Opinion | A nasty turn in the classroom wars invades an affluent N.J. suburb

But there’s another story threaded throughout all this that has been overlooked: These campaigns appear increasingly designed to chill critical perspectives on current events in a way that undermines public education’s core goal of developing civically informed democratic citizens.

A battle has erupted in affluent Bernards Township, N.J., over the local school board’s recent decision to reject inclusion of a sociology textbook. The move — engineered by a right-leaning majority that recently won power on the board — angered parents who discerned an effort to inject a right-wing slant into the teaching of basic realities about contemporary America.

The objections to the tome — a widely used textbook called “The Real World: An Introduction to Sociology” — are striking. They take issue with renderings of recent major news events that are largely dispassionate and factually correct.

At a recent meeting, the board debated numerous such objections from its members. One was to the book’s accurate description of Michael Brown, who was killed by police in 2014, as an “unarmed Black teenager.” The book’s offense? It didn’t also describe Brown’s size and weight, or that he was scuffling with a cop when killed — apparently failing to depict the victim as threatening enough.

Another objection: The book’s description of antifa didn’t mention its supposed role in the “2020 riots.” The book already describes antifa as “far left” and “extreme,” but apparently kids must also be taught wildly absurd right-wing agitprop suggesting that America is overrun with violent leftist terrorism.

Yet another objection faulted the book’s claim that research shows voter fraud is “rare and that when it does occur it is often perpetuated by Republicans.” That statement is true. But the member objected to the book’s citation of reports from The Post and Reuters to back them up, even though they rely on academic and official sources.

Such offenses led objectors to absurdly label the book as “factually destitute” and “trash.” One even preposterously argued that material such as this is why conservative students feel ostracized.

In the meeting, some board members aggressively defended the book. They noted that nixing it would deprive other parents of the choice of having their kids learn the book’s lessons. They said overriding educators who had approved the book — which is used in other New Jersey districts — devalued those educators’ professionalism.

To some liberal parents in this district west of New York City, all this offends their values. They see it as a violation of school district policy that seeks to encourage kids’ exposure to controversial, challenging issues — which, believe it or not, these parents take pride in.

“The sense of outrage and frustration is palpable,” Neslihan Montag, a local parent, told me. “The whole point of the sociology curriculum is to promote critical thinking and debate,” she added, noting that the decision “leaves our entire community in a horrible position.”

This reflects a larger pattern, notes Tom Malinowski, a former Democratic congressman who runs a New Jersey-based political action committee focused on local education battles. Undermining the civic education of future adult citizens is itself the goal, he said: “Right-wing groups often start by objecting to references to sex and quickly move on to attacking civics.”

Supporting the point, PEN America has documented an increase in state laws that place limits on K-12 pedagogy about contemporary America by, say, restricting how racism in the present is discussed or mandating promotion of positive views of U.S. society. PEN concluded this threatens public education’s mission of equipping future members of a democratic society to engage critical perspectives on it.

Education writer Jennifer Berkshire believes all this is meant to render educators fearful of conveying warts-and-all civic realities to students. Around the country, right-wing activists are pushing curriculums that embody their account of “patriotism.” The goal, Berkshire says, is to “impose a conservative view on the treatment of current events,” to “change the political orientation of young people.”

There’s another side to this story, as the parental backlash to this New Jersey decision shows. Surprising outbreaks of local resistance are challenging this sort of reactionary culture-warring all over the country. That’s likely to escalate.

“So long as normal Americans get organized at the local level against this nonsense,” Malinowski told me, “I’m convinced the extremists are going to fail.” As the right attacks one of public education’s most cherished missions, that resistance will only intensify.