International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 1554-5210

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2006, Vol. 2(3) 106-118

The Secret Downing Street Memo and the Politics of Truth: A Performance Text

Norman K. Denzin

pp. 106 - 118   |  Manu. Number: ijpe.2006.015

Published online: October 01, 2006  |   Number of Views: 108  |  Number of Download: 431


Abstract

Reading forward from the recently released secret Downing Street Memos, to the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act, in this performance text I critique the Bush Administration and its reliance on science, or evidence-based models of inquiry (SBR). SBR raises issues concerning the politics of truth and evidence. These issues intersect with the ways in which a given political regime fixes facts to fit ideology. Three versions of SBR are discussed, as is a model of science as disruptive cultural practice. I conclude by calling for a merger of critical pedagogy with a prophetic, feminist post-pragmatism.

Keywords: -


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Denzin, N.K. (2006). The Secret Downing Street Memo and the Politics of Truth: A Performance Text . International Journal of Progressive Education, 2(3), 106-118.

Harvard
Denzin, N. (2006). The Secret Downing Street Memo and the Politics of Truth: A Performance Text . International Journal of Progressive Education, 2(3), pp. 106-118.

Chicago 16th edition
Denzin, Norman K. (2006). "The Secret Downing Street Memo and the Politics of Truth: A Performance Text ". International Journal of Progressive Education 2 (3):106-118.

References
  1. Alterman, E. & Green, M. (2004). The Book on Bush: How George W. (Mis) Leads America. New York: Penguin. [Google Scholar]
  2. Campbell, D. & Stanley, J.C. (1963). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs. Chicago: Rand McNally. [Google Scholar]
  3. Collins, P. H. (1998). Fighting Words: Black Women & the Search for Justice. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. [Google Scholar]
  4. Collins, P. H. (2000). Black Feminist Thought, 2/e. New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  5. Denzin, N. K. (1996). Post-Pragmatism. Symbolic Interaction, 19 (1): 61-75. [Google Scholar]
  6. Denzin, N. K. (2003). Performance Ethnography: Critical Pedagogy and the Politics of Culture. Thousand Oaks: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  7. Denzin, N. K. (2005). Emancipatory Discourses and the Ethics and Politics of Interpretation. in N. K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3.edition, pp. 933-958 . Thousand Oaks: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  8. Didion, J. (2004). Politics in the New Normal' America. New York Review of Books, 51, 16 (21 October): 64-73. [Google Scholar]
  9. Edwards, R. & Mauthner, M. (2002). Ethics and Feminist Research: Theory and Practice." Pp. 14-31 in Melanie Mauthner, Maxine Birch, Julie Jessop and Tina Miller (Eds.), Ethics in Qualitative Research. London: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  10. Freire, P. (1999). Pedagogy of Hope. translated by Robert R. Barr. New York: Continuum. (Originally published 1992). [Google Scholar]
  11. Hall, S. (1996). What Is This 'Black' in Black Popular Culture? in David Morley and Kuan-Hsing Chen (Eds.), Stuart Hall: Critical Dialogues in Cultural Studies. (pp. 465-475). London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  12. Herbert, B. (2005). How Scary Is This? New York Times, Monday 20 October: Op-Ed: A23. [Google Scholar]
  13. Hersh, S. M. (2005). Chain of Command: The Roadfrom 9/11 to Abu Ghraib. New York: [Google Scholar]
  14. HarperCollins. [Google Scholar]
  15. Hillman, S. T. (2003). NIH Funded Research and the Peer-Review Process. American Sociological Association Press Release, 3 November 2003. [Google Scholar]
  16. Howe, K. R. (2004). A Critique of Experimentalism. Qualitative Inquiry, 10: 42-61. [Google Scholar]
  17. Jordan, June. 1992. Technical Difficulties: African-American Notes on the State of the Union. New York: Pantheon. [Google Scholar]
  18. Kaplan, E. (2004). With God on Their Side: How Christian Fundamentalists Trampled Science, Policy, andDemocracy in the George Bush's White House. New York: The New Press. [Google Scholar]
  19. Kittridge, W. (1987). Owning ItAll. San Francisco: Murray House. [Google Scholar]
  20. Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E.G. (2000). Paradigmatic Controversies, Contradictions, and Emerging [Google Scholar]
  21. Confluences. in N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.). Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2/e. (pp. 163-188). Thousand Oaks: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  22. Mills, C. W. (1959). The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford. [Google Scholar]
  23. Mooney, C. (2005). The Republican War on Science. New York: Basic Books. [Google Scholar]
  24. National Research Council. (2001). Scientific Research in Education. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. [Google Scholar]
  25. New York Times. (2005). Editorial Page. Faux News Is Bad News. 4 October: A-28. [Google Scholar]
  26. Orwell, G. (1949). Nineteen Eighty-Four. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company. [Google Scholar]
  27. Pring, R. (2004). Conclusion: Evidence-based Policy and Practice. In Gary Thomas and Richard Pring (Eds.). Evidence-BasedPractice in Education. (Pp. 201-212).New York: Open University Press. [Google Scholar]
  28. Rich, F. (2005a). The White House Stages Its 'Daily Show.' New York Times, Sunday 20 February, Arts & Leisure, Section 2: 1, 20. [Google Scholar]
  29. Rich, F. (2005b). Enron: Patron Saint of Bush's Fake News.' New York Times, Sunday 20 March, Arts & Leisure, Section 2: 1, 8. [Google Scholar]
  30. Rich, F. 2005c. It's Bush-Cheney, Not Rove-Libby' New York Times, Op-Ed, Sunday 16 October, Op- Ed: 12. [Google Scholar]
  31. Rich, F. (2005d). Karl and Scooter's Excellent Adventure. New York Times, Op-Ed, Sunday 23 October, Op-Ed: 13. [Google Scholar]
  32. Ryan, K. & Hood, L. (2004). Guarding the Castle and Opening the Gates. Qualitative Inquiry, 10: 79-95. [Google Scholar]
  33. Seigfried, C. H. (1996). Pragmatism andFeminism: Reweaving the Social Fabric. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
  34. Solomon, J. (2005). Truth Watch: Failed Levees Had Already Been Fortified. The News Gazette, 15 September: B-3. [Google Scholar]
  35. St. Pierre, E. A. (2004). Refusing Alternatives: A Science of Contestation." Qualitative Inquiry, 10: 130¬139. [Google Scholar]
  36. Suskind, R. (2004). Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush. The New York Times Magazine, 17 October, Section 6: 44-51, 64, 102, 106. [Google Scholar]
  37. West, C. (1991). Theory, Pragmatisms and Politics, in Jonathan Arac and Barbara Johnson (Eds.), Consequences of Theory (pp. 22-38). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. [Google Scholar]
  38. West, C. (1989). The American Evasion of Philosophy: A Genealogy of Pragmatism. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. [Google Scholar]
  39. Woodward, B. (2004). Plan of Attack. New York: Simon and Schuster. [Google Scholar]