#ap African American ban

[2bpoliticallycurious]

This has to be one of humorist Alexandra Petri’s most brilliant columns yet.  Enjoy! 😁

FROM THE DESK OF FLORIDA GOV. RON DESANTIS — FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

As we in Florida celebrate Month (what other states call Black History Month), it has come to our attention that woke ideologies have penetrated not just the African American Studies AP course framework but also every other Advanced Placement class.

We were heartened that the College Board updated its curriculum for the African American Studies course for what it claimed were unrelated reasons after we raised objections to the inclusion of Black queer topics and works from thinkers such as bell hooks and Angela Davis. It was so nice that their unrelated edits coincided with our specific complaints; we feel like we’ve won, even if they insist that is not what happened.

But we cannot stop here. These same woke ideologies have penetrated every single AP offering. We would like to see the following changes made to these additional courses as soon as possible.

AP European History: Lots of talk about “allies” and “allyship.” Seems unnecessary in a history course. Mentions allies (including communists) working together to defeat Nazis — this, again, feels needlessly political. Describes book burnings as definitively negative. References to France, the French.

AP Human Geography: Existence of Ukraine as a sovereign nation presented as fact. Teach the controversy, please!

AP Chemistry: Students are urged to call some things “basic” as a judgment — this must stop. Instead, say that a chemical compound “enjoys Starbucks” or “favors the music of Taylor Swift.” Stop students from titrating; this is not something they should be doing at school. Singling out some gases as “noble” because they are “less volatile” has the potential to hurt feelings and should be stopped. Okay to study DNA but not mRNA.

AP Calculus: Omit positive references to integration and change.

AP Art History: Filth! Put fig leaves on all those statues, and then we can reevaluate.

AP Comparative Government and Politics: Description of voting as an unalloyed good is misleading.

AP Physics: “Resistance” and “resistors” have no place in a science course.

AP U.S. History: Mentions events from the American past.

AP Statistics: This whole course seems engineered to make anti-vaxxers feel “wrong” and “lesser.” Need to stress that there is more than one correct way to interpret statistics.

AP Latin: Every word of this seems obscene. “Cum gladiis et fustibus”? “Homo bulla™? “Dix”? These are the same people who gave us all those nude statues, and it shows.

AP English Literature: Includes books. We can’t stand books.

AP Biology: No objections, but see attached 15-page complaint from Texas.

[beleth]

It is not fucking "wokeness" or "indoctrination" (or whatever new word conservatives decide to use in the future) to teach students how BIPOC were treated by the government, and how the effects of said discrimination persist today.

[memecatwings]

btw the reason you see politicians like desantis undermining the educational value of american history from alternate perspectives is bc if you look at american history from any perspective that isnt the european settlers it becomes painfully painfully clear that white colonists have historically been straight up evil. that white people are the "bad guys". students learning alternate perspective on american history would learn things that contridict the white supremacist notion that white people have been the heros and saviors of america since its inception. thats why they fight against it. white people "enlightened" the native "savages". white people "ended" slavery. white people had manifest destiny. thats what they want you to learn in school and thats what they want you to believe. fuck ron desantis - teach the kids about alternate perspectives on history.

[boanddonatetoblacktranspeople]

“states” you mean florida. you mean fucking florida. you mean godawful fuckface desantis in florida. i dont know if other states have been hopping on this, but florida is a step from full on book burns and bans.

I don't Think ive seen anyone on here talking abt some US states forcing teachers to remove all books from their classrooms and force them to only have pre-vetted books available or else face possible JAIL TIME ???

[tomorrowusa]

Far right Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida is getting ready to mark Black History Month which begins on February 1st. He’s doing so by banning African American studies in Florida high schools.

Ron DeSantis, Florida’s Republican governor, has rejected a new advanced placement course in African American studies from being taught on high school campuses. He argues that the course violates state law and “lacks educational value”.

[ ... ]

DeSantis officially banned the course in a letter from the state education department to the College Board, the organization that administers college readiness exams like the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). They also oversee advanced placement (AP) courses, which allow students to earn college credits in subjects like English and chemistry.

[ ... ]

DeSantis, a one-time Donald Trump ally, plays an active role in stoking social and political anxieties, primarily among white Americans, that stem from conversations about race and gender that occur on K-12 public school campuses.

DeSantis enjoys pandering to white nationalists and their neo-Confederate views of US history.

His running excuse for his racist actions is saying that something is “woke”. Don’t tell DeSantis that peanut butter was invented by an African American or you may end up having to drive out of state for Reese’s candy or Jif.

[ace-with--a-mace]

they banned ap psych in florida cuz the class ap discusses sexuailty and gender which violates ron desantis' piece of shit dont say gay law so fuck you ron for that

in the college board statement they say it was banned because "teaching foundational content on sexual orientation and gender identity is illegal under state law" which is bullshit because these gov leaders believe anything lgbtq is a brain disease so you'd think theyd keep the brain learning class

they banned ap african american studies because "it lacks educational value and historical accuracy" which is making it easier for them to erase black history that is so intertwined with the history of this country that most everything here is so deeply antiblack

this mf has his head so far up his ass that hes ruining our education system even more than it already was

[contemplatingoutlander]

Worried by Florida’s history standards? Check out its new dictionary!

As always, Alexandra Petri is spot on in satirizing the right-wing censorship and educational nonsense happening in Florida. This is a gift 🎁 link, so you can read the entire column, even if you don't subscribe to The Washington Post.

Below are some excerpts 😂:

Well, it’s a week with a Thursday in it, and Florida is, once again, revising its educational standards in alarming ways. Not content with removing books from shelves, or demanding that the College Board water down its AP African American studies curriculum, the state’s newest history standards include lessons suggesting that enslaved people “developed skills” for “personal benefit.” This trend appears likely to continue. What follows is a preview of the latest edition of the dictionary to be approved in Florida. Aah: (exclamation) Normal thing to say when you enter the water at the beach, which is over 100 degrees. Abolitionists: (noun) Some people in the 19th century who were inexplicably upset about a wonderful free surprise job training program. Today they want to end prisons for equally unclear reasons. Abortion: (noun) Something that male state legislators (the foremost experts on this subject) believe no one ever wants under any circumstances, probably; decision that people beg the state to make for them and about which doctors beg for as little involvement as possible. American history: (noun) A branch of learning that concerns a ceaseless parade of triumphs and contains nothing to feel bad about. Barbie: (noun) Feminist demon enemy of the state. Biden, Joe: (figure) Illegitimate president. Black history: (entry not found) Blacksmith: (noun) A great job and one that enslaved people might have had. Example sentence from Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R): “They’re probably going to show that some of the folks that eventually parlayed, you know, being a blacksmith into doing things later in life.” Book ban: (noun) Effective way of making sure people never have certain sorts of ideas. Censorship: (noun) When other people get mad about something you’ve said. Not to be confused with when you remove books from libraries or the state tells colleges what can and can’t be said in classrooms (both fine). Child: (noun) Useful laborer with tiny hands; alternatively, someone whose reading cannot be censored enough. [...]

[See more select "definitions" below the cut]

Classified: (adjective) The government’s way of saying a paper is especially interesting and you ought to have it in your house. Climate change: (noun) Conspiracy by scientists to change all the thermometers, fill the air with smoke and then blame us. [...] Constitution: (noun) A document that can be interpreted only by Trump-appointed and/or Federalist Society judges. If the Constitution appears to prohibit something that you want to do, take the judge on a boat and try again. [...] DeSantis, Ron: (figure) Governor who represents the ideal human being. Pronunciation varies. Disney: (noun) A corporation, but not the good kind. [...] Election: (noun) Binding if Republicans win; otherwise, needs help from election officials who will figure out where the fraud was that prevented the election from reflecting the will of the people (that Republicans win). [...] Emancipation Proclamation: (noun) Classic example of government overreach. Firearm: (noun) Wonderful, beautiful object that every person ought to have six of, except Hunter Biden. [...] FOX: News. Free speech: (noun) When you shut up and I talk. Gun violence: (noun) Simple, unalterable fact of life, like death but unlike taxes. [...]

Jan. 6: (noun) A day when some beautiful, beloved people took a nice, uneventful tour of the U.S. Capitol. King Jr., Martin Luther: (figure) A man who, as far as we can discern, uttered only one famous quotation ever and it was about how actually anytime you tried to suggest that people were being treated differently based on skin color you were the real racist. Sample sentence: “Dr. King would be enraged at the existence of Black History Month.” Liberty: (noun) My freedom to choose what you can read (see Moms for Liberty). Moms for Liberty: (noun) Censors, but the good kind. [...] Pregnant (adjective): The state of being a vessel containing a Future Citizen; do not say “pregnant person”; no one who is a real person can get pregnant. Queer: (entry not found) Refugee: (noun) Someone who should have stayed put and waited for help to come. Slavery: (noun) We didn’t invent it, or it wasn’t that bad, or it was a free job training program. Supreme Court: (noun) Wonderful group of mostly men without whom no journey by private plane or yacht is complete. Trans: (entry not found) United States: (noun) Perfect place, no notes. [emphasis added to defined words]

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Peter Smith at AP:

From its towering white steeple and red-brick facade to its Sunday services filled with rousing gospel hymns and evangelistic sermons, First Baptist Church of Alexandria, Virginia, bears many of the classic hallmarks of a Southern Baptist church. On a recent Sunday, its pastor for women and children, Kim Eskridge, urged members to invite friends and neighbors to an upcoming vacation Bible school — a perennial Baptist activity — to help “reach families in the community with the gospel.” But because that pastor is a woman, First Baptist’s days in the Southern Baptist Convention may be numbered. At the SBC’s annual meeting June 11-12 in Indianapolis, representatives will vote on whether to amend the denomination’s constitution to essentially ban churches with any women pastors — and not just in the top job. That measure received overwhelming approval in a preliminary vote last year.

[...] By some estimates, the proposed ban could affect hundreds of congregations and have a disproportionate impact on predominantly Black churches. The vote is partly the culmination of events set in motion two years ago.

That’s when a Virginia pastor contacted SBC officials to contend that First Baptist and four nearby churches were “out of step” with denominational doctrine that says only men can be pastors. The SBC Credentials Committee launched a formal inquiry in April. Southern Baptists disagree on which ministry jobs this doctrine refers to. Some say it’s just the senior pastor, others that a pastor is anyone who preaches and exercises spiritual authority. And in a Baptist tradition that prizes local church autonomy, critics say the convention shouldn’t enshrine a constitutional rule based on one interpretation of its non-binding doctrinal statement. By some estimates, women are working in pastoral roles in hundreds of SBC-linked churches, a fraction of the nearly 47,000 across the denomination. But critics say the amendment would amount to a further narrowing in numbers and mindset for the nation’s largest Protestant denomination, which has moved steadily rightward in recent decades. They also wonder if the SBC has better things to do.

[...] The amendment, if passed, wouldn’t prompt an immediate purge. But it could keep the denomination’s leaders busy for years, investigating and ousting churches. Many predominantly Black churches have men as lead pastors but assign pastor titles to women in other areas, such as worship and children’s ministries. “To disfellowship like-minded churches ... based on a local-church governance decision dishonors the spirit of cooperation and the guiding tenets of our denomination,” wrote Pastor Gregory Perkins, president of the SBC’s National African American Fellowship, to denominational officials. The controversy complicates the already-choppy efforts by the mostly white denomination to diversify and overcome its legacy of slavery and segregation.

Amendment proponents say the convention needs to reinforce its doctrinal statement, the Baptist Faith and Message, which says the office of pastor is “limited to men as qualified by Scripture.”

The fate of Southern Baptists permitting women to serve as pastors in any capacity will be resolved at the upcoming SBC Annual Meeting this week, as the messengers are likely to vote to fully ban women pastors from the denomination.

[allseeingear]

Something that isn't just a reblog for once!

So I know I put in my bio that sometimes I write stuff, that is true but in the 2 years I've been on here I haven't posted any of it. But today is a very *Special* day and I wrote a journal entry/speech that I think deserves to be read and maybe even convince someone to vote. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ That dread takes hold, that particular fear that comes with extinction. A jackboot's heel pressing down on the throat of the world. I have done my pathetic part, held the line even by an inch, but now as is so often the case I can only watch. Only watch as it all seems to amount to a slow and cruel roll of the dice. Maybe we will have victory, that ideology of greed and slaughter denied, kept at bay, but even then it shall not go gentle, in four years it has only grown hungrier and angrier. But there is a dread in me, a heavy feeling that starts in the pit of my stomach and strangles me as it crawls into my throat and coils around my heart. A feeling almost like prophecy that none of this will matter, that I will watch as that map slowly goes red, stained by the blood of our ailing democracy, burning with embers of inevitable pyres. But it would not start with the pyre, extermination is not the sole apparatus of extinction. Extinction does not begin at the gallows or the gas chamber, it begins with book bans in faraway libraries. It begins with the removal of pronouns from email signatures, it begins with the college board not printing AP African American studies exams, it begins when names and medicine become crimes. Perhaps crimes unpunished, unenforced in most places, but the fact remains that what was once kindness, respect, and common fucking human decency, is now an act of rebellion. But it does get more extreme, the shockwave of marching feet reverberates outward. The books near you are banned and those far away are burned. Then the smell of ash reaches your door. Historically, after they have burned enough paper they start burning flesh as well. But we can fight back, we have fought back before. Fighting back does not begin with utopia, revolution is not the sole apparatus of resistance. It begins with not listening to that strangling dread, it begins with a small and pragmatic act of harm reduction, it begins by casting a vote. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will probably post some more lighthearted TMA related stuff eventually, but for now get the hell out there and do your part.

[ausetkmt]

Florida quietly removes LGBTQ+ travel info from state website

FILE - Hundreds of people line Central Avenue and cheer during the 10th Annual St. Pete Pride Street Festival & Promenade in St. Petersburg, Fla. on June 30, 2012.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — Key West, Fort Lauderdale, Wilton Manors and St. Petersburg are among several Florida cities that have long been top U.S. destinations for LGBTQ+ tourists. So it came as a surprise this week when travelers learned that Florida's tourism marketing agency quietly removed the “LGBTQ Travel” section from its website sometime in the past few months.

Business owners who cater to Florida's LGBTQ+ tourists said Wednesday that it marked the latest attempt by officials in the state to erase the LGBTQ+ community. Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis previously championed a bill to forbid classroom instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity, and supported a ban on gender-affirming care for minors, as well as a law meant to keep children out of drag shows.

“It's just disgusting to see this,” said Keith Blackburn, who heads the Greater Fort Lauderdale LGBT Chamber of Commerce. “They seem to want to erase us.”

The change to Visit Florida's website was first reported by NBC News, which noted a search query still pulls up some listings for LGBTQ+-friendly places despite the elimination of the section.

John Lai, who chairs Visit Florida's board, didn't respond to an email seeking comment Tuesday. Dana Young, Visit Florida's CEO and president, didn't respond to a voicemail message Wednesday, and neither did the agency's public relations director.

Visit Florida is a public-private partnership between the state of Florida and the state's tourism industry. The state contributes about $50 million each year to the quasi-public agency from two tourism and economic development funds.

Florida is one of the most popular states in the U.S. for tourists, and tourism is one of its biggest industries. Nearly 141 million tourists visited Florida in 2023, with out-of-state visitors contributing more than $102 billion to Florida’s economy.

Before the change, the LGBTQ+ section on Visit Florida's website had read, “There’s a sense of freedom to Florida’s beaches, the warm weather and the myriad activities — a draw for people of all orientations, but especially appealing to a gay community looking for a sense of belonging and acceptance.”

Blackburn said the change and other anti-LGBTQ+ policies out of Tallahassee make it more difficult for him to promote South Florida tourism since he encounters prospective travelers or travel promoters who say they don't want to do business in the state.

Last year, for instance, several civil rights groups issued a travel advisory for Florida, saying that policies championed by DeSantis and Florida lawmakers are “openly hostile toward African Americans, people of color and LGBTQ+ individuals.”

But visitors should also understand that many Florida cities are extremely inclusive, with gay elected officials and LGBTQ+-owned businesses, and they don't reflect the policies coming from state government, Blackburn added.

“It’s difficult when these kinds of stories come out, and the state does these things, and we hear people calling for a boycott,” Blackburn said. “On one level, it’s embarrassing to have to explain why people should come to South Florida and our destination when the state is doing these things.”

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

What is your take on the Supreme Courts decision to to uphold the ban on race as a deciding factor for admission to college?

“I just opened a brown girl who’s an 810 [SAT].”

“If its brown and above a 1300 [SAT] put them in for [the] merit/Excel [scholarship].”

“Still yes, give these brown babies a shot at these merit $$.”

“I am reading an Am. Ind.”

“[W]ith these [URM] kids, I’m trying to at least give them the chance to compete even if the [extracurriculars] and essays are just average.”

“I don’t think I can admit or defer this brown girl.”

“perfect 2400 SAT All 5 on AP one B in 11th”  “Brown?!” “Heck no. Asian.” “Of course. Still impressive.”

“I just read a blk girl who is an MC and Park nominee.”....

“Stellar academics for a Native Amer/African Amer kid.”....

“I’m going through this trouble because this is a bi-racial (black/white) male.”

This, as noted by Coleman Hughes in his recent "10 Notes on the End of Affirmative Action" post, is the ugly racist reality of "Affirmative Action." The above logs from Harvard's chat system come directly from the Supreme Court documents. This is how the sausage is made. This is racial discrimination.

If what these institutions are doing is so good, then it's curious that this process is not made transparent. Harvard were even insisting that they don't do it, simply because they changed the name so that, technically, they were telling the truth. Shouldn't they be proud of their "equity" work? If it's something that's good, own it.

A lot of the discourse around this is exactly the same tactics we've seen with CRT and gender stuff: "Literally nobody is doing this, but if they are doing it then it's a good thing and you're a bigot for trying to stop it. But nobody's doing it so that's why we have to stop it from being banned. Because of the fact it's not happening." #KettleLogic

They should also be honest with applicants. After all, Harvard's motto is Veritas (i.e. "truth").

https://colemanhughes.substack.com/p/10-notes-on-the-end-of-affirmative

Imagine if every college rejection letter contained an honest account of why every kid was rejected. Imagine, for example, if the Asian-American kid who would have gotten into Harvard were she not Asian received an honest statement attesting to that fact in her rejection letter: “We regret to inform you that you’ve been rejected in part because you are Asian-American. Had you been black or Hispanic with otherwise identical qualifications, we would have accepted you.” 

Coleman didn't go further, but I'd like to suggest the text for an acceptance letter: "We're pleased to inform you that you've been accepted to Harvard. This has occurred in part because of the color of your skin. Had you been white or Asian with otherwise identical qualifications, we would have deemed you as unsuitable."

Welcome to Harvard.

These institutions are neither transparent nor honest. This fact alone suggests they know what they're doing is wrong.

This is the result of what Harvard's system produces.

Sources:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf - Case

https://www.aei.org/op-eds/is-it-time-to-replace-race-with-class-in-affirmative-action/ - Chart

That is, an Asian person in the top 90-100 range on the academic index (higher scores are better) has a lower chance of acceptance than a black person in the 30-40 range.

Let's be frank: this is about expensive social signaling. Luxury beliefs.

Expensive, because it throws both black and Asian people under the bus. It's a way for elite progressives to signal how Good™ they are, without doing anything. Because it means they never have to wonder what could be done to actually lift black academic performance upwards, instead of lowering standards.

There's some suspicion that the quoted tweet is a parody account, but the fact it's so hard to tell these days means it kind doesn't even matter.

"You see that over here students are struggling, and instead of helping them more, you say, 'alright, well, we'll accept your failure.'" -- Dr. Amir Whitaker

If you're trying to "solve" academic disparity in the gap between high school graduation and university admission, you're out of your damned mind, you're over a decade too late, and you have no clue what the causes are, and therefore whether your "solution" will even do anything.

For example, it's uncontroversial that SAT scores correlate to study time, and that lower study time also corresponds to lower household income.

[ Source: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/analyzing-the-homework-gap-among-high-school-students/ ]

Why, and how can we address this, are all very interesting and worthwhile questions to pursue; there are few studies of enquiry that would be more noble and worthwhile.

Here's the thing: Roland Fryer did uplift very low performing black students to above the level of white students. But it took hard work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8xWOlk3WIw

• "Aggressive Human Capital Management" - i.e. firing lots of teachers "You ask the teachers what you think you need to educate these kids. We got answers like, 'well, all we need is smarter kids.' I said, 'all you need is a new job.'" • Extra time "If you're behind, you either got to spend more time, or ask the white kids to please take Thursday and Friday off." • Small tutoring groups • Use data to drive instruction • High expectations and no excuses for failure

All of this is doable. It won't even cost all that much. But doing the hard work around student study time, performance expectations, staff management, etc, isn't as glamorous as online screaming to show off your progressive bona fides by calling everyone a racist. #MoreHomework isn't a hashtag that's going to go viral. And there's a certain class of person - usually white progressive elites - who wants to claim that the above common sense, pragmatic list is some kind of cloaked message of racism. "bLaMiNg pOc iNsTeAd oF DiSmAnTLInG SyStEmIc rAcIsM" or whatever. You know the song; it's the same one they always sing.

There are dozens of other problems in the way the US education system works which I've talked about before: teaching reading the wrong way; stupid woke classes in fake-math rather than real math; the lack of a fixed, defined curriculum; the pathological avoidance of teaching content. Many of these issues are magnified at the lower socio-economic classes. The failures in teaching reading, for example, can be offset among those in the middle-class if you're engaged in reading at home with involved parents and access to books. In poorer households with parents - or indeed, single-parents - who are time-poor and where books might not be as plentiful, the deficiencies of the education system aren't as likely to be mitigated at home.

So the problem often isn't an issue of race but of poverty. People pay attention to it as it affects race, but that misses the rest of the forest.

Remember the Harvard academic decile rankings table I posted earlier? It comes from an article by Ian Rowe titled "Is It Time to Replace Race with Class in Affirmative Action?" It makes, obviously, the case that assistance should be applied at the level of socioeconomics, not race. The idea that middle and upper-class black people - and yes, most black Americans are middle-class - need assistance, while poor whites, such as the Appalachian areas, do not and are "privileged," is pretty perverted. It assumes black people are incapable, while also redirecting help from people who would benefit from it, simply because they're white. It makes gross assumptions about everyone, while helping very few. If you help poor people, you'll help poor black people as well. Which is what the left used to be about. Remember those days?

I mean, have you ever actually looked at the Nation's Report Card? It's a portrait of a broken, inadequate education system.

[ Source: https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/dashboards/schools_dashboard.aspx ]

My point being that by the time you're talking about admission to university, it's already too late. This should have been addressed right from the beginning as children start school. Then you would have closer parity in terms of academic results, and closer parity in academic admissions.

One other thing that should be mentioned is something I recall John McWhorter discussing which is called "mismatch."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CU3hQfyEKQ

Studies on mismatch show that those lowered academic standards cause black people to attend schools where they're less likely to earn degrees than they otherwise would be.

That is, throwing a student of average academic capability into an elite institution is more likely to have them either fail out or drop out. It would be better to have them attend a university better fitting with their academic ability.

Especially as it relates to ambition. Why everybody needs to aspire to a pretentious, expensive - and let's not forget, woke, as clearly demonstrated - university as Harvard is beyond me.

“I wouldn't want to belong to a club that would have me as a member” -- Groucho Marx

Maybe that's just me, though.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0465029965/

Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It's Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won't Admit It Sander and Taylor have long admired affirmative action's original goals, but after many years of studying racial preferences, they have reached a controversial but undeniable conclusion: that preferences hurt underrepresented minorities far more than they help them. At the heart of affirmative action's failure is a simple phenomenon called mismatch. Using dramatic new data and numerous interviews with affected former students and university officials of color, the authors show how racial preferences often put students in competition with far better-prepared classmates, dooming many to fall so far behind that they can never catch up. Mismatch largely explains why, even though black applicants are more likely to enter college than whites with similar backgrounds, they are far less likely to finish; why there are so few black and Hispanic professionals with science and engineering degrees and doctorates; why black law graduates fail bar exams at four times the rate of whites; and why universities accept relatively affluent minorities over working class and poor people of all races.

And even for black students who legitimately make the admissions standards, their framed Harvard certification will have a cloud permanently cast over it. Did the black Harvard-attending economist you're interviewing for your company get there by merit or by lowered standards? Should you even bother with Harvard graduates any more?

Some of the other discourse is like "you're going to stop affirmative action..." - i.e. racial discrimination - "...but you're not going to stop legacy admissions!?" This is literally WhatAboutism. Both things can be wrong and unfair. "This thing being wrong justifies us doing this other wrong thing."

This case is about race-based selection, filed by Asian students who were being racially discriminated against. The case was not about legacies. You don't rule on a case that nobody has presented. And as far as I know, legacies are not explicitly in violation of the U.S. Constitution. If you think legacies should go away, then make the case. Find something in the Constitution, find a legal precedent, or make a challenge some other way.

But don't make excuses for perpetrating one wrong thing on the basis of another wrong thing.

Coleman's analysis is interesting and goes into depth, so is worth a read.

I won't reproduce the whole thing here, but the headings are worth a read at least:

“Affirmative Action” is a Euphemism for Racial Discrimination

“Affirmative Action” Affects the Elites, Not the Masses

The Benefits of “Affirmative Action” are Dubious

Mismatch is Real

“Affirmative Action” is Not the Product of The Civil Rights Movement

Quotas are a Red herring

We’re Confused About Diversity 

Affirmative Action as Reparations?

The Equilibrium Will Change

If Not Affirmative Action, then What?

Finally, what I will say is that it's simultaneously interesting, gratifying and alarming all at the same time to witness the open and proud denunciation of the "colorblind" ideal espoused by MLK Jr, by people purporting to be "progressive."

When you criticize "equity" as discrimination by authoritarians to artificially manufacture their pet outcomes, people sometimes act like you're just making it up. Then a reaction like this happens and people start saying the quiet bit out loud, proving you right. Not that you necessarily want to be.

[anotherdayforchaosfay]

At the Republican National Convention last week, multiple speakers discussed cutting funding for schools teaching critical race theory and allowing transgender athletes to compete through Title IX.

Republicans like Rep. Byron Donalds of Florida, for example, repeatedly mentioned “universal school choice,” referring to the part of the GOP policy platform that seeks to give parents more of a say in what their children learn in school. “We believe schools should educate, not indoctrinate,” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said at the convention. “We stand for parents’ rights, including universal school choice.” Eric Trump, the son of the former president and Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, described the current education system as “brainwash[ing]” children “instead of learning the fundamentals in school.” “Education will be handed back to the states,” Eric Trump said. Republicans and Democrats have long been divided over how to handle public education in the U.S. Polls suggest that within the past few years, as Republicans like Trump have become more vocal about wanting to separate the federal government from education, more parents — and voters — seem to agree they should have more authority over what their school-age kids learn. Overall, education across the United States is funded and overseen by state and local governments. But the federal government does fund some areas and sets requirements for the state and local authorities to comply with, which is where the Department of Education (DOE) comes in. As we inch closer to the 2024 presidential election, Republican calls to dismantle the DOE seem to be growing louder. But what would that actually look like? What is the argument behind shutting down the Department of Education? The Department of Education has long been a target of criticism by the Republican Party. But the current GOP case against the agency is rooted in the belief that the federal government should not be funding curriculums that teach “critical race theory, gender ideology or other inappropriate racial, sexual or political content.” According to Republicans, this includes a long-established academic framework that teaches students about the history of institutional racism — from how settlers stole land from Native Americans to the civil rights movement. For Republicans like DeSantis, who signed the Parental Rights in Education Act in 2023, cutting out the DOE would allow schools to ban instruction on gender identity and sexual orientation for students, limit history lessons on racism that, he claims, encourage “ideological conformity” and reject Advanced Placement class options like AP African American studies. The DOE, however, says on its website that education is already primarily a state and local responsibility in the U.S., with federal funding contributing only 8% to elementary and secondary education. Variations of the DOE, going as far back as 1867, have been massively unpopular with Republicans. In 2023, the Pew Research Center found that 65% of Republicans polled viewed the DOE negatively, and in 2022 more than half of Republican parents of K-12 students said they felt the federal government had too much influence on what public schools were teaching.

CNN reported that at the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2022, Trump said, “Across the country, we need to implement strict prohibitions on teaching inappropriate racial, sexual and political material to America’s schoolchildren in any form whatsoever. And if federal bureaucrats are going to push this radicalism, we should abolish the Department of Education.” In early 2023, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky introduced a bill to abolish the DOE by the end of the year, writing, "Unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., should not be in charge of our children’s intellectual and moral development.” Recently, Trump and other Republicans have taken issue with the federal agency’s policies around diversity and LGBTQ inclusion, some of which, like the DOE’s “Final Rule” under Title IX, protects students from harassment over their ethnicity or sexual orientation. Republicans argue it undermines “the original intent of the gender-equity law” from 1972, which bans discrimination based on sex in education. In April, the DOE expanded Title IX rules to protect against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. At a conference in June, Trump said he would sign an executive order on the first day of his presidency to cut funding for “any school pushing critical race theory, transgender insanity and other inappropriate racial, sexual or political content on to the lives of our children.”

What would happen to the Department of Education’s duties if it were dismantled? While the DOE has several responsibilities, its biggest sectors are student loans, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) and Title I, which provides financial support to schools and school districts with high percentages of students from low-income families. Conversations surrounding shutting down the DOE have spiked in recent months thanks to the 2024 election, but no Republican candidate has really detailed how they would handle DOE redistribution. While Trump was president in 2018, his administration proposed merging the DOE and the Department of Labor into one agency, but it never got the approval from Congress to implement that plan. Earlier this year, House Republicans proposed cutting Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) by 80%. Title I is meant to support underfunded schools and help the education of over 26 million children, and its elimination would disproportionately affect students of color. The funding cuts would also cause 226,000 teachers, aides and staff to be laid off. Another proposal House Republicans offered in July sought to cut $10 million from the DOE’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR). The OCR’s purpose is to investigate allegations of discrimination — in 2022, the OCR resolved over 16,000 cases of potential civil rights violations against students. Title III, another DOE program Republicans want to cut, is dedicated to funding language assistance programs for the more than 5 million students in K-12 grades who are learning English as a second language.

Other proposed cuts include slashing funding for state grants that help teachers, for Federal Work Study programs that provide part-time jobs for students with financial need, for magnet schools and programs that help with full-service community colleges and for research and development grants that go to historically Black colleges, tribal colleges and minority-serving institutions. How would someone go about eliminating the Department of Education? Experts told Politico that it’s “nearly impossible” to kill an entire government agency. Federal employees are protected from layoffs by civil service laws, and the president can’t just decide to downsize government agencies without backing from Congress. According to Rick Heiss, the director of Education Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute, in terms of any threat to the DOE, “it’s a safe bet that the big programs aren’t going away.” Hypothetically, if Congress agreed with the president to dismantle the DOE, it’s likely there would be a rearrangement of all its programs, funding and employees to other departments instead of cutting everything. In fact, the DOE was originally part of a larger agency called the Department of Health, Education and Welfare which then-President Jimmy Carter split up in 1980. “The fact is that few policymakers, right or left, are willing to call for slashing (much less spending) federal aid for low-income students or learners with special needs,” Heiss wrote in an op-ed for Education Week. “The practical effect would be to move this stuff to other Cabinet agencies.”

The best way to control and influence a population is by keeping it ignorant.

Vote Blue of you don't want to see this fuckery happen. Republicans don't have your best interest in mind. They care only about staying in power, making the rich richer, and keeping the rest of us poor.

Vote Blue like your life depends on it, like your rights depend on it, like generations ahead depend on it. Because they do.

Vote Blue down the ballot. Congress, the Senate, the White House, and SCOTUS.

Do not split the vote!!!!!!! That's how Dictator Agent Orange won, and why we have years of recovery ahead of us.

Anyone who tells you not to vote, that it's not worth voting because it doesn't matter, they are actively suppressing your vote. If your vote didn't matter, republicans wouldn't be so afraid. They wouldn't be trying so hard to keep people from voting. They wouldn't remove voting sites, they wouldn't be purging voting registries, they wouldn't be fighting to keep BIPOC from voting.

"One vote won make a difference." When a hundred people, a thousand people, a million people believe this, republicans win. Every. Single. Time. They always vote!

You cannot boycott the vote. Boycotting is done to prevent a business from making money. You can boycott Starbucks but not the government. You will be actively giving up your power by refusing to vote.

There are two parties. Third party votes always respult in republicans winning.

Vote Blue!!!!

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

David Fitzsimmons, Arizona Daily Star

* * * * *

Across Florida, spontaneous demonstrations against Ron DeSantis' gutting of public education. This summer, Iris Mogul – a junior at a Miami high school – found out that she wouldn’t be able to take an AP African American history course that she had planned for the coming semester because it had been blocked by the state’s department of education.

“As presented, the content of this course is inexplicably contrary to Florida law and significantly lacks educational value,” the department said in a statement. “It felt so far away when I first heard about all of this,” says Mogul, who only had a passing knowledge of book challenges and changes to school curriculum previously. “But that is really when it hit me – when it started to affect me directly.”

Now, Mogul is prominent among the growing number of students and parents in Miami-Dade county and across Florida who are speaking out in opposition to book challenges, the capture of Florida school boards by conservative activists and this summer’s latest policy changes, which includes the expansion of DeSantis’s Parental Rights in Education Act.

[‘Reading is resistance’: students and parents take on DeSantis’s book bans]

[schraubd]

Nobody Is More Gullible Than Alt-Center "Free Speech" Advocates

When Florida announced it was banning the AP African-American history course, 90% of Ron DeSantis' supporters know exactly what he's doing -- legally banning wrongthink on race to the greatest extent possible -- and support it on that basis. They know that's what he's doing because he's been crystal clear about his agenda from day one and entirely consistent in applying it.

But you still can easily find alt-center "free speech!" advocates who tie themselves in knots to plead that it's actually about "opposing indoctrination" or "ensuring that multiple perspectives are taught" or something that just has to be different from "rank censorship". Meanwhile, the Florida government just states outright that if the college board wants its class taught in the Sunshine State, "we expect the removal of content on Critical Race Theory, Black Queer Studies, Intersectionality and other topics that violate our laws." They're not even bothering to hide it, but the alt-center sorts are perfectly happy to pull the wool over their own eyes in order to maintain harmony on their Scales of Broder.

It is incredible, looking back, to remember that approximately 9 month period where conservatives went on a high horse about protecting "free speech" and "uncomfortable learning" in the educational space as against various real and imagined left-wing bugaboos. The rapidity to which they shifted without even breaking a sweat into "enact legal bans on left-wing ideas whenever and wherever we can", and the degree to which their "free speech" hangers-on just followed along without seeming to notice or care that they suddenly were becoming foot soldiers of legally-mandated censorship, is a development I still can't fully wrap my head around. At most, you get some "both sides" grousing about how while they aren't exactly fans of throwing librarians in jail if they stock books that deviate from state-imposed orthodoxy, they can't focus on that too extensively because it might distract them from finishing their 67-tweet thread on an overzealous student protest at Swarthmore, followed by a portentous statement expressing outrage that anyone would even think of withdrawing any honors or accolades from state-censor-in-chief Ron DeSantis.

But seriously -- has any movement more quickly demonstrated itself to be populated entirely by useful idiots than this one?

via The Debate Link https://ift.tt/Ed48MrJ