A Shockingly Undemocratic Democratic Party Political Event

Arizona Democratic Congressman Greg Stanton’s Town Hall Meeting on March 19, 2025

This essay originally appeared on Substack.

By Jeff Bloom

When I wrote down the title of this essay, my computer’s Artificial Ignorance put “downhill” instead of “town hall,” but then I thought maybe that was accurate, too. 

Representative Greg Stanton (D-AZ) had a “town hall” on March 19^th, 2025in a Tempe middle school gymnasium. About 650 people had RSVP-ed, and it seemed that at least that many people showed up. I sat in a chair 4 rows from the front. I wanted to sit in the bleachers, but after waiting in line for a half an hour after arriving just after the posted opening time, my lower back was spasming and needed the support of a chair. 

I had voted for Stanton. Everything I knew about him seemed pretty good, as far as politicians go, but that’s another story. I had already written to Stanton about my concerns a few weeks earlier, along with our two Senators. Senator Ruben Gallego never responded, not even with a simple “thank you” form letter. Senator Mark Kelly responded with a simple thank-you form letter. However, Representative Greg Stanton responded with a rather lengthy on-topic letter, which may have been a form letter, but at least it was on the topic I had discussed. So, I was looking forward to this event. 

I had submitted a detailed question ahead of time, as requested, but I was really interested in getting a good discussion going around the issue I described in my submitted question (details of what I wanted to explore are discussed in a few of my other essays: “Can’t Fix a Dysfunctional System from Within that Dysfunctional System,” “Life In and Out of the Box OR Red Pill—Blue Pill?” & “Run, Run, Runaway”). 

As the event began after testing the speakers, which produced a awful sound that made it difficult to hear clearly, they began with a brief introduction by someone whose name I couldn’t hear. (See photo at the beginning, which was taken at this point.) This person introduced two middle school girls to lead the Pledge of Allegiance. My first gut reaction was “Really?! But, our country in that form no longer exists…” That was clue #1 of what was going to be a bizarre couple of hours. Next up, was the principal of the school, Dr. Lucas Pugh. Dr. Pugh has an Ed.D. (doctorate of education) from Northern Arizona University. Ed.D. programs vary considerably from the equivalent depth, scope, research, and rigor of a Ph.D. program (which is the degree I have and, fortunately, the type of rigorous program I went through) to one comprised of a lot of theoretical and practical coursework and a final “project” instead of a research study-based dissertation. NAU’s program is somewhere in between, but varies considerably depending upon the faculty advisors and dissertation committee members. 

Dr. Pugh went on to welcome everyone to the school. So far, so good, but was this really necessary? However, at this point, everything went downhill quickly. But, it did set up the context for the downhill Town Hall perfectly. 

Dr. Pugh proceeded to lecture the people in attendance about the words on banners hanging in the gym, and how these words should be reflected by everyone at the Town Hall meeting. I’m sure this was almost a duplicate of the speech he makes at the start of every year  to an assembly of all of the students in this same gymnasium. People at the Town Hall were squirming uncomfortably. Everyone seemed to be in a state both of being drawn back into uncomfortable, awkward, and/or bad memories of their early schooling and of being in state of overwhelming disbelief. 

After Dr. Pugh finished speaking, the mayor of Tempe, Corey Woods, got up and gave a pep talk, during which he explained that they would be taking no questions or comments from the audience, and that they would answer the submitted questions grouped into one question that represented each set of similar questions. He went on to say that four-letter words would not be tolerated. This diatribe went on for a while, before introducing Stanton.

CONTEXT

For anyone who has gone on to graduate work in education, you should have spent at least some time within at least one course, examining the history of schooling in the U.S., as well as at least one course in curriculum theory. Both of these academic areas of study are pretty basic to understanding our present day status of schooling. And, please don’t withdraw in horror at the mention of these two areas of study. All too often theory and history are presented in ways that are beyond boring and irrelevant, but, in this case, they are pretty interesting and thought-provoking.

Thomas Jefferson was one of the major, if not the major, founders of American public schooling. Jefferson, with all of his faults, did see that a democratic republic needed an educated populace in order to survive and flourish. 

“Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day.” [[1]] 

In a way, his thinking laid the foundation for education about democracy and education for democracy… slightly different angles on related orientations of schools.[[2]]

Now, I must insert here, that I’m not sure democracy is the best form of government, especially as democracy manifests in the U.S. and other countries. But, I can’t think of another existing form of government that’s better, especially in an increasingly complex and major wicked-problem ridden world. I do think democracy has the potential to be quite good, but I don’t think this essay is the place to discuss this any further. For this essay, I’m pushing for democracy, which we no longer have, but hopefully can take back in the not too distant future. But, this latter point of taking back our democracy is relevant here. It appears that most Democratic Party legislators are living in an illusion that democracy still exists, that their jobs are still a functioning part of this democratic republic, and that they can operate as if everything is a little weird, but still reasonably normal. And, this is a huge issue! I’ll return to tie this point in a little bit, but let’s return to the educational context of Stanton’s town hall.

A sizable segment of curriculum theorists and those who draw on curriculum theory for their work in teacher education and other sub-fields, as well as a number of teachers, maintain a core focus on teaching about democracy, but especially on creating classroom and school environments that manifest and work as democratic communities (i.e., education for democracy).[[3]] And, what these historians, curriculum theorists, and other researchers and practitioners have been finding in their examination of schooling practices is at best disturbing and at worst downright frightening. 

Democracy, in Dewey's conception, involves the joint working through of the problems that arise at a given stage of society and culture, by people committed to the improvement of that society and that culture.[[4]] 

Dewey also pointed out that voting is one of the more superficial aspects of democracy. The most critical aspect, on the other hand, is engaging is conversations and arguments about the concerns of the people and the nation.[[5]] Although schooling in the U.S. began as a way of supporting informed democratic participation, by the end of the 19^th Century the battle for corporate control of education had become well-entrenched. Among those who fought for education for and as democracy, John Dewey [[6]] may have had the biggest and long-lasting impact. Even so, his efforts and the efforts of those who took up his cause, even to this day, were never able to counter the overwhelming power of corporate America.[[7]] The corporate agenda began with making schools places to educate the masses just enough to be good workers in factories. And, “good workers” were obedient. They never questioned the authority of their bosses. They conformed to the demands and expectations of their bosses and companies. These qualities of obedience, accepting authority, and conformity were and still are pretty much the opposite of the qualities that citizens should have in a democracy. The corporate and political agenda did not change all that much up to and through 2024, except in its increasing influence and control, and in its incorporation of technology (e.g., online classes and teacher-less web-based learning websites, which have minimal value, have been added to the reign of the monolithic book and materials publishing corporations and the monolithic educational testing corporations. 

The dumbing down of children in schools has been a major focus of schooling since the beginning of the corporate take-over of schooling. The rationale was, and is presently being taken to much higher levels, in order to maintain control over the population the masses had to be minimally educated without the depth and extent of knowledge and thinking skills to grasp and tackle the issues of governing and maintaining a democratic system.[[8]] We are now reaping the “benefits”(?!!!) of the century and half or so of such a dumbing down system. 

Most members of our governing bodies of both parties in the U.S. (Executive Branch, Legislative Branch, and Judicial Branch) appear not to have the requisite knowledge of democracy; of our specific system of government; of local, regional, national, and global issues (from social relations and cultures to economy to global relations and dynamics to the major environmental issues that are threatening our very survival) to effectively and equitably run our nation. And, they don’t care. They don’t care that they don’t know. They don’t care that their actions and inactions will have drastic and horrible effects of millions of people in this country and billions of people around the world. They do care about their own little cushy positions and the money they manage to amass not always discretely, but always at least unethically and probably illegally. As a result, they are afraid to make waves; afraid of losing their cushy little positions, afraid of losing votes (if they are in elected positions), and afraid of the TruskMump-Fascist-Dictatorial-Empire-In-the-Making (somehow Trump and Musk seem to be mixed and fused together in some horrid way). In other words, the vast majority of the people, in whom we’ve entrusted (willingly or unwillingly) our lives, lack empathy, integrity, and courage, which may be the three qualities most needed in the people who run our country.  

Now, let’s return to the context of the middle school where Representative Stanton held his “Town Hall.” All of the previous discussion serves as a set-up for taking a critical look at the physical context of the school and the context of the actual town hall. The following points briefly describe some of the highlights that more or less markers or signs that characterize the contexts, embedded meanings, and metacommunications.[[9]]

The Banners

• The words on these banners vary somewhat among schools, but almost all schools have such banners. They are, in part, signals to parents and visitors that these qualities are developed and cherished. They also serve to remind the children, as if they need reminding, that they need to adhere to these qualities. On the surface, they may seem to be “nice” qualities for people, especially children, to develop and manifest. But, let’s take a look at each of these words
• Trustworthiness — “Trust” is a pretty slippery concept, and may have different meanings, expectations, assumptions, and connections to personal experiences for everyone; and may have different meanings in different contexts. Personally, I can’t think of any particular instance, individual, or entity that can be completely trusted. I certainly can’t trust every thought that pops into my head. I can’t trust the driver in the car in front of me is going to drive reasonably and not make any sudden moves. I can’t trust that the government won’t seize my money, pension, home, and car. On the other hand, I had more than 99% trust that my former Doberman pinscher, would never purposefully hurt me, anyone else, other dogs, or cats. As for rabbits, all bets were off. I put a certain amount of trust in other drivers, but I look for clues that might indicate a potential breach of that trust. I trust my close family and friends as much or almost as much (😉) as I trusted my Doberman. However, I always start off when meeting new people with a fairly high degree of trust, unless there is a distinctive “sign” that I shouldn’t place much trust in them. I have trusted our government to a reasonable degree in terms of my personal interactions with them, even though I rarely agree whole-heartedly with their policies, actions, decisions, etc. Now, I have almost no trust in our government in any way. 
• Respect — This is another slippery concept. Schools tend to demand that students respect teachers, but that is not always reciprocal. There’s hardly ever any sense that people of any age need to “earn” respect through what they say and do, and how they interact with others. 
• Responsibility — “Responsibility” doesn’t mean being responsible or taking responsibility as we would normally understand it. Instead, schools tend to use such a term to mean doing what you’re told to do, such as doing homework; obeying the rules, such as walking in lines, not talking in class, etc.; and not questioning authorities, such as not questioning the actions and statements of teachers and the principal. 
• Fairness — Like the other terms, fairness is more or less in the eyes of the beholders. Is it what is fair to teachers or is it fair to a particular student? Are the rules and actions taken by teachers and principals fair? Are tests fair assessments of students knowledge? Is it fair to give a grade for a specific class, such as social studies or English, that is based partly on the quality and depth of understandings, but also on how much homework was or was not turned in, on how many days a student was absent, and on well-behaved a student was in class? 
• Caring — “Caring” is another slippery term that has multiple meanings. Does it mean caring about the school, caring about the rules, caring about other students, etc? If caring manifests in schools by teachers, principals, and students, it is almost always “caring about” some thing and sometimes “caring about” a student. It hardly ever means “caring for” others, which involves caring that manifests in one’s actions towards another. 
• Citizenship — This one is not only slippery, it’s loaded with all sorts of assumptions and expectations. Being a good “citizen” in schools usually means being well-behaved, following the rules, doing all work, following instructions, and being polite to others, especially teachers. It rarely, if ever, involves active participation in a democratic institution or context of school. Questioning authority, expressing your individuality, expressing your opinions and other ideas, and engaging with others to discuss issues within the school is just not part of what is expected by teachers and principals. In other words, students should be nice, little zombies.
• The banners are not only explicit communication about these specific mandated and expected qualities of behavior, but also implicit or metacommunications about authority and the status of students. 

What qualities are not mentioned, but could be important to nurture and manifest without posting them on signs and banners?

• Participating
• Manifesting Integrity
• Questioning Everything
• Having Courage
• Sharing in the Ownership of the School and Classroom
• Being Inquisitive
• Being Knowledge Producers
• Manifesting Equitability
• Being Empathetic
• Valuing and Developing Relationships
• Seeking Meaningful and Relevant Understandings 
• Caring about Justice and Human Rights
• Caring for Others 
• Being Creative

This brief overview of the context of the school is consistent with the corporate agenda of schooling in the U.S., and most other nations. The actual qualities and attributes of participating in a democracy are not valued, even though much talk is often spent on describing how schools value democracy. The two girls who led the Pledge of Allegiance was another paradoxical sign or metacommunication about how the school valued democracy. The pledge means absolutely nothing in this context, since everything they do in school is contrary to the meaning of the pledge of allegiance, which was especially poignant in the national political context of that moment, when people in the audience were pledging allegiance to a fascist dictatorship. 

This paradox or, more aptly, blatant contradiction, of what followed was much more disturbing. The principal lecturing the audience on behavior; the mayor lecturing the audience of what not to do and then saying that no audience questions or comments were to be taken; and then Stanton’s song and dance routine, saying what everyone  expected, and expressing how angry he was. Stanton looked more like he was running for office than dealing with the biggest threat to democracy. He talked a lot and said nothing. There were no calls for action. There were no discussions of how to organize and take action. The whole thing was about as anti-democratic as it could be. The audience was demeaned, devalued, and silenced from the get-go. 

The whole event was the typical political script. There was no human vulnerability, no caring about or for others, no invitations to participate. People started streaming out about halfway through. I left part way through that evacuation. On the way out, I stopped and talked to Stanton’s assistants. It was like talking to zombies… eyes glazed over, expressionless, not present. However, one was different, but not that much unlike a zombie. She was more like a robot with human expressions, but still adrift in some other world. They seemed to symbolize the whole event, like some dystopian sci fi movie. Zombies in a corporate run world.

When I got outside a man came out screaming and ranting about how undemocratic it was. One woman told me, “Most of the people here were aware of the news. He [Stanton] didn’t say anything we didn’t already know.” I talked with several other people, who weren’t quite so animated, but all them were some mixture of horrified, angry, disappointed, and desperate for someone to listen and take action. 

Zombies are not some horror film fantasy. They are live human beings who’ve lost their humanity and all ability to think at higher levels. They’re stuck in a world of base-level emotions, superficiality in their thinking and interactions, unable to have real relationships, unable to be open to others, unable to actually listen and ponder issues…. 

[* Sorry for the zombie metaphor, but it has been popping into my head much more frequently in the past few years, than it has in the past.]

NOTES

[[1]] From Jefferson’s letter to Chevalier Luis de Onis (April 18, 1814) as cited on page 3 in Holochak (2014).

[[2]] Urban & Wagoner (2014)

[[3]] Dewey (1916); Freire (1998); Gatto (2009); Sant (2019); Snow-Gerono (2007). Three examples of notable teachers that have tried to democratize their classroom, include, Karen Gallas (1994, 1995, 1997), Erin Gruwell (Gruwell & the Freedom Writers, 1999), and John Hunter (2013).

[[4]] Kitcher (2010, pp. 306-307)

[[5]] Kitcher (2010)

[[6]] Dewey (1900-1902/1990, 1916, 1938/1997); Kitcher (2010); Marshall, Sears, & Allen (2007)

[[7]] Marshall, Sears, Allen, Roberts, & Schubert (2007)

[[8]] Gatto (1991, 2000, 2002, 2009); Marshall, Sears, Allen, Roberts, & Schubert (2007); Sears & Marshall (1990)

[[9]] The terms, “metacommunication,” “signs,” and “markers,” are related terms that refer to a way that information is communicated implicitly. Gregory Bateson coined the terms “metacommunication” (Ruesch & Bateson, 1951/2008) to refer to the way information about information is communicated at a higher levels of abstraction. He often used the example of how during play dogs metacommunicate that their bites are play bites, not aggressive bites. Bateson also used the term “marker” to refer to some event, word, or phrase that communicates or marks a specific context (Bateson, 1972/2000). Both of Bateson’s terms relate to “sign,” which was introduced as symbol or indication of some meaning. This term is used in the field of semiotics, or the study of signs, which was founded by Charles Peirce (Peirce, Houser, Kloesel, 1992). 

REFERENCES

Bateson, G. (2000). Steps to an ecology of mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Dewey, J. (1900 & 1902/1990). The school and society and the child and the curriculum. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Macmillan.

Dewey, J. (1938/1997). Experience and education. New York: Touchstone/Simon & Schuster. 

Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy, and civic courage. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Gallas, K. (1994). The languages of learning. New York: Teachers College Press.

Gallas, K. (1995). Talking their way into science: Hearing children’s questions and theories, responding with curricula. New York: Teachers College Press.

Gallas, K. (1997). Sometimes I Can Be Anything: Power, Gender, and Identity in a Primary Classroom. New York: Teachers College Press. 

Gatto, J. (1991). Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling. Philadelphia, PA: New Society Publishers. 

Gatto, J. T. (2000). The underground history of American education: A schoolteacher’s intimate investigation into the problem of modern schooling. New York: Oxford Village Press.

Gatto, J. T. (2002). Some lessons from the underground history of American education. In R. Kick (Ed.), Everything you know is wrong: The disinformation guide to secrets and lies (pp. 274–287). New York: The Disinformation Company.

Gatto, J. T. (2009). Weapons of mass instruction: A schoolteacher’s journey through the dark world of compulsory schooling. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.

Gruwell, E., & Freedom Writers. (1999). The Freedom Writers diary how a teacher and 150 teens used writing to change themselves and the world around them. New York: Broadway Books.

Holowchak, M. A. (2014). Thomas Jefferson’s philosophy of education: A utopian dream. New York: Routledge.

Hunter, J. (2013). World peace and other 4th-grade achievements. Boston, MA: Eamon Dolan/Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Kitcher, P. (2010). Education, democracy, and capitalism. In H. Siegel (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Education. (Oxford Handbooks Online) DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195312881.003.0018

Marshall, J. D., Sears, J. T., Allen, L. A., Roberts, P.. A., & Schubert, W. H. (2007). Turning points in curriculum (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Peirce, C. S., Houser, N., & Kloesel, C. J. W. (with Peirce Edition Project). (1992). The essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings. Indiana University Press.

Ruesch, J., & Bateson, G. (1951/2008). Communication: The Social Matrix of Psychiatry. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Sant, E. (2019). Democratic Education: A Theoretical Review (2006–2017). Review of Educational Research, 89(5), 655–696.

Sears, J. T., & Marshall, J. D. (Eds.). (1990). Teaching and thinking about curriculum. New York:Teachers College Press. 

Snow-Gerono, J. L. (2007). Afterword to the Second Edition: Democratic education through curriculum work. In J. D. Marshall, J. T. Sears, L A. Allen, P. A. Roberts, & W. H. Schubert, Turning Points in Curriculum: A Contemporary American Memoir (pp. 273-277). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall. 

Urban, W. J., & Wagoner, J. L. (2014). American education: A history (Fifth edition). New York: Routledge.

© 2025 by Jeffrey W Bloom

SHARE:

PLEASE RATE: