3 ms·
There were a lot of things going on in the world in the '60s. Whatever you think of TFA, it's simply arguing for more rigor in education. Unless you think racia
by weberc2 7y ago
There were a lot of things going on in the world in the '60s. Whatever you think of TFA, it's simply arguing for more rigor in education. Unless you think racial minorities are less capable of rigorous study, there's no reason to assume the article is racially coded.
- SolaceQuantum 7y agoI didn't say that racial minorities were less capable of rigorous study, merely that the article did not actually functionally advocate for rigor with that statement, but instead is equating meritocracy with a time period that didn't have meritocracy because people were excluded based on race. Which is concerning.
- weberc2 7y agoThe article isn't making any such equivalence. It doesn't so much as imply a pre-60s meritocracy. The fact that two things are contemporary doesn't suggest a causal relationship. Perhaps if the article mentioned desegregation, one could reasonably infer that the article was alluding to a causal relationship, but it doesn't even do that. The article (and indeed the specific sentences you referenced) is very explicit about the problem (decline of academic standards) and it offers an explanation (the rise in value of nonacademic standards). If your subtext depends on ignoring everything about the original claims (fixating solely on a date), you're being libelous.