Hello, and happy Saturday!
I have had a very busy week. I pitched several pieces on Monday, two of which resulted in commissions. One of them – my first piece for a new website, which is linked below – I have been shopping for a couple weeks now. It is a piece I am incredibly passionate about, and the lack of interest from editors was very frustrating and dejecting. However, I knew that I would eventually find a home for it, and I did. Writing requires tenacity, and for every “yes” you get you hear “no” 100 times. However, it only takes one editor giving a piece the greenlight for you to get it published, so keep at it.
Sometimes, though, you pitch things or write things that never see the light of day. I have many pitches which have never turned into anything more. The second piece I offer today is one of those. It is something I pitched to a couple places last month but found no interest in. I expanded it slightly because it is something I find interesting, even if few others do.
The first piece, however, is something I wrote “on spec.” This means I actually wrote the essay without any commitment from the editor. Some publications require this. Personally, I hate it, because it means I am doing work that I may not get paid for. It also means I’m writing things that might not see the light of day.
Except, now it will.
I have this wonderful platform where I get to write what I want. So, as I was brainstorming ideas for this week, I remembered this piece that was just sitting in my “unpublished” folder. It’s on a teacher who brought her politics into the classroom, and why she shouldn’t have done that. The story is a few weeks old, but the lessons it imparts are still relevant. I added a few paragraphs, but it is basically the piece as originally written.
Anyway, as I said above, I do work that I don’t always get paid for. That’s the life of a writer. However, if you want to help me make a living, you can become a Patron for as little as $3 a month, make a one-time donation using PayPal, or buy me a book to help with my research. All contributions are greatly appreciated, no matter how big or how small!
On politics in the classroom…
Leah Kinyon has had enough.
“This is my classroom, and if you guys are going to put me at risk, you’re going to hear about it,” the high school chemistry teacher from Utah says in a video that last month went viral on social media. In the two-minute clip, Kinyon expresses her hatred for Donald Trump, her frustration at vaccine hesitancy, and her low opinion of her students’ parents.
Since the clip went viral, the Alpine School District has confirmed that Kinyon is no longer employed. Depending on your political point of view, the incident is either a rallying cry or a cautionary tale for teachers injecting their personal views into public school classrooms. To teachers worried about the virus, she is a hero. To conservatives worried about “leftist indoctrination” in our schools, she is a villain.
The truth is somewhere in the middle.
“I would be super proud of you if you chose to get the vaccine,” Kinyon can be heard telling her classroom. The pandemic, she says, “could end in five seconds if people would get vaccinated.” If they don’t, she claims, “we’ll just keep getting variants over and over.”
While Kinyon’s timetable may be hyperbolic, the science is on her side. We are currently in a pandemic of the unvaccinated, with those not vaccinated against COVID-19 making up the overwhelming majority of new infections and virtually all of the deaths. I see no problem with a teacher – especially a science teacher – laying out the facts, even ones inconvenient to certain students’ ill-conceived worldviews. Facts don’t care about your feelings, as the right is fond of saying.
I sympathize with Kinyon’s frustrations and fears about having to work in a district that does not require masks, though I question why she isn’t wearing one in the video. “I don’t have to be happy about the fact that there’s [sic] kids coming in here with their variants that could possibly get me or my family sick,” she is heard saying in the video.
She’s right to be angry. I genuinely feel for her and all the teachers out there who are being asked to put their lives on the line because conservatives have decided to wage a culture war over COVID rather than follow the science. If that is where the video ended, I would likely not be writing this article.
It is when Kinyon begins getting into politics that she crosses a line. “I hate Donald Trump. I’m going to say it. I don’t care what y’all think. Trump sucks. He’s a sexual predator. He’s a literal moron,” she tells her classroom. The shock and outrage among her students can be heard in their reactions, and this is where Kinyon gets herself into trouble.
I happen to agree with Kinyon’s assessment of Donald Trump. He is an odious, ignorant narcissist who has done untold damage to our democracy. I have spent six years saying just that, starting with his descent down that golden escalator and into the political gutter, where he dragged the rest of us. Not only is it my right to say that, as an opinion writer it is my job.
It is not, however, Kinyon’s job to say that. Her job is to teach children science, regardless of their political persuasion. Teachers bringing their own politics into the classroom alienates students who disagree with them, as I well know. I was the only openly gay, left-wing student in my high school. Coming from a town that is so solidly Republican that Richard Nixon made his first post-resignation appearance in our high school gym, it is safe to say I was as rare as a unicorn.
With such a homogenous political culture, teachers regularly felt free espousing their own political views. On finding out I am pro-choice, one teacher brought in a photo of an aborted fetus to show me. Another accused me of being unpatriotic because I opposed the invasion of Iraq. Still others had no problem telling me about their own views on gay marriage and homosexuality. I was routinely othered and alienated by the open discussion of politics by teachers, who it is worth mentioning were in a position of authority over me.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see how this could create a hostile learning environment. Teachers are authority figures, and teenagers are not necessarily mature enough, nor equipped with the emotional tools or bandwidth, to counter their opinions. Teachers presenting their politics as facts run the risk of not only alienating the children in their classrooms who may disagree with them – disrupting their education and putting them in an awkward or even detrimental position, academically and socially – but also run up on the very real concern of indoctrination.
On the one hand, obviously different political views should be taught in schools. I firmly believe that every high school in America should include a civics class – at least taken one year, but ideally all four -which teaches various political philosophies. This can include the political positions of the major parties as laid out in their platforms at the last presidential election. This would admittedly be difficult given the Republican Party did not run on a platform in 2020, but rather just ran as “Donald Trump.” But that’s a different story for a different day. The point is, there is a need for civics, even politics, to be taught in classrooms.
But this is not the way. A science teacher lecturing her students on the evils of the former president is bang out of order. She has a right to her opinion, but her students have a right to an education free of political bias and intimidation. And make no mistake, Kinyon’s tone was intimidating. If a teacher had talked that way in front of me as a student, I would have been very concerned about turning in any assignment which disagreed with her political views.
In college classrooms, professors rightly enjoy academic freedom. Students can more readily add and drop classes because a wider array of units and courses are offered. The same is not true in high school, where some classes required to graduate may be taught by only one teacher and the course catalogue is much thinner. Contrary to Kinyon’s assertion, those children have little to no choice as to whether they are there. A teacher expressing her highly charged political opinion can alienate students, creating a negative educational atmosphere.
The problem isn’t limited to Kinyon or anti-Trump opinions. Classrooms are ground zero for some of our most fraught culture wars. From mask mandates to critical race theory, educators are under continuous attack from the right for things which are frankly absurd. Kinyon’s outburst, however understandable, only serves as further ammunition for conservative provocateurs in their crusade against our nation’s teachers.
Of course, the right’s moral panic over critical race theory is ludicrous. A relatively obscure and niche legal theory about how law and public policy perpetuate inequality among racial minorities is not being taught in our schools. In fact, so specific is critical race theory that I only once encountered it outright in my academic studies: in a minority politics class, where it makes sense that critical race theory would be taught.
And while some obnoxious Robin DiAngelo “check your privilege” trainings have crept into some schools this is hardly the national emergency Fox News would have us believe. And that is not critical race theory. Not by a longshot.
Instead, critical race theory is being used by conservatives as a bogeyman and a red herring. They are using the pretense of eliminating politics from the classroom to eliminate actual history from the curriculum. That includes the history of many of the human rights abuses this country has contributed, from slavery to Indian removal to Japanese internment. These are not political issues but a matter of public record, yet conservatives are using politics to make sure America’s students never learn about the atrocities our nation has committed.
Getting into why teaching about those atrocities is so important is outside the remit of this essay, though I have touched on this in the past if you want to read my thoughts. The point is that Kinyon’s outburst is incredibly unhelpful, at best. She crossed a line.
No teacher should be punished for telling the truth about vaccines and science. I applaud Leah Kinyon’s efforts to provide facts to students who may only be hearing fictions outside of her classroom. However, no student deserves to feel alienated or insulted because of their political beliefs. As I well know, this can create a hostile learning environment and sour a student’s relationship with his or her teacher, affecting performance and dimming their desire to learn.
At a time when the right is bringing politics into our classrooms, the left must resist the urge to meet fire with fire. Leah Kinyon’s anger can be forgiven. Venting it publicly in her classroom cannot.
On Fannie and Freddie…
A few months ago, the Washington Post ran an editorial advocating the end of the federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This followed a Supreme Court decision rejecting shareholders’ lawsuit alleging the government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) owed them billions in profits that were instead paid to the US Treasury. The federal government, of course, took control of the GSEs in 2008 to protect them from and mitigate the damage of the subprime mortgage crisis.
This month marks the 13th anniversary of the federal takeover. Many, including those in the mortgage industry, agree with the Post editorial board that the time to reprivatize Fannie and Freddie has come. They could not be more wrong. To preserve the good that the GSEs have done over the past 13 years, and to prevent them from destroying the world economy again, Fannie and Freddie should remain under government stewardship.
Fannie and Freddie have always existed in a weird space between private and public ownership. However, prior to the federal takeover, they put shareholder profits ahead of responsible lending. By backing subprime loans on houses borrowers could not afford, shareholders raked in billions in profits at the expense of borrowers and the wider economy.
While this sounds like it would be good for low-income borrowers, the subprime crisis did more to hurt these borrowers who were sold mortgages far beyond what they could afford. The result was that lenders, including the GSEs, tanked the global economy. We all remember 2008. Do we really want to go back to that?
To protect the economy from the GSEs and the GSEs from themselves, the federal government assumed a conservatorship. That has been the status quo for the past 13 years. In that time, Fannie and Freddie have more than repaid their bailout to government coffers, continuing to provide a vital revenue source for the federal government.
According to ProPublica, which has been tracking the repayment of various bailouts resulting from the Great Recession, to date the government has invested $191 billion in Fannie and Freddie. However, the GSEs combined have poured $301 billion in dividends into the federal coffers. They have not repaid any of the principal, meaning that money is still outstanding – and represents an even bigger bulk of money the government is yet to reap from the GSEs. However, the profits they are generating clearly represent a more lucrative financial stream than any repayment of the principal would.
At the same time, the GSEs have proved invaluable in helping responsibly get borrowers into affordable homes. Under the leadership of Sandra Thompson (who Biden named Acting Director of FHFA, the agency created in 2008 to oversee the GSEs), Fannie will soon begin factoring positive rental payments into underwriting decisions. FHFA eliminated the adverse market fee on refinances, struck an agreement with HUD to strengthen fair lending enforcement, and proposed affordable housing goals including covering lending in minority neighborhoods for the first time.
Given the structural racism faced by many homebuyers, as well as the general classist nature of the private real estate and lending markets, the importance of Fannie and Freddie in addressing these issues cannot be understated. Public stewardship of the GSEs enables them to focus on addressing inequalities in lending and prioritize helping low-income borrowers into affordable houses. This simply will not happen if shareholder profits are allowed to take precedence, which will invariably happen should they be reprivatized.
We are only just beginning to see what Fannie and Freddie can do for borrowers, and the proposals coming out of the Biden administration are exciting. We have, however, seen what happens when Fannie and Freddie work not for the American people, but for private shareholders. A return to the pre-2008 status quo would eliminate a lucrative revenue stream from the federal government, once again put shareholder profit ahead of people, and stymie government efforts to make homeownership more affordable.
Simply put, the American economy cannot afford it.
What I’ve been up to…
In my first piece for 100 Days in Appalachia, I wrote about the recent decision by a federal bankruptcy court to grant legal immunity to the Sacklers, the family behind Purdue Pharma and the opioid crisis. I am so grateful to the team at 100 Days in Appalachia for publishing this piece, which I struggled to find a home for, but which is so important. I am very excited that it is live and encourage you all to read it, as I went to great lengths to document the Sacklers’ responsibility for the opioid epidemic.
For The Independent, I wrote about my great-uncle who is currently in hospital for COVID-19. While I pray for his speedy recovery, his illness has forced me to reckon with vaccine mandates. I was opposed to them before he got sick, but his unwillingness to take the vaccine – and the fact that he likely infected other members of his family – has made me reconsider my approach to education. Some people just won’t change their minds, and the collective health of the nation is more important than their wrongly perceived individual rights. (Also, check out my fancy new author photo.)
For Newsweek, I wrote about AOC’s dress at the Met Gala. To be honest, I thought the dress was a stupid stunt, but the outrage over it seemed over-the-top. I don’t have much more to say about it than I said in this piece, but basically this is all a distraction from the bigger issue. My main problem with the Met Gala is that it exists at all.
What I’ve been reading…
Louise Perry wrote a fantastic column taking down the Butlerian nonsense over Wi Spa for the New Statesman. Judith Butler is not a philosopher I have much time for – I think she is overrated and deliberately uses inaccessible language to mask the weakness of her arguments – but it is impossible to deny her influence on the modern left. However, her idealist notions of gender do not hold up to material reality. I agree with her on gender being a social construct, but as recent events demonstrate, sex very much is a matter of material reality.
This profile of Russian Communist Party candidate Nikolai Bondarenko in The Independent was an interesting look at a politician I had not heard of before. I don’t know a lot about Russian internal politics other than Putin basically controls everything and doesn’t like opposition, but it is nice to know that the left is still alive in Russia. Now, I’m no Leninist, but I’ll take a Soviet-style communist over Putin any day, and the look at how rough life has been for the Russian working class since the end of the Cold War is welcome – and a massive departure from the false narrative that things got better after the fall of the USSR.
Peter Fox wrote a beautiful essay on Yom Kippur – which began on Wednesday – for Newsweek. Writing about how the themes of shame, forgiveness, and redemption which underpin the Jewish holiday could show a way out of cancel culture and our unforgiving society really struck a chord with me. It’s a call for us all to be a little humbler and a little more compassionate.
Hadley Freeman is saying goodbye. Well, to opinion writing, at any rate. She has a great farewell column in the Guardian explaining that, while she will still continue to produce features and interviews, she will no longer work as a columnist. That’s a shame, because Hadley is one of my favorite opinion writers working today – firm but fair and never afraid to break with the prevailing orthodoxy. She makes some good points about the sorry state of public discourse today and how we all need to learn to disagree without being disagreeable.
What I’ve been listening to…
I was driving back from town on Wednesday listening to WDVX, a local Americana station out of Knoxville, when I heard the most beautiful cover of Snow Patrol’s “Chasing Cars.” It turns out it was cellist Dave Eggar playing on the Blue Plate Special! It’s a fantastic set, and Dave Eggar is one of the best cellists you’ll ever hear. The entire show is on WDVX’s Facebook page. (I can’t figure out how to embed it into the newsletter, so just click the link and it’ll take you to the video.)
A picture of the puppy…