Connect with us

America

Florida mandates anti-communism course for all middle and high school students starting 2026

Published

on

Starting in the fall of 2026, every middle and high school student in Florida will be required to complete a social studies course on the history of communism — a sweeping curricular mandate that has drawn both institutional backing from conservative organizations and sharp rebuke from educators and academic historians.

The curriculum has been endorsed by the Heritage Foundation, the Trump-aligned conservative think tank; the National Association of Scholars (NAS), a right-leaning nonprofit; and the Civics Alliance, an NAS affiliate.

The move builds on a 2022 Florida law that established a mandatory annual Victims of Communism Day, observed each November 7 — the date marking the onset of the October Revolution in Russia in 1917. Under that law, schools are required to devote a minimum of 45 minutes each year to instruction on what the legislation describes as “the horrors of communism” and “the destructive nature of Marxism-Leninism.” The program is also expected to instill “respect for the founding principles of the American republic,” though those principles are left undefined in the statute.

The new curriculum formally extends that single-day observance into a full course requirement. It also deepens Florida’s alignment with the Phoenix Declaration: An American Vision for Education — a document developed by the Heritage Foundation and published in February 2025.

Florida Education Commissioner Anastasios Kamoutsas, who announced the Declaration’s formal state adoption at a press conference, described it as a reflection of the state’s “connection with the Heritage Foundation.” The Declaration explicitly restricts instruction on sexual orientation, gender identity, racial inequity, and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) — subjects the state has long characterized as pedagogically problematic.

In their place, the Declaration commits to curricula that purportedly cultivate “love of country” and teach children “to seek the good, the true, and the beautiful.” Florida remains the only state to have signed the Declaration. Kamoutsas and state education officials argue that the new History of Communism Standards will reinforce the Declaration’s principles and strengthen students’ “support for capitalism and free enterprise.”

The curriculum’s rationale, as articulated in official state materials, is unambiguous in its political framing:

“Young Americans’ open affection for socialism and communism is a result of never having been educated about the characteristic features of communism in practice: poverty, oppression, and mass murder. If students in New York had been taught the litany of horrific atrocities committed in the name of communism by Lenin and Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot, Fidel Castro and Che Guevara, it would be hard to believe that Zohran Mamdani, for example, would receive such enthusiastic support.”

The state Department of Education’s press release further praised the standards, stating that “Florida is leading the nation in equipping students with an accurate and thorough understanding of how communist ideologies suppressed individual freedoms, abused power, and caused widespread suffering.”

The curriculum enumerates a broad range of topics to be covered: how communist espionage undermined US national security and continues to threaten the United States and its allies; how communists infiltrated the civil rights movement; and the mechanics of communist indoctrination.

The standards cast Joseph McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee as “champions of anti-communism.” They condemn collective ownership models, and extol the virtues of private property and individual wealth accumulation. Cuba receives particularly pointed treatment, labeled — unfavorably — as a prominent exporter of “revolutionary internationalism.”

Andrew Spar, president of the Florida Education Association, has been among the most vocal critics of the new curriculum. In a statement to Truthout, he said:

“Florida’s code of ethics requires educators to teach state standards. That’s the difficulty. Teachers already feel handcuffed. If they want to use their own resources or add supplemental reading or film, those materials first have to be approved by the district. We know that students in public schools need and deserve more than just math and reading instruction. They need honest history instruction. A democratic society requires students to learn how to think, not what to think. Debate and deliberation encourage creativity and the development of problem-solving skills. But that’s not what’s being encouraged.”

Spar also reported that teachers are increasingly anxious about the boundaries of permissible instruction. “The state should let teachers teach,” he said. “It’s concerning that the right wing says it wants to take politics out of education, but this mandate does the exact opposite.”

Spar is not alone in his objections. Despite opposition from the union and from the broader civic community, teachers and administrators expect the curriculum to be implemented at the start of the 2026–2027 academic year. Opponents nonetheless express hope that its negative reception will discourage other states from adopting the model.

Yale historian Timothy Snyder, writing on Substack, criticized the curriculum for reducing the United States to a crude superlative — “the best country in the world” — and for asserting that the US “should be defined as free and democratic regardless of what Americans or legislatures actually do.” Snyder concluded that the curriculum prevents any meaningful examination of the nation’s own history and forecloses substantive thinking about how best to protect and expand equality, justice, and freedom.

Historian Ellen Schrecker, a leading authority on right-wing political repression and McCarthyism, told Truthout that the curriculum contains numerous factual distortions requiring direct correction:

“They are throwing out random facts about alleged communist attacks on American values. What students will be taught is a vision of a nonexistent communist threat. The portrayal of an out-of-control left — socialist and communist — constantly trying to undermine American security is simply false. We also need to look at what’s missing from the curriculum. For example, in the section on McCarthy, there is no mention that people lost their jobs and genuinely suffered as a result of his attacks.”

Like Snyder, Schrecker finds the curriculum’s depiction of the United States as a beacon to the world deeply problematic. “The curriculum presents the US as largely perfect, with its great, white, male, Christian leaders, while warning that the country can be threatened by external socialist or communist forces,” she said. “There is no mention of people within the US who were oppressed or had limited opportunities. There is also a vague ‘us versus them’ framing that focuses on individual rather than collective responses.”

John White, a professor of English and Adolescent Literacy at the University of North Florida, also expressed concern about the factual claims embedded in the History of Communism Standards:

“The right says teachers shouldn’t indoctrinate students, yet they’ve produced a curriculum that indoctrinates students into a particular point of view. The curriculum conflates communism and socialism as if they were a single ideology. It ignores the fact that Joseph McCarthy is widely recognized as a discredited demagogue. Worse still, the term ‘communism’ appears to function as a catch-all slogan for any idea the right finds objectionable.”

White noted that many of his students pursue social studies education because of a genuine love of history and politics. “They don’t want to view the world through a binary lens of good and evil, or to place racism, sexism, and homophobia in the ‘bad’ category while placing blind patriotism in the ‘good’ category,” he said. “Students don’t need everything handed to them pre-packaged. This curriculum is the antithesis of good teaching because it undermines critical thinking.”

None of these objections appear to have given the Florida Department of Education or Governor Ron DeSantis’s administration any pause. State officials view the History of Communism Standards as the natural successor to Americanism vs. Communism, a mandatory course taught to Florida middle and high school students between 1962 and 1983.

That earlier requirement was enacted in the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in April 1961. Its stated purpose was to teach Florida’s children “the dangers of communism, the ways to fight communism, the evils of communism, the fallacies of communism, and the false doctrines of communism.”

Linda Camarasana, a retired professor of English at the State University of New York at Old Westbury, took that course in 1976 at a high school in North Miami Beach.

“We knew the purpose was to teach us the evils of communism and emphasize American superiority,” she told Truthout. “But at the time, North Miami had a very liberal population, and so did our teachers. We learned about the conditions that led to the Russian Revolution and caused the people to rise up.”

Camarasana said that despite the ideological intent of the course, she and her classmates came away with a balanced perspective — one that encouraged independent inquiry and research.

Both DeSantis and Kamoutsas are determined to ensure that the current History of Communism Standards afford neither students nor teachers any comparable flexibility to examine systems of government on their own terms.

As Kamoutsas declared at the 2025 press conference, halting “the resurgence of communist ideologies in the United States and around the world” is Florida’s stated educational priority. He and the state Department of Education have expressed confidence that the curriculum will soon be adopted by other states as well.

America

Pentagon and Justice Department form joint task force to combat media leaks

Published

on

US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth announced on Monday that the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice have established a joint task force as part of efforts to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information to the public.

Hegseth stated that the Office of the General Counsel (OGC) of the Department of Defense will have the authority to request and receive all information, support, and records across the Pentagon related to media leak investigations.

The Defense Secretary noted that all departments and personnel within the ministry will prioritize these requests. He added that a complete and comprehensive response to any instruction issued by the OGC under this authority must be provided within two days of the submission of the request.

“Leaked information risks lives. These new tools and processes will greatly assist us in protecting our collective strength. Our nation’s security cannot be a bargaining chip for those chasing instant headlines,” Hegseth said in an approximately two-and-a-half-minute video message published on the social media platform X.

Hegseth also stated, “Access to classified and confidential information is a sacred trust, and those who betray this trust will face the full force of the law.”

The announcement of the task force came a few days after the Department of Justice issued subpoenas to four New York Times reporters. The journalists, summoned to testify before a federal grand jury, had reported on security concerns regarding President Donald Trump’s flight to Türkiye for a NATO summit on an aircraft donated by Qatar.

The subpoenas drew sharp criticism from The New York Times and press freedom advocates. Opponents argue that the government is attempting to intimidate news organizations.

“Our journalists report the facts and defend the American public’s right to know how their government operates and how taxpayer dollars are spent,” New York Times attorney David McCraw said in a statement. “This brazen action is nothing less than an attempt to deter journalists from doing their jobs, thereby preventing the public from learning what is happening in the country.”

Hegseth has been taking steps to prevent leaks to the press since the beginning of his tenure at the Pentagon. Last year, the department launched investigations into personnel alleged to have leaked classified information to the media and threatened to administer polygraph tests.

Leak allegations were also directed at some of Hegseth’s advisers last year. Former senior adviser Dan Caldwell and former deputy chief of staff Darin Selnick are among those individuals. Caldwell, Selnick, and Colin Carroll, the former chief of staff to Deputy Secretary of Defense Stephen A. Feinberg, were first suspended and subsequently dismissed from their positions and removed from the Pentagon as part of the internal leak investigation.

A government official, speaking to The Hill in mid-March, stated there was no evidence that Caldwell, who began working at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) earlier this year, had leaked information from the Pentagon.

Defense Secretary Hegseth has previously been the target of criticism himself for allegedly sharing sensitive information. Last year, Hegseth discussed planned US strikes against the Houthis in Yemen in a Signal group chat to which an editor of The Atlantic magazine had been mistakenly added. A report published in December by the Pentagon’s Office of the Inspector General determined that Hegseth had compromised military security and violated department policy by using the Signal application on his personal mobile phone.

“It is highly ironic that Hegseth himself shared sensitive national defense information with his wife over Signal last year and faced no consequences, yet now speaks of the need to protect this information,” said former Pentagon spokesperson John Ullyot. “In 2012, CIA Director David Petraeus resigned from his post for a similar situation involving his girlfriend, and was sentenced in federal court to two years of probation and a $10,000 fine.”

Ullyot, who also served as the spokesperson for the National Security Council during Trump’s first term, told The Hill on Monday: “The President deserves better from his national security leaders. Hegseth should start holding himself accountable before holding others accountable.”

Reporters have been largely blocked from entering the Pentagon after Hegseth revoked access to most of the facility. Pentagon correspondents returned their press credentials in October, refusing to sign a new media policy that required a commitment not to solicit unauthorized materials.

Hegseth and his supporters argue that the policy will protect national security by preventing the leak of classified information. Press freedom groups and critics, conversely, characterize the practice as a violation of the constitutional rights of journalists.

Most recently, the department further restricted press access by declaring the Pentagon building a classified space and banning journalists from entering.

Offering historical references in his statement on Monday, Hegseth said, “Leaking sensitive national defense information and secrets is a betrayal of the men and women who wear the uniform of our country. This is a principle as old as the history of warfare, reaching back to the founding of our republic in the United States. George Washington himself combated leaks, insider threats, and espionage.”

Continue Reading

America

SpaceX shares fall 40% from peak to approach IPO floor as regulatory scrutiny weighs

Published

on

Shares of the American aerospace company SpaceX fell to as low as $136.78 at the trough of the trading session on Monday, July 13, representing a 5.87% decline compared to the close of trading on July 10. According to data from the US-based NASDAQ exchange, this retreat marks a depreciation of approximately 40% from the company’s historic peak of $225.64, which was recorded on June 16. With this latest decline, the company’s shares have approached their initial public offering (IPO) price threshold of $135.

As of 21:25 Moscow time on the trading day in question, the shares continued to trade at $137.4, down 5.4%.

The downward trend in the shares was driven by reports that the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had concluded its investigation into the emergencies and malfunctions during the May 22 launch of Starship, the largest and most powerful rocket model developed by SpaceX.

According to CNBC, the agency reviewed and approved the findings and corrective measures submitted by the company following its internal investigation into the incident.

The Starship project, a massive, reusable rocket designed to carry crew and cargo to the Moon and Mars and to perform other space missions, is considered one of the most critical elements of Elon Musk’s space program.

In a statement issued by the FAA, it was noted that following the approved corrective actions, SpaceX is permitted to begin preparations for the Starship Flight 13 flight, provided that the company meets all safety requirements and licensing conditions.

The FAA had previously issued a statement regarding the malfunction during the launch attempt at the end of May. The statement noted: “The anomaly occurred during the Super Heavy booster’s flip maneuver over the Gulf of America.”

The region referred to as the Gulf of America by US authorities in official correspondence is commonly known as the Gulf of Mexico.

According to official data, the booster parts fell within the boundaries of pre-established hazard areas. Six flights were delayed and five aircraft remained in holding patterns for a period due to the incident, though no changes were made to flight routes.

SpaceX shares, which began trading on the NASDAQ exchange at the beginning of June, gained 25% at the opening. As part of the initial public offering, the company offered 555.6 million shares for sale at a fixed price of $135 per share.

The SpaceX IPO was recorded as the largest initial public offering in financial history. The company initially raised $75 billion, and the total funds raised reached $85.7 billion after consortium members exercised their over-allotment option to purchase an additional 83.3 million shares.

In a statement to his employees, company founder Elon Musk stated that going public was necessary to generate capital during a phase of rapid growth. It was announced that the proceeds would be used to complete the development process of the Starship rockets, bring them to commercial readiness, and expand the Starlink satellite network.

The post-IPO surge in SpaceX shares had briefly made Elon Musk the world’s first trillionaire. Bloomberg had estimated Musk’s wealth at $1.05 trillion, while Forbes valued it at $1.1 trillion.

However, with the decline in share prices and the company’s market value that began in late June, Musk lost his trillionaire title after holding it for 12 days.

According to an analysis by Bloomberg, the decline was driven by SpaceX’s preparations to issue at least $20 billion in bonds to finance artificial intelligence projects, alongside the signing of a multi-billion-dollar agreement with AI startup Reflection AI to provide computing resources.

Assessments by S&P Global projected that SpaceX will continue to incur expenditures without generating revenue until at least 2029.

Continue Reading

America

Trump notifies Congress of renewed war with Iran, resetting War Powers clock

Published

on

US President Donald Trump has formally notified lawmakers that the country is back at war with Iran, according to an official notification sent to Congress over the weekend.

In the letter dated July 10 and obtained by Politico, Trump stated that airstrikes beginning on July 7 constituted “military actions consistent with my responsibility to protect Americans and US interests both at home and abroad.”

The notification triggers a new 60-day statutory window under which the US administration can utilize military force in the region without prior congressional approval.

The conflict, which has repeatedly paused and restarted over control of the Strait of Hormuz—a crucial chokepoint for global energy supplies—has become a persistent challenge for the Trump administration.

Trump has expressed frustration over the failure to secure a peace agreement with Iran, while congressional Republicans remain concerned about being blamed for rising fuel prices ahead of the upcoming midterm elections.

On Monday, Trump intensified military pressure on Tehran, declaring that the US would reimpose a blockade on the region, seize control of the Strait of Hormuz, and levy fees on transiting vessels.

Ceasefire process officially ends

The notification to Congress follows Trump’s announcement that a two-month-old ceasefire with Iran has officially ended.

The ceasefire, originally declared in April, had been fragile from the outset due to reciprocal attacks by both nations. Despite the friction, the Trump administration had previously maintained that a full-scale war had not resumed.

Officials from US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that US forces have struck more than 300 Iranian military targets over the past week in retaliation for Tehran’s hostile actions in the Strait of Hormuz.

On Monday, CENTCOM released a statement confirming that US forces had conducted additional airstrikes against Iran “at the direction of the Commander-in-Chief.”

“These strikes will continue to impose heavy costs on Iranian forces, degrading their capability to attack innocent civilians and commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz,” the statement read.

War powers debate

Trump had previously notified Congress that the war, which began in February, had “ended” in May, thereby resetting the 60-day statutory clock that would otherwise require the cessation of military operations without congressional authorization.

With the April ceasefire intended to run indefinitely, the White House argued that the timeline mandated by the War Powers Act had been paused.

However, anti-war lawmakers in Congress challenged this interpretation. They argued that the government was misapplying the law, noting that even when major combat operations subsided, the US Navy maintained its blockade to exert pressure on Tehran.

The new notification complicates ongoing efforts within Congress to limit military action against Iran. Last month, the Senate passed a symbolic resolution calling for an end to the hostilities, signaling waning support for Trump’s military campaign against Tehran.

The resolution, which passed 50 to 48 after four Republican senators voted with Democrats, sought to make congressional approval a requirement for continued military operations.

A similar measure had previously passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 215 to 208, also drawing the support of four Republicans.

The legislative impact of these measures remains limited, however, as joint resolutions are not sent to the president for signature, and any bill seeking to restrict executive war powers would face a certain White House veto.

In his letter to Congress, Trump emphasized that US military forces remain deployed to counter threats against allies.

“United States Armed Forces remain postured to take additional steps, as necessary and appropriate, to address further threats or attacks against the United States, its allies, or its partners, and to ensure that the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran ceases to pose a threat to the United States and its partners,” Trump wrote.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey