that the word liberty is only mentioned once and that it is not mentioned as an unalienable right or in the context of the sacrifices made in its defense remains.

Securing these inherent rights has made the America the freest, most prosperous, and most generous nation in the history of the world.  Yet the concept of American exceptionalism is completely absent from these standards.  Instead, there is an incredibly out of balance emphasis on the concept of America as an oppressive culture with an obsessive focus on slavery and the wrongs done to the indigenous peoples.

The standard, “People have rights both as U.S. citizens and as citizens of Minnesota and those rights have changed over time. (6.5.2.1.1)” is highly disturbing, because it promotes the false idea that rights are from government and transient, instead of God-given and permanent as written first in the Declaration of Independence and expanded upon in the Constitution.  The Founders’ understanding of the origin of our rights distinguishes America from every other nation in the world and is why the U.S. continues to be the freest, most stable, most prosperous nation in history that people do everything they can to enter.