Leave ‘destiny’ talk to the past

Asecretary of the Public Education Department in New Mexico — especially one from out of state — would do well to study our region’s complex history and continuing clash of cultures. If not, expect ill-advised statements, likely made from ignorance rather than animus. But they are unsettling, nonetheless. Consider Public Education Secretary-designate Christopher Ruszkowski, who recently told a charter school conference: “This is a country built over the last 250 years on things like freedom, choice, competition, options, going West, Manifest Destiny — these are the fundamental principles of this country.”

Putting school choice alongside freedom as a fundamental choice, he said: “That’s why charter schools make so much sense — high-quality options — in the context of where we are as a country.”

Yet, by essentially praising Manifest Destiny, a policy that envisioned the United States stretching from coast to coast — no matter who occupied the lands first — the secretary-designate failed to take into account the damage such a destiny left in its wake.

To indigenous peoples who were here first, Manifest Destiny was a thinly disguised argument for the racial superiority of white Europeans over everyone else. If God meant a people to occupy the land, then eliminating any other claimants could be justified — and was.

Pueblo leaders of New Mexico rightly called Ruszkowski on his thoughtless statement, and the secretary designate did attempt to clarify what he meant and also said he had reached out to tribal leaders to express remorse. In his statement, Ruszkowski said: “I stand alongside New Mexico’s children, families, educators, and tribal leaders who are fighting for schools that are both higher performing academically and more culturally and linguistically responsive.”

Those are useful steps to take, but an actual, straightforward apology, followed by face-to-face meetings with tribal leaders and educators would be useful as well. After all, the public education system in New Mexico faces the challenge of educating all children, not merely those who choose a particular charter school. Where charter-school students — aided by their families — are self-selected, public schools take all students who show up.

More worrisome than Ruszkowski’s language, however, is the message tribal leaders say they are receiving from the state education bureaucracy.

Pueblo leaders, in a My View in The New Mexican (“The legacy of Manifest Destiny: Trauma and suffering,” Dec. 24) had this to say: “In the last several months, we have been engaged in protesting proposals by the department’s Bilingual and Multicultural Education Bureau to repeal and replace essential language programs — this, after years of struggle to legitimize indigenous languages to take their rightful place among heritage languages that are in statute. We have argued that our children should have the opportunity to learn their languages as a basic and fundamental right in their education, and we have accomplished that. It is at the heart of our protest to any changes to that framework.”

Ruszkowski needs to make a better apology — publicly — and then demonstrate the he will work to ensure that Native languages are treated with respect in our public schools. They must be places where students do not have to abandon their heritage as they learn the skills required for success in our modern world.

Schools can support culture and tradition, all while providing an excellent education. Sadly, that has not been the case in too many public schools, where non-English speaking students — whether fluent in Spanish, Tiwa, Towa, Keresan, Tewa or other languages — have been made to feel ashamed. Today, we know better. Unless, as shown by Ruszkowski’s comments and the department’s actions, we have forgotten the hard-learned lessons of the past.