Hard to Muzzle (Page 2)

The Return of Lynne Cheney

By Jon Wiener

This article appeared in the October 2, 2000 edition of The Nation.

September 27, 2000

When Cheney moved to the American Enterprise Institute in 1993, she became a director of the defense contractor Lockheed Martin and did a lot of writing that reveals how far she stands from this year's "compassionate" Republican theme. For starters, she called for the abolition of the agency she had headed (an argument she has now abandoned as part of her new "compassionate" mode). Her Op-Ed pieces in the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard and once in a while the New York Times all made the same argument: She would start with an outrageous incident or two--e.g., a freshman composition course at the University of Wisconsin in which, the claim went, the students were force-fed feminist theory. Then she would argue that this outrage exemplified what was typical in today's schools as a result of the domination of left-wing cultural relativists. Whether she was going after multiculturalism in high schools, "political correctness" in universities or vocational education for women, her point was the same: She was the brave and lonely defender of truth in a world dominated by leftists--leftists who don't believe there is any truth.

» More

Her biggest campaign--the one that got the 99-to-1 vote in the Senate--was her 1994 battle against the National History Standards, which were published that year with NEH funding. She's still talking about it: As recently as July 30 she told Cokie Roberts on ABC's This Week that the standards were "a disaster." Cheney launched her campaign against the standards in a Wall Street Journal Op-Ed piece, in which she argued that they included too much about women and minorities and not enough about white men. She said Harriet Tubman, the African-American who led escaping slaves to freedom before the Civil War, was "mentioned six times," while George Washington "makes only a fleeting appearance" and Thomas Edison gets no mention at all.

With impressive speed, the right-wing network had the story all over the media. Rush Limbaugh yelled that the standards should be "flushed down the sewer of multiculturalism." Charles Krauthammer repeated Cheney's charges in the Washington Post, as did John Leo in U.S. News & World Report. The headlines of both columns referred to the "hijacking" of American history. Time and Newsweek then picked up the "controversy."

What were these evil standards? They were the product of more than two years of meetings involving 6,000 teachers, administrators, scholars and parents, along with thirty-five organizations, ranging from the American Association of School Librarians to the National Council for the Social Studies. The most cursory look at the published standards suggests that the assault by Cheney & Co. was a fraud. White males can be found on virtually every page of the document. For example, on page 76: For the revolution of 1776, students are asked to "analyze the character and roles of the military, political, and diplomatic leaders who helped forge the American victory." If you don't discuss George Washington, you flunk. Page 138: For the period 1870-1900, "how did inventions change the way people lived and worked? Who were the great inventors of the period?" If you don't discuss Edison, you're in trouble.

Cheney complained about too much favorable attention to the experiences of women and minorities, but it's hard to see why (I criticized her in an article at the time, which Cheney criticized in a published letter). High school students, according to the standards, should be able to explain "the arguments for and against affirmative action" and "for and against ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment," and be able to evaluate "the Warren Court's reasoning in Brown v. Board of Education." All thirty-one standards setting forth what students should understand about the American past are like these examples--completely unobjectionable. The New York Times editorial page called the standards "exhilarating" and declared that "teachers will cherish using them." The paper criticized Cheney for "misrepresentation"; you might also call it "dishonesty" or "lying."

Cheney's campaign against the National History Standards peaked during the week before Election Day in 1994--which turned out to be the day the Democrats lost control of the House, opening the way to the Gingrichites. Cheney used the standards to call for the abolition of the NEH, an item on Gingrich's agenda. Many of her other stories of educational outrage, Jonathan Chait suggested in The American Prospect last year, spoke to the fears of the Christian right, a crucial base for the Republican "revolution."

About Jon Wiener

Jon Wiener started writing for The Nation in 1984. Since then he's written more than 100 stories and reviews for the magazine, many about American history, university politics, and California life. He's also professor of history at the University of California, Irvine, and a Los Angeles radio host. His most recent book is Historians in Trouble: Plagiarism, Fraud, and Politics in the Ivory Tower (New Press). more...
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Blogs

» Editor's Cut

Around the Nation | The week we went Rouge. Plus, Moyers on Afghanistan.
Katrina vanden Heuvel
46 Comments

» The Beat

Health Care Bill Advances, as Harry Reid Trumps Sarah Palin | The death panelist-in-chief rallied her followers to "KILL THE BILL." But 60 senators decided to follow the real leader.
John Nichols
55 Comments

» The Notion

Palin as the Church Lady | Going Rogue book tour brings passive-aggressive rightwing Christianity to the fore.
Leslie Savan
144 Comments

» Altercation

Slacker Friday | The "Second Amendment" sale; the raving paranoids of the right.
Eric Alterman

» The Dreyfuss Report

Chongqing: Socialism in One City | China is managing the most important event in the world: the urbanization of half a billion people. Fast.
Robert Dreyfuss
218 Comments

» Act Now!

Toward Copenhagen | A guide to joining the movement against climate change.
Peter Rothberg
75 Comments