Faced with the unsettling news emerging daily from reports on the Epstein files, President Trump is using headline grabbing actions in opposition to “Woke Culture” to divert the public’s attention. In the coming weeks, two of these recent news stories on the culture wars could have an outsized impact New Hampshire’s schools this fall, when the recently enacted Parental Rights bill goes into effect.
Last week, the New York Times reported that the Trump administration was reviewing several displays at National Parks that “disparage” Americans and contribute to the “corrosive ideology” they promote. The examples of “corrosive ideology” cited by the Times included three items at Independence National Park: a panel at the Liberty Bell describing the bell’s travels across the country during the late 1800s, a panel that also noted the racism and sexism during that time; the President’s House outdoor exhibit, which highlights nine of Washington’s slaves and describes the brutality slaves experienced on plantations; and several displays describing the federal government’s strained relationship with Native American tribes throughout its history.
These installations, which Trump attributed to the Biden administration, represent what the President sees as “a false reconstruction of American history,” a narrative a newly installed sign invites the public to re-write by weighing in if they see “any signs or other information that are negative about past or living Americans or that fail to emphasize the beauty, grandeur, and abundance of landscapes and other natural features.” A QR code on the sign makes it easy for the aggrieved visitor to file their concern.
The National Park Service’s fight against “corrosive ideology” is not limited to history. At Cape Hatteras National Seashore in North Carolina, officials are reviewing displays on how climate change is causing sea levels to rise, displays that share research findings of climate scientists over the past several decades. At Great Smoky Mountains National Park, a plaque about the harm that air pollution poses to plants and animals is under review, a plaque that notes the well-established fact that “fossil fuel-fired power plants, motor vehicles and industry are the primary sources of these pollutants.”
And Donald Trump is not only revising history and climate science to match his perspectives. He also has his eye on the future. The Guardian reported last week that the President signed three Executive Orders dealing with AI, including one that targets artificial intelligence models. In remarks that were applauded by the technology leaders in attendance at the signing ceremony, Trump decried the “woke Marxist lunacy in the AI models” his predecessor, Joe Biden, put in place to advance a “toxic diversity, equity and inclusion ideology as a guiding principle of American AI development.” Trump’s new order requires any artificial intelligence company receiving federal funding to maintain politically neutral AI models free of “ideological dogmas such as DEI,” underscoring how the government has “the obligation not to procure (AI) models that sacrifice truthfulness and accuracy to ideological agendas.”
Mother Jones writer David Corn describes how problematic this executive order on the federal government’s procurement rules will be for technology companies who view the US government as a major client. As Corn notes, these new executive orders pose difficult questions for AI producers.
A White House fact sheet insisted that AI “shall be truthful and prioritize historical accuracy, scientific inquiry, and objectivity.”
Who decides what is true? That’s the rub here. Ask an AI chatbot who won the 2020 election and what will you get? An answer that Trump claims is false. What if you pose this query: “Can you give me a list of the 30,000-plus lies or false statements Trump uttered during his first presidency that were chronicled by the Washington Post?” Or which president has had the best economy? Did Trump encourage an insurrectionist riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021? The replies will not line up with MAGA reality.
Anyone with a basic understanding of US History and current events can see that at least two of our seminal documents do not “line up with MAGA reality.” The Declaration of Independence, which declares “all men are created equal (and) endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” and the Constitution, which calls for everyone in our nation to benefit from due process of law and equal protection of law. An AI chatbot cannot alter the words of these documents any more than President Trump can alter the course of a hurricane with a Sharpie or re-write decades of climate research.
But it is possible under New Hampshire’s Parental Bill of Rights that teachers and school boards will be forced to face the underlying culture war question of who decides what is true?
Here’s why. This recently enacted law gives any parent the right to file a formal objection regarding “instructional materials and other materials used in the classroom” based on the parent’s “beliefs regarding morality, sex, and religion or the belief that such materials are harmful.” Would a district policy on the inalienable rights of LGBTQ students remain in place if it were challenged by a parent whose “belief regarding morality, sex, or religion” contradicted it? Would a social studies teacher’s lesson on the current administration’s immigration practices be allowed if a parent believed such a lesson was “harmful?” Do a parent’s beliefs regarding morality, sex, and religion supersede the rights bestowed by the Constitution?
The Judicial Branch review of this bill issued at its passage indicates that litigation of questions like these will be the answer. It stated that the bill “would result in an increase to criminal and civil complaints filed in Circuit Court and Superior Court, and … an increase in the number of appeals taken to the Supreme Court.” Hence, the Judicial Branch was “unable to estimate the number of such new complaints and petitions and therefore unable to estimate this bill’s impact on Branch expenditures in FY 2024 and each year thereafter.”
To paraphrase an old advertisement: the cost to taxpayers can be eventually be calculated. The cost to school board governance and academic freedom is priceless.
Wayne Gersen is a retired public school administrator. He lives in Etna.