William Connor's Response

My initial impression of Prager is that he is rather pompous and a seemingly racist man. One argument that stood out to me was that about "e pluribus unum." Yes, it's from many one but that doesn't simply mean that all races should assimilate to this so called American culture. America, as was intended, should be a place of individual identity, freedom, and culture shouldn't be drawn out of that. It's in no way undermining the motto. Another thing which deterred me is that he blatantly stated that "people have their priorities backwards." First off, it bothers me that people care so much about the outward appearance of another, they'll still contain the same capability. In his final sentence also, he once more he made a relatively risky assumption stating that we probably don't know the words to the pledge as if he were all high and mighty. However, the way in which he set up clubs to revolve around the arts was quite interesting. "To think beyond yourself." Then again, he somewhat contradicts himself by implementing the importance of another language which is, in a sense, identified with culture. Furthermore, I appreciate his stand against obscene language.

I don't understand how one's race could even be overemphasized in the first place. Moreover, to take pride in your ethnicity is in no way narcissistic! Culture is not based around an individual, it's a whole group of people therefore it's in no way self oriented. Why should we even have to speak about our character? Does it not come out through observation of how we react to things throughout the day and what we say without trying to directly pinpoint our characteristics?

Pragers view on the education seems quite unusual to me however some aspects I can understand. He proposes that we not implement any sort of political matters into the education. I think this would ultimately lead to a large portion of the students having no sense of nationalism or understanding of the law. I think it's incredibly detrimental to be oblivious to the laws one must abide by and those that protect them. Although, at the same time, it seems smart to base the school system on academics, however, once more students are cut of from more abstract ideas

There is no doubt that it's possible to teach in this manner, but is it right, safe? To be blind of all that the world of education has to offer seems to me as counterproductive. Yes you'll be smart academically, but in what will you implement these skills?