“…it is unacceptable to have eighth grade Algebra I classes and gifted education programs that disproportionately exclude Black and brown children.”
a definition of exclude is “deny (someone) access to or bar (someone) from a place, group, or privilege.”
no one is barring access to these classes on the basis race. can you even imagine that? “sorry, you’re not allowed to take this class; you’re black.” it’s like everyone who writes this lives in their mom’s basement and has never gone outside and thinks if they just make the boring and tired declaration that non-black/non-brown people are evil/racist, that it absolves them of every other sin they commit, like not caring about homeless people or the fact that everything they own is made by chinese children. in reality it accomplishes nothing except complacency and it helps the people raping the world continue their work of exploiting everyone.
>> “…it is unacceptable to have eighth grade Algebra I classes and gifted education programs that disproportionately exclude Black and brown children.”
> no one is barring access to these classes on the basis race. can you even imagine that?
A test for a gifted class that measures _knowledge_ rather than the _ability to learn_ will create an "elite" class full of students whose parents had them study the advanced topics. Even if they were not "good" at it. In this case high SES -> advanced knowledge -> good test scores -> elite class that excludes Black students primarily because the entrance test results are predicted by SES.
Not really. Any teacher qualified to teach HS math should be able to teach anything up to pre-Calc. If you have more Algebra students ahead of grade level than usual, you shift a teacher away from pre-Algebra and into teaching Algebra I.
That's not what the progressive complain about. But if that is true, the obvious solution is to create more spots.
If the same people wouldn't complain about disparate failure rates, I'd even support making them open enrollment, but weeding people out based on performance. But we all know, people would just claim the classes are racist.
Laws theoretically apply to Mark Zuckerberg, and he has broken them. But because he is wealthy and powerful, the justice system does not attempt to hold him accountable for breaking those laws.
Therefore, the result is the same as if the laws did not apply to him in the first place.
> The Dirks case is an example of what has been called the “white collar paradox” – that conservative Supreme Court justices, who rarely vote to reverse convictions of poor criminal defendants, have shown a clear sympathy for rich ones. The conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, one study found, voted for defendants in about 7 percent of non-white-collar criminal cases – and 82 percent of white-collar ones.
> After Watergate, Congress passed a tough campaign finance law, with strict limits on both contributions and expenditures. In 1976, the Court struck down the expenditure limits, on the dubious theory that money equals speech under the first amendment. That let wealthy people spend as much as they wanted to elect candidates, and the Court has been opening the floodgates further ever since. In 2010, in Citizens United v. F.E.C., it took the radical step of saying that corporations have the same right to spend money to elect candidates as people do.
> In a series of rulings, including a high-profile one against Wal-Mart in 2011, it has made it far harder for workers and consumers to band together in class action lawsuits, which are often the only way for working-class people to get justice. In the Wal-Mart case, the Court threw out a class action by about 1.5 million female workers, insisting they did not have enough in common to sue together. The Court has also decided that the Due Process Clause bars what it views as excessively large punitive damage awards. It then used that made-up doctrine to drastically reduce jury awards against Exxon Shipping for the Exxon Valdez oil spill, and State Farm over its mistreatment of a physically disabled customer.
“I don't think I follow your point about income level”
it makes sense when you consider that TLAs basic function is to preserve the status quo for wall street. we subvert democracy overseas to preserve corporate profits and have been doing so for many generations a la United Fruit Company, selling weapons to saudi arabia, etc.
belligerence is a bourgeois and pearl-clutchy way to dismiss desperate people writing text on the internet as a part of their struggle to improve the horrible material conditions of their lives and the lives of the people they love. it’s easy to be sophisticated when everyone else is effectively your slave because you happened to be born higher up in the global supply chain. belligerent is how Marie Antoinette would have described people who don’t want to want to be told to eat cake.
its probably part of a pipeline to make a reliably isolated and scared voting base that will always vote to give big brother more power because they don’t know how to socialize so they are more susceptible to propaganda
> its probably part of a pipeline to make a reliably isolated and scared voting base that will always vote to give big brother more power because they don’t know how to socialize so they are more susceptible to propagand
No.
1. You're describing a deliberate conspiracy, but providing zero evidence for it. It's not enough to show that the policy will lead to the results you allege (which I do not grant you), but that the policy was deliberately chosen for that reason and not another.
2. From what I've read, the actual result of masking and COVID has been increased behavior problems and acting out in students, not increased compliance.
I still wear a mask today - specifically when I am going to encounter a lot of people at once (like ordering food at a cafeteria), interacting with someone who through their job has to come face to face with hundreds of people a day (like a barista), or just passing through a shared area (like walking from the cafeteria to my desk with my food). Other than that I take the mask off if I am sitting relatively by myself.
I am still waiting to feel this fear that the right wing media has hammered into people's heads as a legitimate talking point. I think there are at least two comments here already citing this fear. I don't feel afraid when I have the mask on or when my mask is off and wearing a mask does not change any of my other behavior.
What was scary was in 2020 when I went to the ER with COVID. That was actually scary.
a definition of exclude is “deny (someone) access to or bar (someone) from a place, group, or privilege.”
no one is barring access to these classes on the basis race. can you even imagine that? “sorry, you’re not allowed to take this class; you’re black.” it’s like everyone who writes this lives in their mom’s basement and has never gone outside and thinks if they just make the boring and tired declaration that non-black/non-brown people are evil/racist, that it absolves them of every other sin they commit, like not caring about homeless people or the fact that everything they own is made by chinese children. in reality it accomplishes nothing except complacency and it helps the people raping the world continue their work of exploiting everyone.