Over the years on listservs for fl teachers and on some unrelated places like blogs and columns, someone has criticized me for including discussions of government in my fl classes. My defense was several-fold: ACTFL standards included comparisons of culture as well as of language; many social studies teachers were unequipped to discuss the government cum culture of Russia, of Ancient Rome, or of the many Latin-American states; and the cultural context of the language demanded an understanding of the realm in which speakers live and lived. The latter is especially pertinent to literature and literary figures. How explain the autocratic rule characteristic of Russia? The caudillismo of Latin-American countries? The Founding Fathers’ frequent references to the Republic of Ancient Rome and the democracy of the Greek polis?
Enough said, one would think. But the criticisms still abound, one just recently from a Spanish teacher. Was I personally motivated? Yes, of course. Many teachers do not know much about the politics of the countries their L2 is spoken in. I do cringe when I read what I read recently from an American residing in Hungary, describing the laid-back life-style there while ignoring the thrust toward autocracy there (see David Frum’s description of that in the March 2017 issue of The Atlantic). What will you do when those laid-back Hungarians react to the critical response to them on the part of foreigners? Right now, you can leave and take your money with you; that can change under an autocrat.
Well, nowadays I have a crushing one word response to those critics of mine:
Trump.
Pat’s Polemics
On-going brilliance
