[flagged]
There are two error modes: Listening too much to people and not listening to them enough. Maybe it is some sort of mental or personality failing on my part that I cannot choose to completely disregard unjustified hate. It's still hate and it still hurts. And I'm not entirely convinced that that's bad.
As a liberal, am gonzo for diversity. As a capitalist, I recognize that talent is very rare and I think it is foolish to reject talent based on irrelevant personal details. As an intellectual, I am for focus and clarity.
This kind of activism isn't the only source of distraction. But it's a big one right now.
Feel free to disagree, but that's how I feel, and my feelings aren't nonsense.
Literally the first line of your source
Laughable
Those who can't do teach.
Those who can't teach administer.
They say 'LatinX', where the correct term is Latin. They specifically list black students because the constant message in the liberal USA is that black people aren't capable and need to be called out by skin color in all contexts so they can be helped across the line by virtuous white people who recognize their weakness.
But keep reading the lesson plans and it goes on and on.
Chapter 1 is "Dismantling Racism in Mathematics Instruction", and it claims that "White supremacy culture infiltrates math classrooms [...] perpetuate educational harm on Black, Latinx, [...]"
- "greater focus on getting the 'right' answer ..."
- "required to 'show their work' in standardized, prescribed ways."
- "Independent practice is valued over teamwork or collaboration."
God forbid individual minority students are given the ability to personally succeed without being forced into a group identity, or that they be taught how to use math to communicate with others.
- "It also presupposes that “good” math teaching is about a Eurocentric type of mathematics, devoid of cultural ways of being."
Yes, of course, because math is about the numbers! You can apply it to your personal cultural way of being after learning how to get correct answers.
It's actual racism is to assume that all black people need to have a social-justice framework put in front of their academics to "help" them. Not help them to success, but to a white-constructed pseudo-success of wrong but "culturally correct" answers that is somehow the best they can be expected to achieve.
- "study ethnomathematics and incorporate into all classrooms."
In other words, don't try to help everyone achieve a common goal, create race-based targets and replace all education with them.
"the practice of school mathematics in the US regulates the child by privileging:"
- "algebra/calculus over geometry/topology/spatial reasoning;"
- "rule following over rule breaking;"
- "Western mathematics (culture free) over ethnomathematics"
- "logic over intuition"
Calculus encompasses geometry and spatial reasoning, so that's just wrong.
They attack "Rule following" - like the rules that get you correct answers. Western mathematics (which they've just identified as the type of math focused on correct answers). And logic, damned logic, getting in the way of the "lessers" just doing what they culturally know is right rather than applying critical thought like white people.
There's nothing in that course, or any of the rest, or in the critical theory that it came from, which is capable of helping, or even intended to help, any minority student.
It only prioritizes raising students uneducated and with a bunch of misplaced racial baggage.
If you don't believe me, or want to write it off as "what a white supremacist would say", read this:
https://unherd.com/2022/02/anti-racism-betrays-asian-student...
"After the tragic killing of George Floyd in 2020, much of the virtue-signalling that followed focused on an unexpected target: admissions processes. Activists claimed children “of colour” weren’t getting their fair share of places at good schools — or, to be precise, black and Hispanic children weren’t. The same couldn’t be said of Asian children. And so Asian students became a convenient scapegoat for “anti-racists”. [...] in the months when America was rocked by race riots, self-described “equity warriors” described the Asian, mostly immigrant families of TJ as “white-adjacent” and “resource hoarders”. The white principal, Ann Bonitatibus, told us to check our “privileges”, [...] the local school board — all 12 members endorsed by the Democratic Party — voted to remove the school’s merit-based, race-blind admissions process, and replace it with one that was race-based. Along with other parents I was horrified by the school’s readiness to use identity, rather than achievement, as the basis of admissions. But when we objected, the Virginia education secretary, a Democrat, told our families that preparing for tests was like using illegal “performance enhancement drugs”. A black father, Harry Jackson, who spoke up for our cause was called a “motherfucker” selling “segregationist bullshit” — by a white activist who uses the Twitter handle @Antiracist14"
Even if you were actually reading what's in the recommendations - what's the point? Why are we talking about this?
And great example ofs anecdotal evidence. How hard is it to make a HN handle with antiracist in the name? If you give me a few minutes I can get you a bunch of comments that show the inverse.
Please argue things that are factual or matter OR at least are on subject.
The only effect your long comment has is to further radicalize people into believing that nothing should be done to support minorities. Think twice before writing reactionary nonsense.
Edit: btw, the source you quote here, Unherd, has this article at the top of their website "Why lesbian women should sleep with men". Laughable.
Why here? Because, as I said below, I posted that in response to this specific thread somewhat by mistake. I was discussing racially motivated changes in university acceptance criteria on a parenting forum and pretty much the same example was being used as an example of the thinking of those calling for the changes.
> And great example of anecdotal evidence.
Is anecdotal the new dismissal word of 2023 or something? "Oh, sure that happens and you see it near you, but that's just an anecdote - if you can't show it happening worldwide it doesn't count!"
Racialized teaching is in schools, rarely with justification this blatant though. They're using this rhetoric to justify getting rid of advanced classes and push groups of people entirely out of academics sometimes. If you don't follow schools and local politics I can imagine why you don't hear about it though.
> The only effect your long comment has is to further radicalize people into believing
Oh, I thought you were using the actual meaning of radicalize - you know. Violence instead of speech, etc.
> that nothing should be done to support minorities
No... That what should be done to support minorities is the same thing that should be done to support the majority - full and proper academic standards.
You should never need to talk about a student's race, or even take it into account. If a specific group of students really need extra help, use class analysis (ie, poverty) instead of racial analysis.
> Think twice before writing reactionary nonsense
Is this like calling me fascist, or do you actually mean something by this label?
> btw, the source you quote here, Unherd, has this article at the top of their website "Why lesbian women should sleep with men". Laughable.
I don't pick and choose source sites by their overall ideology so I didn't check the rest of their site before sharing the opinion piece.
But, yeah .... That is laughable. Can you believe that homophobes are literally attacking lesbian at pride parades and dyke marches for saying things such as "Lesbianism is female."
Note the Benford question mark in the headline though, it's sarcastic - the content says lesbians should not sleep with men. Sadly though, the article is in response to very real calls for violence against lesbians.
Feel free to use a dictionary or google to look up the meaning of "to radicalize" - I get "cause (someone) to adopt radical positions on political or social issues.".
What do you think reactionary mean? You have no further point other than reaction to what some activists do. You don't work for schools to have actual policy, you just flail your arms.
Vetting media outlet by general editorial quality is a good idea to not read nonsense.
Good job not using HN for ideological battles
You don't understand evidence. When our school boards are getting rid of advanced classes they're referencing race based reasoning like that example. Also, these specific recommendations are adopted in many schools - Stride Equitable Math - it's one of the more common.
> "cause (someone) to adopt radical positions on political or social issues".
That's circular reasoning though. What about the positions I would encourage someone to adopt is "radical"?
So far you're just using it as an insult.
> What do you think reactionary mean? You have no further point other than reaction to what some activists do. You don't work for schools to have actual policy, you just flail your arms.
That's probably the dumbest standard because by nobody has a plan when they first discover a problem. As you're using it, it's just an insult, and an empty one at that.
> "You don't work for schools to have actual policy"
Also, um, yeah. We do. A policy which bans using racial identifiers in all policy and policy discussions. Mandates that the same curriculum be available to any student gated only by skill.
> Vetting media outlet by general editorial quality is a good idea to not read nonsense.
I said I don't check for ideology. The quality is just fine - a mom had a complaint and they published her opinion piece as an editorial.
You pointed to a headline you didn't understand about lesbians but that's on you, not the paper. The headline was fine and references real events.
> Good job not using HN for ideological battles
Ironically, here you are flailing with insults and wildly reacting to my comments about a radical new movement to shove racism into schools.
Only one of us is having a battle.
You got freaked out because you saw something you didn't understand, refused to read deeply and engage, and now you've accused me of all this crypto-racism because I'm trying to remove racist policies from schools. Slow down. Not everyone uses your dog whistles, and not everyone on the other side is a bad guy.
Do you actually have any problem with my stance on this, that "what should be done to support minorities is the same thing that should be done to support the majority - full and proper academic standards."
Go read the HN guidelines buddy
And you piggybacked on a racebaiting comment on an unrelated subject. Come on.
Yes, but you haven't explained why this is a problem though.
Let's say a black man gets beaten by the police. It's just "anecdotal" in that he hasn't performed a study showing that it's a global issue, but it is irrefutable proof that police do beat up at least some black men.
In this case, let's say that only our school was enacting these policies and that we the parents discovered it only by our personal observation of policy updates, why would that matter? We'd still want to change it.
But in this case it actually is a widespread issue: https://archive.is/bZcXu
"The high school, [the parents] argued, should reinstate honors English classes that were eliminated because they didn’t enroll enough Black and Latino students. The district earlier this school year replaced the honors classes at Culver City High School with uniform courses that officials say will ensure students of all races receive an equal, rigorous education."
> "no ideological battles"
You're the one having a battle, and over an ideology. Walk away or engage with the issue, either is fine, but you're attacking me directly, using labels (radical, reactionary, etc) and saying that I "know what I'm doing".
You don't say what you'd do instead. You don't say why you support the policies, or would/wouldn't if they existed.
Please chat with your representative with all this wonderful evidence I'm sure you'll change their mind or they will gladly answer all your questions - I'm not a civil servant, I'll let them do it
No. It doesn't. Because we have the school boards saying this in this in their own words and publishing them in their policy updates. All the "limited in value" stuff in the Wiki article is about ad-hoc and poorly collected evidence and that doesn't apply here. We're pointing to their own words.
> chat with your representative with all this wonderful evidence
It's perfect evidence. It's their own policy statements with their own justification.
A lot of people are like you initially but when they actually read the policies they come around - race-based rules are something most people feel icky about.
I've seen people rudely dismiss a pamphlet about this from a white parent only to happily read and engage when approached by an asian parent only moments later. That's racist, but I understand because all the news pumps out is a constant stream of partisan race-baiting and it takes many people a while to turn off that defensiveness.
> or they will gladly answer all your questions
No, usually they refuse to let us even get on the agenda for meetings.
> I'm sure you'll change their mind
Thankfully we don't have to talk to our representatives when they're this dismissive, we can simply vote them out and we have been.
But usually we find that at least half of them felt railroaded into these blatantly racist policies by a bunch of small frog-boiling policies and they're grateful for an opportunity to put things back in order.
And why does it matter? I'm part of a multi-racial group of parents. What does it matter if I'm the asian one or the white one or the black one?