America And "Could Be"

Living Life Forward

I love what America Could Be,

Not in making America great again.

I want my future back –

A land where dreams progress,

Where diversity and unity are one,

Where love, not hate,

Seals common bonds.

I want my future back –

A country of infinite hope

That perches in each soul

And sings a song of new horizons

To protect Liberty and Justice for All.

I want my future back –

No longer an eye for an eye

That makes everybody blind,

But rather both truth and light

That extinguish the Dark Night.

I want my future back –

Where people never ban Imagine.

And always believe no lost cause makes right

As they lift the Lamp beside the Golden Door

And shelter the wretched and tempest-tossed.

I want my future back –

I don't believe in the Great Again.

I don't believe in America first.

I don't believe in bleached nationalism.

I don't believe in silencing principled resistance.

I don't believe in unquestioned Pilgrim's Progress

I don't believe in“Love It or Leave It.”

I just want my future back.

I love what America Could Be.

– Frank R. Thompson (June 7, 2022)

 

It's pretty deflating getting old in a country where division and politics thwart progress. As a 71-year-old man – an ex-teacher who still believes that youth are our greatest national resource – I could fall into some antiquated, stagnant version of living that finds solace in the old days. But, the truth is that reminiscing about good times of long ago does not reflect my desire to return to prevailing beliefs and customs that were once dominant. Forging a future where we both acknowledge our shortcomings and forge new and better roads must prevail.

I support positive change, not stubborn adherence. I believe the only way to live up to our true American ideal is to employ creativity and free thought that foster understandings. I am shocked at the indifference of those around me. It seems as if a political anesthetic has rendered the national consciousness insensitive to anything but slogans, flags, and scapegoating.

How well I remember the 60s when our best dreams seemed possible. Turbulence? Yes, but there was such unbridled hope too. People then – especially young people – voiced their opinions, pushed for progress, and found themselves moving toward a shared vision. Now, we have no common vision. Instead, sides want only “their way” with no compromise. Is it any wonder the future has been relegated to restoring a single vision of liberty? Partisan politics plague new movement.

What America “could be” will never “be” until the people seek a future – a better, safer, more inclusive, less accusatory time spurred by dreams – and take their attention off one-way thinking. Higher thought processes must be exercised in order to give youth muscle to do this important job.

To illustrate this, please allow me to share this report (2016) from New Jersey …

“During the public comment period at a school board meeting in Chatham, New Jersey, a parent in the local school district, Libby Hilsenrath, brought up her concerns over excerpts from Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States, alternate history text used to supplement the main textbook in advanced social studies classes.

“In particular, she cited the book’s contention that “the U.S. Constitution was not written by ‘We, the people,’ but a group of ‘50 privileged, white males whose class interests required strong central government.’” She also quoted Zinn’s ready admission that his book was 'biased' in favor of popular movements, but neglected to mention the other half of the equation: his critique of most mainstream history texts as biased in favor of institutions.

Chatham Superintendent Michael LaSusa, a former social studies teacher himself, explained that the People’s History excerpts are included in the curriculum precisely in order to push students to think critically about accounts of history, including their primary textbooks:

“The goal is primarily to teach about perspective, and that textbooks themselves are not necessarily objective works. At least that’s the position of a number of historians – that just the mere historiography of a given period has value judgments that authors apply when they are working with the sources …

“So the goal with this book and others in all of the social studies courses at the high school is to teach kids how to decipher how authors are putting together sources and how narrative is being created. That’s done with all the works.”

After the meeting, LaSusa told the Chatham Courier that he also used supplemental texts to provide alternate perspectives on history when he was teaching, including James Loewen’s Lies My Teacher Told Me and works by Booker T. Washington. He said he feels “it’s important to expose kids to multiple perspectives and have them understand that primary sources are the critical ingredient for any historian or any critical consumer of information.”

(Maren Williams. “New Jersey Parent Objects to 'One-Way Thinking' in Supplemental Text.” http://cbldf.org/2016/08/new-jersey-parent-objects-to-one-way-thinking-in-supplemental-text/.

August 5, 2016.)