- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 54,877
- Reaction score
- 51,765
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Clear your cookies.The link goes to a paywall.
This information is so important that you have to pay to read it.
No, it doesn't.The link goes to a paywall.
This information is so important that you have to pay to read it.
The link goes to a paywall.
This information is so important that you have to pay to read it.
Sounds good."In the classroom, kids can read a diverse assortment of books. Kids can discover and appreciate the beautiful human rainbow in all its colors and cultures. Kids can amass empathy and critical-thinking skills. Kids can learn how persistent group inequity is produced by bad rules, not bad people. Kids can see themselves in humans who don’t look like them, speak like them, love like them, worship like them, live like them. Kids can explore the complex history of racism and the interracial body of anti-racist resisters. White kids can learn about the violence of white settler colonialists and enslavers—and the white-supremacist ideology they embraced. White kids can learn about Sarah and Angelina Grimké, who were born into an enslaving South Carolina family and courageously transformed themselves into leading abolitionists.
Strongly disagree with this framing. Public education should not be tailored to counter particular ideologies, and especially not among particular demographic groups. "Anti-racism" means such different things to different people, it should not be a goal of public education.Kendri is right, of course. We need anti-racism education in schools to help thwart the threat of white supremacy among young white people.
"What are white children being indoctrinated with? What is making them uncomfortable? What is causing them to hate? White-supremacist ideology: the toxic blend of racist, sexist, ableist, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, and anti-Semitic ideas that is harmful to all minds, especially the naive and defenseless minds of youth. Which group is the prime target of white supremacists? White youth.
...In 2021, the Anti-Defamation League released a report finding that nearly one in 10 multiplayer gamers ages 13 to 17 had been exposed to white-supremacist ideology. An estimated 2.3 million teens each year are exposed to white-supremacist ideology ...17 percent of 13-to-17-year-olds who encounter white-supremacist views on social media, according to the same ADL study. ...One study of TikTok videos found that almost a third “amplified white supremacy.” ...And yet, there might be more white-supremacist material preying on vulnerable young people on Instagram than on TikTok. ...Experts know—and white supremacists know—which white kids are most vulnerable to grooming: kids seeking a sense of purpose, a sense of belonging; loners and excluded kids; and depressed kids. And depression among “white teens seems to be rising faster than among other groups,” Derek Thompson recently reported in The Atlantic.
In the classroom, kids can read a diverse assortment of books. Kids can discover and appreciate the beautiful human rainbow in all its colors and cultures. Kids can amass empathy and critical-thinking skills. Kids can learn how persistent group inequity is produced by bad rules, not bad people. Kids can see themselves in humans who don’t look like them, speak like them, love like them, worship like them, live like them. Kids can explore the complex history of racism and the interracial body of anti-racist resisters. White kids can learn about the violence of white settler colonialists and enslavers—and the white-supremacist ideology they embraced. White kids can learn about Sarah and Angelina Grimké, who were born into an enslaving South Carolina family and courageously transformed themselves into leading abolitionists.
This is anti-racist education, and it protects white children—all children—against the growing threat of white supremacists..."
Link
Kendri is right, of course. We need anti-racism education in schools to help thwart the threat of white supremacy among young white people. But since Republicans can't attack the public school system by going after white supremacy, its not worth the trouble.
When I was in school, we read Huckleberry Finn. Huck decides in the book that if having a "Black" friend meant that he was going to Hell, then he'd go to Hell.
For me, that was a life changing sequence of thought by Huck and I accompanied him along the path as he followed an undeniably well founded line of reason and logic.
Now, our ridiculously stupid educational hierarchy refuses to allow Huckleberry Finn to be taught in publicschools.
Too bad...
As Thomas Sowell asked,
"Have we reached the ultimate stage of absurdity where
some people are held responsible for things that happened before they were born while
other people are not held responsible for what they themselves are doing today?”
Such is the state of the drive to divide out society along the lines of race and hate.
Sounds good.
Strongly disagree with this framing. Public education should not be tailored to counter particular ideologies, and especially not among particular demographic groups. "Anti-racism" means such different things to different people, it should not be a goal of public education.
This guy is a younger version of Al Sharpton: a For-Profit Race Baiter."What are white children being indoctrinated with? What is making them uncomfortable? What is causing them to hate? White-supremacist ideology: the toxic blend of racist, sexist, ableist, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, and anti-Semitic ideas that is harmful to all minds, especially the naive and defenseless minds of youth. Which group is the prime target of white supremacists? White youth.
...In 2021, the Anti-Defamation League released a report finding that nearly one in 10 multiplayer gamers ages 13 to 17 had been exposed to white-supremacist ideology. An estimated 2.3 million teens each year are exposed to white-supremacist ideology ...17 percent of 13-to-17-year-olds who encounter white-supremacist views on social media, according to the same ADL study. ...One study of TikTok videos found that almost a third “amplified white supremacy.” ...And yet, there might be more white-supremacist material preying on vulnerable young people on Instagram than on TikTok. ...Experts know—and white supremacists know—which white kids are most vulnerable to grooming: kids seeking a sense of purpose, a sense of belonging; loners and excluded kids; and depressed kids. And depression among “white teens seems to be rising faster than among other groups,” Derek Thompson recently reported in The Atlantic.
In the classroom, kids can read a diverse assortment of books. Kids can discover and appreciate the beautiful human rainbow in all its colors and cultures. Kids can amass empathy and critical-thinking skills. Kids can learn how persistent group inequity is produced by bad rules, not bad people. Kids can see themselves in humans who don’t look like them, speak like them, love like them, worship like them, live like them. Kids can explore the complex history of racism and the interracial body of anti-racist resisters. White kids can learn about the violence of white settler colonialists and enslavers—and the white-supremacist ideology they embraced. White kids can learn about Sarah and Angelina Grimké, who were born into an enslaving South Carolina family and courageously transformed themselves into leading abolitionists.
This is anti-racist education, and it protects white children—all children—against the growing threat of white supremacists..."
Link
Kendri is right, of course. We need anti-racism education in schools to help thwart the threat of white supremacy among young white people. But since Republicans can't attack the public school system by going after white supremacy, its not worth the trouble.
This guy is a younger version of Al Sharpton: a For-Profit Race Baiter.
Then why designate it with a specific, oppositional term? Why call it 'anti-racism'? Outside of debating the pros and cons of different ideologies (all kinds) in say a senior logic/philosophy class, offhand I'd venture that the only values which should be promoted by public education are truly foundational ones like universal human rights as in the UN Declaration of that name or the US Declaration of Independence. But while it could and should have that effect, that's a far cry from saying that you're teaching 'anti-racism'; and if someone does insist that they want to teach 'anti-racism' you'd surely have to wonder what else they're going to add to it.I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around the idea that we are all equal is a political ideology.
Disadvantages along the lines of race such as implicit biases in employment, justice etc. are just one of the types of disadvantage and inequalities of opportunity in society. Furthermore since those disadvantages can no longer be explicit formal discrimination, most of them end up boiling down to disparities in wealth and income, albeit sometimes a step or two removed: Unequal educational funding between predominantly white and non-white schools would no longer exist if people in non-white districts had the same incomes and property values to provide the same funding, for example, or if there weren't as much black poverty there obviously wouldn't be as much black crime, and if crime/imprisonment statistics and educational outcomes were the same we should expect those implicit biases to resolve eventually too.Anti-racism isn't really complicated. Examining implicit bias just leads to rather complex and reflective thinking. That, to me, is a big part of education - the "not repeating the mistakes of past" part of studying history.
So, is anti-racism a political ideology or an ideal that is reflected in our Declaration of Independence with "all men created equal?"
Should schools teach it to counter the racist indoctrination kids are getting online?
"What are white children being indoctrinated with? What is making them uncomfortable? What is causing them to hate? White-supremacist ideology: the toxic blend of racist, sexist, ableist, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, and anti-Semitic ideas that is harmful to all minds, especially the naive and defenseless minds of youth. Which group is the prime target of white supremacists? White youth.
...In 2021, the Anti-Defamation League released a report finding that nearly one in 10 multiplayer gamers ages 13 to 17 had been exposed to white-supremacist ideology. An estimated 2.3 million teens each year are exposed to white-supremacist ideology ...17 percent of 13-to-17-year-olds who encounter white-supremacist views on social media, according to the same ADL study. ...One study of TikTok videos found that almost a third “amplified white supremacy.” ...And yet, there might be more white-supremacist material preying on vulnerable young people on Instagram than on TikTok. ...Experts know—and white supremacists know—which white kids are most vulnerable to grooming: kids seeking a sense of purpose, a sense of belonging; loners and excluded kids; and depressed kids. And depression among “white teens seems to be rising faster than among other groups,” Derek Thompson recently reported in The Atlantic.
In the classroom, kids can read a diverse assortment of books. Kids can discover and appreciate the beautiful human rainbow in all its colors and cultures. Kids can amass empathy and critical-thinking skills. Kids can learn how persistent group inequity is produced by bad rules, not bad people. Kids can see themselves in humans who don’t look like them, speak like them, love like them, worship like them, live like them. Kids can explore the complex history of racism and the interracial body of anti-racist resisters. White kids can learn about the violence of white settler colonialists and enslavers—and the white-supremacist ideology they embraced. White kids can learn about Sarah and Angelina Grimké, who were born into an enslaving South Carolina family and courageously transformed themselves into leading abolitionists.
This is anti-racist education, and it protects white children—all children—against the growing threat of white supremacists..."
Link
Kendri is right, of course. We need anti-racism education in schools to help thwart the threat of white supremacy among young white people. But since Republicans can't attack the public school system by going after white supremacy, its not worth the trouble.
Good to see that I wasn't the only one to get that feeling.This guy is a younger version of Al Sharpton: a For-Profit Race Baiter.
Sounds good.
Strongly disagree with this framing. Public education should not be tailored to counter particular ideologies, and especially not among particular demographic groups. "Anti-racism" means such different things to different people, it should not be a goal of public education.
If public education should be tailored to counter particular ideologies, as you seem to be suggesting, what criteria determine which ideologies should be opposed and which should be upheld? 'Science' obviously isn't an answer since we're talking about ideologies and values rather than objective facts. Will of the majority seems an obviously flawed answer, firstly in that it would completely politicize curricula and secondly in that it would then be 'right' for highly racist or religious societies to have education systems which oppose tolerance and secularism. Curious as to your thoughts how this would be decided/justified.Children in Germany are taught the horrors of Nazi Germany. That doesn’t make them feel guilty. Most German kids are very proud of the liberal democracy their nation has become.
Not sure why teaching the history of racism here should be any different.
If public education should be tailored to counter particular ideologies, as you seem to be suggesting, what criteria determine which ideologies should be opposed and which should be upheld? 'Science' obviously isn't an answer since we're talking about ideologies and values rather than objective facts. Will of the majority seems an obviously flawed answer, firstly in that it would completely politicize curricula and secondly in that it would then be 'right' for highly racist or religious societies to have education systems which oppose tolerance and secularism. Curious as to your thoughts how this would be decided/justified.
As I further explained in my subsequent post, outside of debating the pros and cons of different ideologies (all kinds) in say a senior logic/philosophy class, offhand I'd venture that the only values which should be promoted by public education are truly foundational ones like universal human rights as in the UN Declaration of that name or the US Declaration of Independence. But while it could and should have that effect, that's a far cry from saying that you're teaching 'anti-racism'; and if someone does insist that they want to teach 'anti-racism' you'd surely have to wonder what else they're going to add to it.
See the last paragraph of my earlier post: If there's no difference, why introduce newfangled terminology to push an educational agenda, when you already know that "they're out to get your kids" is powerful messaging even when it's naught but smoke and mirrors? That's like deciding to start naming ordinary history classes 'Critical Race Theory' - obvious pushback with zero upside.What is the difference between "anti-racism" and the idea of universal human rights?
Kendi has bills to pay. Scam artist of BLM proportions.The link goes to a paywall.
This information is so important that you have to pay to read it.
If public education should be tailored to counter particular ideologies, as you seem to be suggesting, what criteria determine which ideologies should be opposed and which should be upheld? 'Science' obviously isn't an answer since we're talking about ideologies and values rather than objective facts. Will of the majority seems an obviously flawed answer, firstly in that it would completely politicize curricula and secondly in that it would then be 'right' for highly racist or religious societies to have education systems which oppose tolerance and secularism. Curious as to your thoughts how this would be decided/justified.
See the last paragraph of my earlier post: If there's no difference, why introduce newfangled terminology to push an educational agenda, when you already know that "they're out to get your kids" is powerful messaging even when it's naught but smoke and mirrors? That's like deciding to start naming ordinary history classes 'Critical Race Theory' - obvious pushback with zero upside.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?