California journalism students given assignment promoting COVID-19 compliance, smearing conservatives

High school journalism students in Chino Hills, California, were assigned to read a pro-compliance think piece that's critical of COVID-19 skepticism and stresses personal responsibility for the collective good at the cost of individual medical freedom.

The reading assignment was shared by Twitter account Libs of TikTok, which exposes the woke COVID-19 insanity infiltrating K-12 schools across America.

Students were told to read an Atlantic piece from Feb. 3 written by University of California, Riverside, philosophy professor Eric Schwitzgebel, who is also the author of A Theory of Jerks and Other Philosophical Misadventures.

Screenshots of the assignment were also uploaded by Let Them Breathe, a parent group advocating for the removal of mask and vaccine mandates for students.

"This is the type of response that schools give to people who have used science based research to unmask. They call them a 'Covid jerk' and they list all the reasons why they are a selfish, uneducated 'jerk' for showing their smiles," Let Them Breathe's account remarked in the Instagram post's description.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by LET THEM BREATHE (@let_them_breathe_)

Comments on the Instagram post identified the school as Chino Hills High School.

When asked what was the teaching objective of the assignment, a spokesperson for Chino Hills High School told The Post Millennial that a journalism teacher at the school provided the reading as an in-class exercise where the students dissected the writer's writing style, choice of language, and manner of presentation.

"The teacher believed the topic selected would invoke maximum participation among journalism students since it is a current subject of discussion in our community. The exercise was never intended to solicit favor for any particular side of the masking debate, but rather, to assist future journalists with assessing their responsibility of reporting news without bias," the school representative said.

The piece, titled "The COVID Jerk," explores the "boundaries of responsible behavior" and examines the shifting characterization of the "classic" stereotype.

Schwitzgebel describes the COVID-19 jerk archetype as a character who struts unmasked through the supermarket "exhaling clouds of risk on worried shoppers and employees" and "daring low-paid workers to try to enforce the new policies."

Flaunting "disdain" for the "scientific consensus," the spring 2020-era coronavirus jerk, according to Schwitzgebel, is a chronic complainer criticizing maximum-occupancy requirements and who breathes on you in the grocery store line.

Schwitzgebel defines the general term "jerk" as someone who "culpably fail to appreciate the intellectual and emotional perspectives of others around them."

Jerks "have no interest in exploring alternative views," Schwitzgebel writes. "Listening with an open mind is for other people..." he continues. "Unless in alignment with the jerk's own goals, other people's feelings, priorities, and values barely register in consciousness, or register only as targets for ridicule."

Schwitzgebel names former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as a COVID-19 jerk who made recent headlines for dining outdoors at a Manhattan restaurant after testing positive for the virus and despite New York City's proof-of-vaccination requirement mandating businesses screen patrons desiring to dine indoors.

Palin's dinner also offended federal five-day quarantine guidelines. "She did this, presumably, without their knowledge or consent" when she "exposed nearby staff and diners to what most would regard as excessive risk," Schwitzgebel lambasts.

"We are not the border police," an Elio's employee had told the New York Post.

The unvaccinated ex-Republican vice presidential nominee had eaten indoors at the Italian restaurant and returned a second time to "apologize" for the fracas surrounding the previous visit. Palin was then seated in the heated outdoor area.

Having the "wrong opinions" about COVID-19 safety is not what makes someone a COVID-19 jerk though, Schwitzgebel notes. He tells readers to stipulate "hypothetically" that the risks of COVID-19 are overblown. "Assume for the sake of argument" that COVID-19 now poses "little more risk than the ordinary flu."

"Even if that's the case and you know it, you can still respect those who disagree," Schwitzgebel says, advising COVID-19 skeptics to pull up their face masks out of "politeness" and "in acknowledgement that you might be wrong" if others express that maskless breathing puts "lives at risk." Overall, it's the "dismissive attitude" toward outside concerns that makes a COVID-19 jerk, Schwitzgebel explains.

Schwitzgebel recommends readers follow certain "principles of non-jerkitude" he concocted. "Be open," he states, even citing the decline of positive coronavirus cases. "Don't hide your vaccination status. Don't hide a positive test result."

"Respecting others" mean disclosing what risks you bring so peers can respond according to his or her own "comfort level," Schwitzgebel states.

"Adhere to rule and custom" is Schwitzgebel's second rule to abide by. "If the supermarket requires masks, wear a mask, even if you think it's silly."

Others rely on your COVID-19 compliance with policies in deciding "when, where, and how to appear in public," Schwitzgebel writes. Even if there's no explicit rule, "don't be the one person violating customary precautions," he declares.

"Be willing to compromise. Maybe you think that children should start playing together again without restriction, but another parent in your playdate group feels more cautious. Try respectful conversation aimed at compromise," he advises.

Schwitzgebel admits that those cautious about the virus who have become citizen enforcers can also be COVID-19 jerks by being too gung-ho about precautions.

But he then pivots back to telling readers to not "inflict unusual risks or costs on others" without "consent." Schwitzgebel again concedes that ordinary living entails "inflicting some unwelcome risks and costs on others," pointing to driving cars, burning firewood, hosting noisy parties, and talking on the phone in public.

"It's part of the implicit social contract..." Schwitzgebel acknowledges in the piece, appearing to further depict COVID-19 compliance as an ethical quandary.

"Go ahead and argue against mask requirements at town-hall meetings—but wear a mask if that's the policy," Schwitzgebel writes. "Petition your school to change the quarantine rules—while continuing to abide by them. You might be mistaken, or you might be correct, but either way you are respecting the people around you."

Schwitzgebel's principles do not require you to live according to a COVID-19 crazed friend's code of conduct, he interjects. If you feel comfortable eating at a restaurant or drinking at a bar, "that's your call," Schwitzgebel writes, even if you might have COVID-19 or pass the disease on to a relative, he adds.

"But if you haven't been a jerk about it—if you've been open, rule-compliant, and respectful; if you told Dad how you've been living before exposing him to the indirect risk—then that's bad luck, not an ethical slip," Schwitzgebel concludes.

After reading the article, students were asked in the assignment to answer questions such as "When is it possible to be able to believe in something without being judged for what you believe in?" and "What does freedom mean to you?"

In addition to the two highlighted questions, students were instructed to respond to the article and write at least one paragraph with an eight sentence-minimum.

Other thought-provoking prompt questions that students were encouraged to address in the assignment's written response include: "Did you like the article? Did you agree or disagree with anything mentioned by the author? Was the author fair in his assessments and advice? What do you think about the title?"

Above the series of questions, another segment of the COVID-19 assignment provides a "good" verses "bad" example, although the context is unclear.

"Why would someone choose to be a 'COVID Jerk'?" is listed a "good" example, meanwhile "Have you had COVID?" is a "bad" example cited in the assignment.

Last week, more than 300 students at Chino Hills High School protested the school's mask mandate, spending the school day maskless in the lunch area working on assignments instead of in the classroom, FOX 11 Los Angeles reported.

The student protest was in response to viral photos of California Gov. Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti not wearing masks during the NFC Championship game, before Garcetti was also photographed unmasked at the Super Bowl.

Let Them Breathe said that the school announced that students will no longer be able to do schoolwork outside. School children must either wear a mask and attend class or move to distant learning. The school is also threatening kids with expulsion, which is a violation of California law, according to Let Them Breathe.