Education Has Reached Peak Absurdity, But There Is Hope
By: Melissa Mackenzie (The American Spectator USA News and Politics)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
It didn't seem possible that school could get more ridiculous than me as a fourth grader hiding under my desk with a three-inch-thick textbook on my head to protect my noggin from a tornado or nuclear fallout. Yet here we are in the United States of America defending our children's right to not have their innocence ruined by gay pedophilic rape books in elementary school libraries.
Peak absurdity wasn't Silent Spring. Peak absurdity is now: children's test scores are sliding and their IQs are declining because teachers aren't teaching reading, writing, and arithmetic. Instead, teachers churn out barely literate cretins skilled in the art of condoming a banana but unable to authoritatively state that two plus two equals four.
If I recall correctly (and this was an eternity ago), my crimson-lipsticked, former cover model (she informed us while sitting cross-legged on her desk) public school English teacher played The Day After in 1983 to scare us seventh graders into a no-nuke stance. These days, she'd have rainbow flags and ally pins and secret meetings with students encouraging them to be their "true" selves and wear chest binders without telling their parents. (READ MORE: How Teachers Unions Co-Opted School Boards)
My point is that the academic world didn't turn upside down yesterday or even with Randi Weingarten's pandemic response; it's been a mess for a couple of generations. Millennial parents don't know what they don't know because of their own miseducation and couldn't correct most inaccuracies in modern curricula. What hope do their kids have? It turns out they have quite a bit. We're excited to share these hopeful changes in the pages of this magazine.
Addressing education in the print edition of The American Spectator has been a dream of mine. The various college-ranking books and magazines mostly stink. They do not address the most important considerations and options for schooling. Conservative parents — heck, good old-fashioned liberal parents — would like to have their children's minds inculcated with what used to be understood as the basics: English literacy, fluency in writing, mathematical competency, scientific knowledge, fact-based American and world history focused on the triumphs of Western Civilization, and a broad-based survey of the arts, with some practical knowledge thrown in. In generations past, a student could graduate high school with the skills to be a hairdresser, cook, or mechanic. Basically, American parents could count on the public schools to produce a literate graduate who would become a fully functional citizen and taxpayer.
No more. Parents are fortunate if their children graduate high school as agnostic heathens seeking satisfaction in the material realm. The worst public school outcomes include brainwashed potheads with purple hair seeking meaning at their local black-bloc Antifa meetup. Stupid and violent and disordered is no way to make it in the world, yet far too many products of the education system end up that way.
Turning the tide is going to take rehabilitating many formerly trusted but decrepit institutions, including religion, marriage, and medicine. Education is only one piece of the puzzle, but since so many resources both nationally and locally are spent on such obvious failure, it's a good place to start.
The articles herein are wide-ranging. We don't rank colleges and universities; we offer them and hope that you and your child will be surprised by the expansive and unique choices and find one that suits you. We likely have missed some excellent schools. We urge you to share your ideas and feedback with us.
We don't believe that there is one primary educational solution for your children or grandchildren — our writers discuss many of them, from homeschooling to online learning to classical education.
Our writers also address structural issues. Who created this dystopian education situation? Public-sector teachers unions deserve much of the blame. Randi Weingarten is feverishly attempting to rewrite history, but she and Anthony Fauci were consistent, pint-sized villains during the government's response to the COVID pandemic. Teachers unions must be held accountable not just for harming children by shutting down schools during the pandemic, but also for defending failing school administrators and teachers while leaving children behind.
We are honored to have Betsy DeVos, the former secretary of education, write about the institution she attempted to reform. Like all distant, powerful bureaucracies, the Department of Education's one-size-fits-all policies harm rather than help improve education. Ms. DeVos offers some radical solutions to the radical institutional problems she faced.
The government's failure to educate America's youth has created opportunities for real change. Parochial schools, classical schooling, and homeschoolers have remade the education landscape. The weaknesses of public school education illuminated during the COVID crisis accelerated reforms. Many states have passed school choice policies in which funding follows the student.
I grew up with the fear of nuclear annihilation — a legitimate fear, as it turns out. But most of the rest of the nonsense poured into heads in the years hence has been useless propaganda. Acid rain, the ozone layer, the Amazon rain forests dying, the mini ice age, global warming, and now climate change are used to instill irrational fear in America's youth, robbing them of hope. In the internet era of narcissism and isolation, 25 percent of Gen Zers identify as one of the "Alphabet People," as Dave Chappelle calls them. The kids are not alright.
Change happens one motivated parent at a time. Parents are running for school boards. They're challenging curricula. The pain that the public schools inflicted on American families ignited a fever that has yet to cool off. Americans are angry at what was revealed to them. Furious. And well they should be. The amount of money thrown at education in America is astonishing. The outcomes are embarrassing.
We hope that you will be heartened by what you read here and empowered to make better decisions for your family. We hope that you're instilled with hope. One of our writers is an eloquent 15-year-old who shares the joys of her unique and effective educational method. The future is bright for her, and she's not alone. That's a comforting thought.
Tags
Who is online
524 visitors
What a disaster!
America spends so much on education and those entrusted with educating have committed such treachery. The above article provides an example of what parents and concerned citizens can do to restore the education system that America once had. We need to take back our school boards. which have been infiltrated by the radical left, challenge the curricula and eventually break the back of the fanatical teacher's unions.
So you are saying we ignore the challenges facing our country? We just pretend they don't exist and we are in an endless 1950s rerun?
That is Vic's master plan. Click our heels and wish...
The challenge is defeating an ideology.
[DELETED]
Funny coming from someone's whose party members waste no time attacking and insulting any minority that escapes from the liberal plantation.
I don't belong to a party
I guess that reading the truth hurts so much that one finds removal of the words to be favorable.
You might not belong to a party, but you obviously toe the democratic party line.
I don't toe any party line.
I am a liberal.
I do not believe that most absolute statements are factual.
I believe that government exists to provide the structure for things that cannot normally be brought about by an individual, and to protect the rights of all individuals.
With that in mind, telling teachers that they cannot discuss topics for whatever reason goes against my instincts as a person in two ways: The first is, I personally do not want to be silenced or sanctioned for expressing myself in the public sphere. The second is I do not want any good ideas silenced for the simple fact of where they originate. We can and should debate whether or not these ideas are actually good or not. That is how we are supposed to get things done: Not by strict enforcement of partisan ideology, but by cooperation and compromise.
True, but it's coming from the right. From the article:
What the fuck do you think Common Core is? CC should be a conservatives’ dream - most of the states getting together and saying this is what our kids should know about our language/literature & math. Not how it should be taught. Not a Federal directive, the bipartisan consensus of most states on import aspects of education. But what happened was that some 'red meat' was needed to energize the base, it doesn’t matter that the ‘red meat’ is false and that it will be enormously damaging. So, CC is attacked by conservatives as a Federal takeover of education. Incompetent teachers' lesson plans are published as if they were the result of CC.
Conservatives also brought us the devastation of “No Child Left Behind”. The testing resulted in “score inflation, cheating, narrowing the curriculum, obsession with test scores, more time devoted to testing, less time for the arts, physical education, history, civics, play, and anything else that was not tested.” The epic disaster of NCLB was replaced by the lower yield ESSA. Still with the testing…
Conservatives have also brought us book banning, insane school board meetings with parents outraged about ‘CRT’ being taught. Of course, it’s not CRT, but manufactured nonsense, red meat, to play on the gullibility of parents. A contributing factor appears to be the snowflake nature of conservatives. They don't want little Timmy feeling bad about himself because of racism. Laughable, because I image the little black kid having to deal with actual racism.
The rest of the article is BS. E.g.
Conservatives are attacking education because the educated back liberals, from a 2009 PEW survey: Most scientists identify as Democrats (55%), while 32% identify as independents and just 6% say they are Republicans. It’s probably a lot worse for conservatives after the Trump disaster. Steven Colbert was correct in 2006 when he said “Reality has a well known liberal bias”.
I remember back when they were debating the creation of the Department of Education. The Constitution left education to the states and suddenly in 1980 under Jimmy Carter, the federal government was overseeing the funding of schools and contributing money towards it. During the debate that took place over all that federal money being spent, I recall one of the proponents blurted out "how else will we effect social change?"
The rest of the article is BS
The article nails it!
I hope your next congressional representative has purple and green hair, a nose ring, identifies as trans fluid, and carries a Ph.D. from MIT. You know, 'cause they aren't real doctors.
Aren't you satisfied with special rights, special status, a month dedicated to a sexual orientation and a rainbow flag flying over the White House & the American flag?
If you are calling the ability to show their faces in public "special rights, special status," we have a long way to go definitionally before I am satisfied.
What 'special rights and status'?
A more hyperbolized comment I have not seen in NTers in awhile.
The overcompensation of public showing we are seeing from these folks right now is epic so I’m not sure how one can view that as “not comfortable” showing their faces in public.
Yet they can never state what those 'special rights and special status' are.
They're just looking for equality. Nothing 'extra' or 'special'.
I'm calling making laws against using the wrong pronouns a felony equivalent to special rights.
What say you now?
I just did.
Post 1.1.17
Spin that away.
No, you did not, you never do.
Fantastic! Bravo! Truth and facts! A rarity 'here'.
Just because you don't read and comprehend doesn't mean he doesn't/didn't.
Love Stephen! Miss him since the writer's and now actor's strike.
Reality=LIBERAL
A felony?
BULLSHIT!
R-i-g-h-t.
Who sold you on that?
Guess you realized you aren't supposed to flag and then comment on the item you flagged. Thus, 1.1.23 went **POOF**
Isn't your comment considered taunting or bullying? Or is it meta? Or simply you being you?
Do you have nothing better to do than follow me around from comment to comment?
1.1.22
Another member of my fan club has arrived.
You replied to mine so I did the same. Is there a problem? That's kind of how an internet forum works.
LOL!
The UK version of the National Enquirer
Faux news
Really credible!
What makes you think I'll check out your faux sources?
What makes you think that anyone believes you'll check out any source?
Opinions do vary. I knew you wouldn't but being the guy I am, I thought I would give you the opportunity to admit you were wrong. Not my fault you didn't take advantage of it....................oh, and yeah, when all else fails, attack the source.
[DELETED]
The state of Michigan just passed the law.
Welcome “Democrat” control of executive and legislative branches.
This is the type of stuff that happens …..
They quitely took control of every agency & institution and now they are running roughshod over all of us.
It wasn’t quiet here. People got elected the usual way, with all sorts of promises. Many of which have already been broken.
Congress will swing back in 2024. Bank on it.
I say, "Bullshit!"
If you are referring to the Michigan hate crime update bill :
But go ahead, keep listening to places that tell you what you want to hear instead of actual and factual stories.
I say "Bullshit". If you keep calling a guy a girl continuously and they identify otherwise, it's gonna piss them off and they will feel intimidated and possibly threatened. Interpretation is everything.
It is a very hate driven bill.
Really?
I want to be called SIR at all times. Where is my equal protection?
But you are the one who is always wrong and the 'sources' were worthy of attack as they are not credible.
What nonsense.
So what?
Opinions vary...................
See comment 1.1.43 for the truth of what is in the law.
Perhaps you should brush up on the bill........................
You see the person being called she when they want to be called he can claim intimidation and PERCEIVE that violence will ensue.
It's not an opinion.
No need. I'll go with the truth, as in Thomas's comment 1.1.43
Not yours or Vic's
Perhaps you should or refer to the truth, in 1.1.43
I got that from Thomas' post. Perhaps you hadn't read it yet or just didn't recognize the text.
See 1.1.56 and then refresher may be needed on 1.1.52 and 1.1.43
See 1.1.43 for the truth
You may have the last word
For now
Are you going to do it on purpose? There does come a point when being an asshole repetitiously does become an aggravating circumstance. Just imagine someone who identifies as a man (such as yourself) being called a girly-girl repeatedly, over and over, right up and in your face by some bulky proud-boy asshole and a group of his friends. Would you feel harrassed? Would you feel intimidated?
Isn't it, though?
When people start to harras you by repeatedly calling you ma'am to the point of intimidation even when you have expressed a preference for sir, let us know.
What was his name? Friday? "Just the facts, ma'am. "
Yes, you did. But,you missed the operative conjunction "and". What this conjunction does is hook the first part to the second, so not only does the person have to feel, but also "would cause a reasonable individual to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened," thereby qualifying and quantitizing the action.
Too bad you ignored the lines after, also
Sounds like an ignorant, unnecessary law.
Making it a felony to refer to someone as they appear is ORWELLIAN at the very least. It is un-Constitutional at best.
posting the Schoolhouse Rock video "Conjunction Junction" was more of a public, educational service.
Vic, repeat after me: The legislation updating the "hate crimes" statute is not making one being an asshole and calling someone something that they don't want to be called a crime. Read my responses above and cogitate on the meaning of the words, not the meaning that FOX's Ministry of Deception is providing.
So, if one is willing to stand there and harass a person by calling them something that they do not wish to be called to the point that a reasonable person in the same situation would feel intimidated or " terrorized, frightened, or threatened" then one is committing a crime and deserves to be fined. If one is doing it because the other person is of a protected class of people as defined by the bill the government will tack on the term "hate" and fine you more.
Personally, I do not agree that hate crime legislation is useful as a deterrent, but that is neither here nor there. The fact exists that people hate some other communities and will express that hate in a myriad of ways. Your protestations that this law will somehow keep you from calling an individual whatever you wish is false and the claim that you can be fined thousands of dollars for simply using an incorrect pronoun is specious at best, perniciously misleading and patently dishonest would be much closer to the truth.
Read it again.
Personally, I do not agree that hate crime legislation is useful as a deterrent,
It certainly wouldn't end the elite left's disdain for working class America.
Your protestations that this law will somehow keep you from calling an individual whatever you wish is false and the claim that you can be fined thousands of dollars for simply using an incorrect pronoun is specious at best, perniciously misleading and patently dishonest would be much closer to the truth.
We'll see what happens, won't we?
Some, it would seem, lack the proficiency to discern clearly stated and plain language. It is that, or they are behaving in a mendacious manner, or maybe the author just got her generations mixed up when she said, "Millennial parents don't know what they don't know because of their own miseducation and couldn't correct most inaccuracies in modern curricula". I will let our readers decide.
The bill states:
As you can plainly see, if one is merely being an ordinary, everyday asshole and making a passing remark, one is just an asshole. But if one is a king-size asshole and maybe has a couple of his asshole friends along, they might have different results.
[deleted]
This legislation is prime territory for abuse. I have no doubt it will get abused by the professional victims of the world and a felony?
Do you honestly believe that is not overkill? Normal misdemeanors include: vandalism, perjury, prostitution, indecent exposure, trespassing, basic assault, resisting arrest, public intoxication, and DUI.
And this will be a felony?
Ridiculous!
A recently passed bill in Michigan would make it a felony to intimidate someone by using the wrong gender pronouns.
Michigan's state House of Representatives has passed bill HB 4474, a piece of legislation that criminalizes causing someone to feel threatened by words.
Under the new bill, offenders are "guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or by a fine of not more than $10,000."
"'Intimidate' means a willful course of conduct involving repeated or continuing harassment of another individual that would cause a reasonable individual to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened, and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened," the bill reads.
The bill specifically addresses "sexual orientation" and "gender identity or expression" as protected classes.
According to the bill, "'Gender identity or expression' means having or being perceived as having a gender-related self-identity or expression whether or not associated with an individual's assigned sex at birth."
Critics are accusing the bill of violating the First Amendment by compelling speech and outlawing basic expression of traditional, scientific view of sex and gender.
Call me sir or I'll feel threatened! / S
Read the actual bill which I provided for you, not the discussion going on around the bill.
I posted the text several times in response to this article. If you can't read and understand that text and know that my description of that text is accurate then there is not much I can do to enlighten you further.
Cling to your obviously incorrect understanding of the bill (which might not even be taken up by the Michigan State Senate) and continue to weep crocodile tears.
One can lead a Vic to truth, but only Vic can drink for Vic. And once again here it is, this time copied from your own (Yahoo) post
There are only so many ways to say, "I am right," and continually posting the same words that mean exactly what I said seems to be one of them. I won't take Yahoo.com's word for it anymore than I will take FOX'S word for it when I can see that they are, quite obviously, wrong in there conception and interpretation of the words written above.
The words mean what they mean and that is the sum total of their meaning. No more, no less.
Personally, I think that you had best take a break because you are growing more and more incoherent and incomprehensible. I used to give credit for understanding what words mean, now I am not even sure if they mean the same thing to a self confessed wordie as they do to whatever you are calling yourself these days . Oh, yeah... Sir
Here are the specific actions that are limited by this bill
I could call you "Ma'am" and not be in violation of this bill. You could call me "Dearest One" and not be in violation of this bill.
Basically, if one is not breaking another code on the books already, one is not contravening the bill (Ohhh, how I hope and pray that they will, but today I am still just a bill) ...
You guys make this way to easy and you make me want to post another School House Rock video
That is a dishonest interpretation of law!
You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it.
The way that law is written it is up to interpretation whether someone is harrassed via "words."
How long before someone files a complaint about being called the wrong name?
There it is!
Yes, Vic. It is otherwise known as harassment. And the bill stipulates that not only does the person to whom this is occurring must feel threatened, but also a reasonable person would feel the same way.
So you are still wrong. Harassment is harassment. And if one performs this harassment because a person is of a protected class, then one is guilty of a hate crime as well.
The easiest way that I can see to avoid all this is to be a polite human being.
See all of my comments. I guess that "See " them is insufficient in your case. One must see the words, read the words, understand the meaning of the words, and make an informed decision on how to act as a result of doing these things.
Be polite and courteous to others and there will be nothing to worry about.
Here is the legal definition of harassment for the state of MA.
Huh. Looks like you had better just be polite, Vic.
I mean, I have trouble figuring out why anyone would want to harass someone, and then go about repeatedly saying that their rights are being infringed for not being allowed to harass someone. That is just bizarre.
Not your interpretation of harassment.
Stop trying to criminalize speech.
It doesn't say anything about pronouns there.
Huh. Looks like you had better just be polite, Vic.
It doesn't say that either. Here is a law you need to read:
The Constitution:
First Amendment :
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
"Other governmental efforts to compel speech have also been held by the Supreme Court to violate the First Amendment ; these include a North Carolina statute that required professional fundraisers for charities to disclose to potential donors the gross percentage of revenues retained in prior charitable solicitations, 14 a Florida statute that required newspapers to grant political candidates equal space to reply to the newspapers’ criticism and attacks on their records, 15 an Ohio statute that prohibited the distribution of anonymous campaign literature, 16 a Massachusetts statute that required private citizens who organized a parade to include among the marchers a group imparting a message—in this case support for gay rights – that the organizers did not wish to convey, 17 and a California law that required certain pro-life centers that offer pregnancy-related services to provide certain notices. 18."
I am not trying to criminalize speech. You are trying to decriminalize bullying and harrasment.
I have tried being nice, showing you the error of your ways along with the method of correction. Tsk-tsk on me for attempting the impossible.
I really wish that you could see through the anger that you erect as a shield before you to the truth that is just beyond your furious grasp.
Let me try one more time.
Can you walk up to someone and address them by any word, pronoun or not? (The answer is yes, Vic. ) Under this bill you can. The criminality comes in when you get in their faces and say the word in a manner that a competent person would find to be threatening or intimidating. That is known as harassment and has been criminal for a long, long time.
The bill is about the same in intent and meaning as the Massachusetts law against harassment as far as what harassment is. Follow this link to find the MA hate crime laws and you will see (well it is written there anyway) that the law is intrinsically the same in intent and purpose. I don't hear you bitching about that law, so what is wrong with this one? (Don't say it criminalizes speech because it does not do that.)
This bill in no way compels speech. Once again with the specious argumentation. And The Congress of the United States has nothing to do with this bill in Michigan.
You absolutely are. At least be honest about your motives.
You are trying to decriminalize bullying and harrasment.
Calling a man "he", if he doesn't want to be a he that day, is not currently criminal. That's not currently illegal and you want it to be.
I gave you the full text of the bill (minus the parts that are struck-thru) in my commentary above. Try and find one mention of pronouns in the text.
I know that. But go ahead. Keep flailing at the nothingness contained in your argument. I am sure that your readers will enjoy it.
What? Are you jumping on the crazy train too?
I in no way desire to criminalize speech. I desire for harrasment to be criminal, which it already is. It matters not how you contort truth, you cannot get from the language of the bill to the conclusion that you and Vic have made that it is somehow compelling and criminalizing speech.
I have posted the text of the bill. You can go lookup the text of the bill for your own edification. The actual text, not what someone has told you it says.
No. I don't. And that is not what the bill says or does. It is really amazing to me that any person who can read and comprehend the English language could still, after reading the text of the document and in good faith, make the arguments that you and Vic have made.
Read the bill. There is no mention of pronouns in it.
AL you are doing is redefining speech you don't approve of and slapping a new label on it. It's still speech. Be honest about what you are doing.
And if one of these criminalized intentional infliction of emotional harm cases get before the Supreme Court they will be thrown out as violating the first amendment. M
There is no mention of pronouns in it.
Bur pronouns could certainly fall under the category, particularly with a prosecutor willing to play word games like claiming speech isn't speech, but harassment.
Nope, yours is a completely dishonest take on it. The reason that Minnesotans passed their new law is exactly because some people falsely believed they were now free to harass and intimate others for merely being their authentic selves.
This real problem necessitated the law!
And therein lays the issue with legislation like this. High potential for accuser and prosecutorial abuse. This legislation is going to turn into a shit-show if left to stand.
Meanwhile kids on playgrounds all over Michigan are trembling in their kicks. No more nanny nanny boo boo, stick your head in dog poo ….
The irony of comments like that can not be understated.
How so?
That statement is farcical. I am not making saying anything criminal. You can still post your silly lies about my intentions. Is that criminal? No. Is it stupid? I will let our readers decide. Trying to make something true by saying it often enough may work as far as social media goes, but when the words that you, yes I mean you, Sean, post about a written legal document that everyone is capable of looking at and clearly misrepresenting the purpose and scope of the bill, well, I cannot see why you would want to be on record as a spreader of lies and propaganda.
The bill's meaning is clear. It's definitions are the same as many others across the country and accepted by the courts through many years of litigation.
I think I will wear the pink skirt today. Just to see what reaction it gets. See if I cannot be harassed by someone hard core MAGATs.
Bullshit.
From the bill inMichigan.
This is the standard legal definition. There is no new criminal activity created by this bill. It merely makes some instances of the above conduct carry a more severe penalty.
So, go ahead and harass people if that is what you evidently want to do. If you do, you can and should be arrested. Why on earth you would want to do this I have no idea.
Which part?
That is not what people “evidently” want to do. Well, except for some people on NTers.
People are simply concerned that legislation like this will be weaponized against free speech. Empowering the triggered to use it as a weapon when not appropriate and progressive prosecutors more than willing to drop the hammer while operating a revolving door with real criminals.
And a felony? That’s real excessive punishment if I’ve ever seen it.
One of the greatest players in the world now with Inter Miami is wearing pink as is the whole team and all three of Messi's kids.
I doubt if any of the lip flappers will be saying anything to him or the team, including our dunce governor.
Morning...pretty sure I saw a pink Formula One racing car roaring around the track as well recently...
Yep that's the one..thanks for that..was starting to wonder if I was dreaming it..
In other words, glorification of the white races ascendency in America achieved by subduing people of color.
Why is it always race or Trump in your mind?
[Deleted]
Where do you see that?
What do you think the triumph of western civilization means in the context of the wiping out of Native American civilization and the enslavement and then racial oppression against the Africans in America?
When I think of the phrase "the triumph of western civilization," I think of the success of an advanced civilization and it's culture. You think of slavery and the war against Native Americans? I think we have just defined the difference between Conservative and "progressive."
Can you think of any other civilization that has contributed to so many technological, political, philosophical, artistic and religious advances?
BTW Western Civilization was the first to abolish slavery and the first to enfranchise women.
It only took hundreds of years.
And how many years before China gives it up?
Or Africa
It is more of the words surrounding "western civilization " that are the subject of concern.
Maybe some deluded souls believe that, but not too many others fall for it.
Or, you know, modern medicine, technology, unparalleled prosperity etc..
feel free to give up all those things to avoid any taint from western civilization.
More like when Western Civilization is a target of the left.
When ‘Western Civilization’ Is Code For White Nationalism
Of course it is........................./s
Btw this article was written by Melissa Mackenzie. Let us stick to her definitions.
Lol. What does the ramblings of a disgraced man have to with what I wrote?
So about the same bias as The American Spectator.
Almost............but who uses that "source"? Never seen it used............
Um..the seeded article is from The American Spectator.
Didn't see the source so I guess it's even......................thanks for pointing it out.
No, it's not even, sure you knew.
I would agree with you but then we would both be wrong........................
No, you're the one who is always wrong, not me.
I know you are but what am I ism? Funny stuff.
I guess you find the truth funny then.
You may have the last word, for now.
My great-niece does that stuff, too.
She is 4.
Oh, no, not subduing. Conquering and dominating would be more appropriate. The ascendency of the white race was earned. The white race worked, fought, and (yes) sacrificed for that ascendency and legacy.
Why do you think Europeans believe Ukraine can defeat Russia? That's the history and legacy of the white races of Europe dominating the world.
Are you bragging about it or complaining about it?
Are you saying that the civilization that quickly advances in every category, such as Literature, science, the arts and the military, will surely dominate cultures that can only advance to a canoe?
The ascendency of the white races is an accomplishment. Like it or not, that history of dominance by white races has shaped the global civilization we see today. Today the course of societal development is still dominated by comparisons of 'good' white society and 'bad' white society. The course of societal development and civilization is not being dominated by African, Asian, or any indigenous history.
It's no different than a sports team dominating a league. That dominance is earned through effort, commitment, and performance.
"western civilization" has exploited the Middle East, Africa, India, Asia, South America , the Philippines , Australia, the Pacific Islands, and North America among other locales. I suppose all that exploitation did involve a lot of hard work.
That is how it works. The white races of Europe have not always dominated history.
It seems that you ignored (on purpose?) some of the great empires of time such as,
The Mongol Empire
The Han Dynasty
The Ottoman Empire
The Persian Empire
Where are they today? There are a number of civilizations throughout history that have been been displaced (and replaced) by the civilization created by the white races of Europe. Every corner of the globe has been influenced by European civilization.
China exploited its neighbors as hase, Japan, Mongolia, Middle Eastern Empires, etc. What distingues "western civilization", was the technical ability to travel around the world and exploit populations much larger than itself.
I'll let China concern themselves with what is taught in China.
BTW, China isnt much of a multi-racial society is it?
There are enough for Uyghur genocide, racism against Tibetans, Mongols, and descrimination of Africans.
Putting aside the absolute prejudice of that comment, China has a highly diverse population. This is a list of just the Chinese ethnics groups, and doesn't cover the huge populations of EXpats like our friend Buzz.
List of ethnic groups in China - Wikipedia
Where is uk today? Nothing but a shadow of its former self and bankrupt
How many of those groups are not Asian?
That is not multi racial. Certainly not very much.
The UK is still located in Europe and still exerts influence in European affairs; even after Brexit. At present it's uncertain where the UK will fit into the restored Roman Empire of the European Union.
.06% Is huge?
Note that just one group, the Han, represent 91.1% of the total population.
So they were better at killing and genocide, something to be proud of for sure.
Yes, they did what many cultures do, only more effectively. I've never felt proud about that, but many cultures have killed on mass scale, enslaved, looted, ect. It seems to be part of human history.
and yet the seeded article calls only for the teaching of "the triumphs of Western Civilization". Is wiping out "savages" a "triumph'' ?
No, it is what it is, human history.
Why do you label the defeated as savages?
Because that is what the US government labeled us for centuries and of course the fine Christian religions were right there with the government.
Is that how you're still labeled?
Why would you agree with them?
Read the Declaration of Independence for your answer.
Right...so no then?
Not really. The Aztecs perfected mass killing on an industrial scale not rivaled until the Nazis and the sheer inventiveness used by diverse Indian tribes in torturing helpless victims is tough to match.
The Europeans won because they were better at waging war than the warrior cultures they encountered and had better immunity to diseases like smallpox.
Your making an assumption and you know what is said about assumptions. If you want to have a dicussion about it best to ask as an adult would not someone with ADHD.
The DoI describes us as savages as do many US official documents also calling us uncivilized. Now on a personal basis it's been quite some time since some chimook called me a savage but Timber Nigger was quite popular for quite some time, in fact I could take you to places in the US where those and other derogatory names are used on/about us on a regular basis.
Only surpassed by the Europeans and the forms of torture invented by the Euro's far surpassed anything that Indians did.
If you are referring to the Spanish and the Aztecs tactics and weapons made some different but the main thing that the Spanish had that defeated the Aztecs was smallpox.
As Morty would say... "easy Rick..." And pull you away from the table.
Yes, WW I and WW II had a huge impact.
Exactly, here's a short list of Western Culture triumphs and all are totally dependant on subduing people of color:
None of this would have happened without slavery.
The real reason generation Z is so concerned is debatable. I believe they are hearing about it on a daily basis in the classroom.
Yep, indoctrination and not education.
I know how scared shitless alleged conservatives are of Generation Z and their votes!
Somewhat concerned.
We do, however, know what real fear is whenever we read some of the comments on this site.
Scared shitless
They have no shit?
Yes, WE do, yours and those of your buddies.
What a steaming pile of low IQ paranoid propaganda crap this article is.
Yet here you are.....................
It seems it is impossible for you to comment on the article and not other members. That is what most you right wingers on this site do. A sad for NT.
You are so wrong..........but you be you. I would really be interested to know what you and cj find disturbing about this article.
There are far more on your side that do that. It seems to be an immediate reaction by most over there.
You did note what was said in post 4?
Vic post number 4 is specifically about the ARTICLE. The word even appears in the comment !!!!!
I comment on the articles all day long every day. You spend a lot of time commenting on me and other liberals.
It calls the article "low IQ crap."
Were you not asking about debating issues?
Bullshit again.................what are you doing right now? Looks like commenting about me from here..........
Probably a lack of subservience to the alphabet groups and glorification of teachers' unions.
Well, he can expand on what he meant, but he was talking about the article and not other members as you claimed.
I never claimed he attacked a member. There are many on your side that do that.
What he did was trash the article rather than offer a rebuttal.
So true John. Happens to me all the time from the same culprits.
Sounds like that makes you a victim.
Wow....a sentence that did not include "fascist"
Making progress.
Seems to have elicited proof that people hate that which they don't understand.
If there’s ever anything that brings out left wing hate, it’s the idea that America and western civilization is not the worst thing that happened to the world. They hate it, yet are only able to bitch and whine about how terrible it is because it exists to coddle them.
That’s their approach to education in a nutshell, to instill a loathing for the country and culture.
I dont have any objection at all to teaching the history of western civilization to American schoolchildren. I read or watch videos about the subject fairly regularly.
Here is a page with links to the videos in the PBS Series from years ago , The Western Tradition.
The seeded article says " fact-based American and world history focused on the triumphs of Western Civilization, "
I think this sentence pretty clearly means that kids should be taught only about the triumphs of western civilization and nothing else. The history of western civilization is overwhelmingly a history of white people on the planet earth. We should teach kids about wisdom wherever it came from.
Then you clearly have misunderstood it.
Now, had the sentence included the words only or solely you might have got it.
[Deleted]
We teach US history with all it's blemishes as a matter of fact I believe the way it is taught today focuses on exactly that.
I believe that every student in the US knows about slavery and the western expansion, but I'll bet few of them know about the uniqueness of the US Constitution or about the Marshall Plan or even WWII itself or the industrial revolution or American Exceptionalism or American aid to the rest of the world or the formation of the United Nations or Nato or even the "Great Books"...etc...etc...etc.
It is, at best, an unbalanced teaching of history.
Remember what you told us in Post 4.1.5
Let us stick to issues.
He pesters me all day long.
Your claims of members, attacking other members here, ring very hollow.
Make the connection ….
Me too.
One strawman argument successfully built.
And there it stands in all its wonderful straw-ieness.
IMO the absurdity in education has not peaked yet. People are still talking about traditional education, after all. The absurdity peaks when the idea of traditional education has been forgotten. That does seem to be the goal of liberal reformation of education.
Before this is over we'll be more concerned about teaching survival skills. The energy age is nearing an end. Machines to do the work of survival won't be around forever.
The Iroquois Confederacy, founded by the Great Peacemaker in 1142 1 , is the oldest living participatory democracy on earth 2 . In 1988, the U.S. Senate paid tribute with a resolution 3 that said, "The confederation of the original 13 colonies into one republic was influenced by the political system developed by the Iroquois Confederacy, as were many of the democratic principles which were incorporated into the constitution itself."
Instead, teachers churn out barely literate cretins skilled in the art of condoming a banana but unable to authoritatively state that two plus two equals four.
Ms. Mackenzie is certainly skilled at the 'art' of exaggeration.
Kinda funny the American Spectator used a pic of latest fave-of-the-right clickbait Riley Gaines to signal just where this article was going.
Think I'll stop here or the next step will be rude.
But, we're supposed to stick to her 'definitions', whatever that means.
We spend much more per student (K-12) than any other country, but have a high minority dropout rate a significant achievement gap between students from different socioeconomic backgrounds and lower test scores as compared to some other countries.
the Democratic solution is to throw more money at teachers unions.
I'm sure that we need more administrators as well.
Talk about hitting the nail on the head! My generation (baby boomers) and Gen X are administrator-philiacs. We've added an unbelievable burden of 'administrators' to just about everything. Going back to my college after 30 years I found it populated by a huge administration staff -- college cost about 40 weeks of salary when I went, it's about 170 now. Same thing for the local hospital in rural Pennsylvania. The guy running it makes 3 mil! We've created a huge number of marginally useful positions that consume resources to the extent that education, healthcare, ... suffer tremendously.
You got that right. The quantity of administrators drives up the cost far exceeding their value.
You may already know this, but the administration gig is a club. When I was back at my college, it was night and I was with my friend who was walking his dog. Another guy was coming in the other direction with a dog, he was the president of the university. We talked for 10 mins, after he left I turned to my friend and said "he's a moron", and my friend said "yeah". I worked for a division of a large company and our president was an idiot. I Googled him, he was president of an even larger division of another company which failed. The division I was part of eventually failed under him. I followed his career after that for about 10 years - he jumped from one high paying job to the next. It's a club and they see to it that once you're in the club, you keep getting jobs. I'm old, I have a bunch of these stories -- these are just two examples.
So true.
For proof, look at your City, Township, Village government. Mine has grown by nearly seven times over the last 50 years while the population served has only increased by about 45%.
Same goes for Government. Government is by far the largest employer in the US …. And growing.
300 million customers is a lot. Gov employees do a fucking lot for you and a lot of things you don't see, don't shit on them because you aren't one of them. If they stopped doing their jobs you would be bitching up a storm in less than 12 hours. [removed]
Lol … spoken like a person who has or still is sucking off the taxpayer teet. Preach to someone who doesn’t know better. Much of government does less with more each year and could use a good trimming it a lot of places. To think otherwise is just plain ignorance.
Nothing more ….
If that is how you feel about military service and war time deployments I am not surprised.
You don't.
Such as?
it seems like many are already doing that.
A couple of months ago, my wife and I made an appointment to speak face to face with a Social Security rep because she was about to hit 65. After waiting an hour past our appointment time, we were ushered to a small cubby with only a telephone sitting on the desk and was told to pick it up. We ended up talking to some dude, who knows where he was, on the phone.
We could have just called to get the same shitty service from government employees.
Big difference in someone who served in the military and someone that is just sucking the governments teet.
Such as? "
Moving many federal offices out of DC and into smaller cities with lower costs of living. DC is nothing more than an expensive shithole where federal workers go to be lazy because they know they are in a leftist paradise and will never be fired for doing a shitty job.
As a service member I was a gov employee.
Aside from the fact that that would be expensive as fuck, would it rerally reduce costs in any meaningful way and how long would it take to realize those?
And again, have you worked alongside those federal workers? How do you know they are lazy and do a shitty job? Like most people in any public service capacity, I am 100% sure they are stretched thin and overworked. Our department is seriously shorthanded, even our dispatchers are having to put in 60 hour weeks. We are stretched incredibly thin, as is everyone else.
So was I, but being in the military is different than sitting behind a desk 9-5 Monday through Friday.
"Aside from the fact that that would be expensive as fuck, would it rerally reduce costs in any meaningful way and how long would it take to realize those? "
Liberals have zero problem spending money, especially other people's money, so this should be no big deal, right?
"
"And again, have you worked alongside those federal workers?"
Well, being that you consider the military "government workers", then , yes, I have.
"How do you know they are lazy and do a shitty job?"
I gave you an instance of a civilian government worker/office.
"Our department is seriously shorthanded"
Maybe because of the reputation of civilian government workers?"
[no value]
[deleted]
[You are correct there]
I’m not talking about the military but then again you knew that.
Wrong.
Name it but I think the best examples are local government around here. Bloated city and township government. More staff, less services, open fewer days, fewer hours but still costing more each year. Usually above inflation.
It’s clear to any unbiased observer.
Very clear.
Lol …. I only worry if you agree with me.
Then I know my opinion in wrong.
What, pray tell, am I making up, or are you just throwing out P, D and D with a little delusion to boot?
Yea me, too.
If this one ever said.."I agree" to any of my posts, you are going to be damned sure I will go back and look to see what the hell I typed, because whatever it was, it must have really been fucked up.
So clear4 you cannot provide specifics. What a shock.
Neither do conservatives. So what is the hang up?
And for all you know you were the 600th caller at that point they had that day. [Deleted]
So easy when you arent in the shit. Let's see you take on a city contract and try to keep up. [Deleted]
Your eyes must be wide shut.
Not a shock …..
Everything you say.
J. K. Rowling....One of the writers the left has banned!
Not true.
As the premise statement for the article that follows, this is not very good. It appears to set up a strawman by drawing a non-sequitur between teachers, what they are teaching, and the farcical outcomes imagined by ...well, whoever wrote this pile of garbage. How is one therefore supposed to take the rest of the article seriously?
This baseless assertion pandering to people who, ironically, are too stupid to look things up for themselves.
Prove, or at least try to back up through peer-reviewed studies with actual data, that American parents cannot, "... count on the public schools to produce a literate graduate who would become a fully functional citizen and taxpayer." and what does that have to do with college rankings? Does the author need remedial English?
And again with the non-sequitur leading into the baseless assertion. So we have another person making derogatory comments about education in America in a logically illiterate fashion: Better add critical thinking to that list up there.
I see you say the author "nailed it", which leaves me wondering just what on earth you were talking about. I've gotten several paragraphs in and all that I am seeing is logical fallacies and bitching that include "...brainwashed potheads with purple hair seeking meaning at their local black-bloc Antifa meetup," and of course, there is the standard new-right call out against the unions.
You can't see me, but I am laughing out loud.
So are a number of other people that can actually think for themselves.