4 ms·

There are no two people in the world with the same beliefs - nobody is suggesting that. There is however a very broad movement of people who believe that unequ

There are no two people in the world with the same beliefs - nobody is suggesting that. There is however a very broad movement of people who believe that unequal outcomes are a manifestation of racism and so they act accordingly in their roles in government etc.. Many of these people are in the civil service and so this will influence their view. It would be 'insane' to ignore this movement, it's one of the most powerful social forces in the US right now.

klodolph 5y ago
You're saying it's one of the "most powerful social forces in the US right now"... is there any particular reasoning here? To be honest, it sounds like an extremist take on the nature vs nurture argument which has been playing out for millennia and I don't see a reason to believe that somehow the extreme version nurture side of the argument has become dominant here. If anything, it's easy to remember the pendulum swinging back and forth in the past decades, and the pendulum doesn't seem to swing that far in either direction. > Many of these people are in the civil service and so this will influence their view. It influences the political pressures placed on people in the civil service more than anything else. People in the civil service are in the civil service for a long time, typically. Often they are in the civil service for decades. On the other hand, elected officials and political appointees rotate in and out much more quickly. I know people in the civil service, they have a much more long-term and level-headed view of things, and my impression is that they "weather the storm" of changing political pressures. At least, the ones who survive in the job do. Political appointees and elected officials are much more mercurial. Appointees know that their position is (somewhat) an extension of their own political power to begin with.
- tonguez 5y ago
  “I don't see a reason to believe that somehow the extreme version nurture side of the argument has become dominant here” watch “the news” or go on twitter
  - klodolph 5y ago
    Twitter's algorithm promotes whatever tweet will make people angry, because angry people spend more time on Twitter. I'm on Twitter, but I've been on Twitter for a while now, I've selected who I follow, and my feed just doesn't get that kind of noise in it at any significant level. Most of what I see on Twitter is people arguing about Elden Ring or showing off how they can access YouTube from a Mac SE or something. "The news" is dominated by organizations which are trying to maximize their social media engagement metrics so they can get more money from advertisers, so they're subject to the same forces that drive Twitter. Neither of these sources reliably give you a picture of national affairs. Right now the best I can do is get a picture of local affairs by talking with people that I happen to encounter because I live near them.
- jollybean 5y ago
  Yes, it's been going on for a while. Christians are fond if it: "You have an innate, direct relationship with God, in his eyes you are equal to the The King" etc.. But we've only had 'governance' in the broad sense for 100 years. And we've never really tried to apply such principles into education until the 1960s. Now we have actually made incredible progress on social issues, we have our 'wars' in Social Media with Holy Anti Racism Fanatics trying to do their best - because 'racism is bad' - which of course it is - and 'systematic racism exists' - which of course it does - but the 'kernel of truth' of these issues drives people into ideological fervour as though it's some giant overwhelming issue, when really it's not. Racism is still pernicious, but it's not fundamental. And FYI don't think it's all rubbish. For example - 'Math' is heavily based on prerequisites. If you 'fall back' in Grade 4, you may never be able to 'catch up'. While that's true in general, it's not as acute as in math. Poor kids might be far more likely to 'fall of the bandwagon' and a lot of poverty might be due to systematic racism, and so the 'Hard Requirements' for certain things may not be ideal. You could have 'summer school' or 'after school' or 'accelerated catch up' programs. Those would be 'reasonable' solutions in my view - and FYI these are mostly issues of poverty, not race, they are couched as racial issues because that's what fires people up. Edit: and yes, I agree 'most people in the civil service' are level-headed. Most people actually are. But some groups have outsized voices, amplified by 'allies' elsewhere. The 'Anti Racism Agenda' is a 'fundamental pillar', like a religion, of 25% of the US population, and they are pretty active about it. And the actions of the most extreme 5% end up really upsetting other people. Much like a very powerful fool using made up constitutional manoeuvres to try to take over the government would upset a lot of people as well. Good intentions, surely, but that doesn't make them right.
  - CryptoPunk 5y ago
    >>and 'systematic racism exists' - which of course it does Systematic racism only exists today to positively discriminate against people belonging to so-called disadvantaged races, at the expense of those belonging to so-called privileged races. That's why White and Asian kids are discriminated against in college admissions.
    - ummonk 5y ago
drewwwwww 5y ago
- rayiner 5y ago
  I know progressives love to portray things as a dichotomy between “fascism” and “equity” but that leaves out the position that the majority of people in minority groups actually support—color blindness: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/25/most-americans-say-colleges-should-not-consider-race-or-ethnicity-in-admissions/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/25/most-americ...
- jollybean 5y ago
  Well Mr/Ms Drewwwww - you have very graciously made point for me. Since I have no such 'scientific racism' views and claims of 'proto-fascism' are ridiculous at face value ... ... that a common person would take some rather mundane comment somewhere to mean those things, implies that they've been radicalized in some way in the manner that I've described. "Racists is everywhere, under my bed, in the jingle for that product, in our schools! Math is racist! We Need Action Now!" 'Anti Racism' is a reasonable concept at face value, but the issue has obviously created groups of wayward ideologues in large swaths in the US, who are more likely than not to be involved in the civil service, particularly in education. Since 'improving education' is a perennial issue of contention anyhow - if we throw 'math is racist' into the fire, along with legions (at least a critical mass) of fervent supporters - and then finally allow the hollow politicians and media to misrepresent and aggrandize all of it in bad faith (votes, money, attention, power etc.) ... then we have yet another toxic cocktail of public malaise and dysfunction distracting us from dealing with the core issues.
ummonk 5y ago
I certainly agree racism gets overemphasized as the sole cause of disparities compared to other factors like culture, economic status, and selective immigration (I don’t see how racism explains, for example, why the children of Nigerian immigrants outperform those of Mexican immigrants, or why Asians outperform whites). But even conceding that racism is the dominant factor in performance differences, the framework proposed here is plain ridiculous. In essence, what they’re advocating is that because disadvantaged groups underperform in advanced math, advanced math should be scrapped altogether in public schools. The effect of this will be to handicap disadvantaged groups even further, as they’re less likely to attend private school or have access to private tutoring, and thus will be locked out of advanced math entirely while advantages groups continue to receive advanced math instruction in private schools.

klodolph 5y ago

You're saying it's one of the "most powerful social forces in the US right now"... is there any particular reasoning here? To be honest, it sounds like an extremist take on the nature vs nurture argument which has been playing out for millennia and I don't see a reason to believe that somehow the extreme version nurture side of the argument has become dominant here. If anything, it's easy to remember the pendulum swinging back and forth in the past decades, and the pendulum doesn't seem to swing that far in either direction. > Many of these people are in the civil service and so this will influence their view. It influences the political pressures placed on people in the civil service more than anything else. People in the civil service are in the civil service for a long time, typically. Often they are in the civil service for decades. On the other hand, elected officials and political appointees rotate in and out much more quickly. I know people in the civil service, they have a much more long-term and level-headed view of things, and my impression is that they "weather the storm" of changing political pressures. At least, the ones who survive in the job do. Political appointees and elected officials are much more mercurial. Appointees know that their position is (somewhat) an extension of their own political power to begin with.

tonguez 5y ago
“I don't see a reason to believe that somehow the extreme version nurture side of the argument has become dominant here” watch “the news” or go on twitter
- klodolph 5y ago
  Twitter's algorithm promotes whatever tweet will make people angry, because angry people spend more time on Twitter. I'm on Twitter, but I've been on Twitter for a while now, I've selected who I follow, and my feed just doesn't get that kind of noise in it at any significant level. Most of what I see on Twitter is people arguing about Elden Ring or showing off how they can access YouTube from a Mac SE or something. "The news" is dominated by organizations which are trying to maximize their social media engagement metrics so they can get more money from advertisers, so they're subject to the same forces that drive Twitter. Neither of these sources reliably give you a picture of national affairs. Right now the best I can do is get a picture of local affairs by talking with people that I happen to encounter because I live near them.
jollybean 5y ago
Yes, it's been going on for a while. Christians are fond if it: "You have an innate, direct relationship with God, in his eyes you are equal to the The King" etc.. But we've only had 'governance' in the broad sense for 100 years. And we've never really tried to apply such principles into education until the 1960s. Now we have actually made incredible progress on social issues, we have our 'wars' in Social Media with Holy Anti Racism Fanatics trying to do their best - because 'racism is bad' - which of course it is - and 'systematic racism exists' - which of course it does - but the 'kernel of truth' of these issues drives people into ideological fervour as though it's some giant overwhelming issue, when really it's not. Racism is still pernicious, but it's not fundamental. And FYI don't think it's all rubbish. For example - 'Math' is heavily based on prerequisites. If you 'fall back' in Grade 4, you may never be able to 'catch up'. While that's true in general, it's not as acute as in math. Poor kids might be far more likely to 'fall of the bandwagon' and a lot of poverty might be due to systematic racism, and so the 'Hard Requirements' for certain things may not be ideal. You could have 'summer school' or 'after school' or 'accelerated catch up' programs. Those would be 'reasonable' solutions in my view - and FYI these are mostly issues of poverty, not race, they are couched as racial issues because that's what fires people up. Edit: and yes, I agree 'most people in the civil service' are level-headed. Most people actually are. But some groups have outsized voices, amplified by 'allies' elsewhere. The 'Anti Racism Agenda' is a 'fundamental pillar', like a religion, of 25% of the US population, and they are pretty active about it. And the actions of the most extreme 5% end up really upsetting other people. Much like a very powerful fool using made up constitutional manoeuvres to try to take over the government would upset a lot of people as well. Good intentions, surely, but that doesn't make them right.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  >>and 'systematic racism exists' - which of course it does Systematic racism only exists today to positively discriminate against people belonging to so-called disadvantaged races, at the expense of those belonging to so-called privileged races. That's why White and Asian kids are discriminated against in college admissions.
  - ummonk 5y ago

drewwwwww 5y ago

rayiner 5y ago
I know progressives love to portray things as a dichotomy between “fascism” and “equity” but that leaves out the position that the majority of people in minority groups actually support—color blindness: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/25/most-americans-say-colleges-should-not-consider-race-or-ethnicity-in-admissions/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/25/most-americ...
jollybean 5y ago
Well Mr/Ms Drewwwww - you have very graciously made point for me. Since I have no such 'scientific racism' views and claims of 'proto-fascism' are ridiculous at face value ... ... that a common person would take some rather mundane comment somewhere to mean those things, implies that they've been radicalized in some way in the manner that I've described. "Racists is everywhere, under my bed, in the jingle for that product, in our schools! Math is racist! We Need Action Now!" 'Anti Racism' is a reasonable concept at face value, but the issue has obviously created groups of wayward ideologues in large swaths in the US, who are more likely than not to be involved in the civil service, particularly in education. Since 'improving education' is a perennial issue of contention anyhow - if we throw 'math is racist' into the fire, along with legions (at least a critical mass) of fervent supporters - and then finally allow the hollow politicians and media to misrepresent and aggrandize all of it in bad faith (votes, money, attention, power etc.) ... then we have yet another toxic cocktail of public malaise and dysfunction distracting us from dealing with the core issues.

ummonk 5y ago

I certainly agree racism gets overemphasized as the sole cause of disparities compared to other factors like culture, economic status, and selective immigration (I don’t see how racism explains, for example, why the children of Nigerian immigrants outperform those of Mexican immigrants, or why Asians outperform whites). But even conceding that racism is the dominant factor in performance differences, the framework proposed here is plain ridiculous. In essence, what they’re advocating is that because disadvantaged groups underperform in advanced math, advanced math should be scrapped altogether in public schools. The effect of this will be to handicap disadvantaged groups even further, as they’re less likely to attend private school or have access to private tutoring, and thus will be locked out of advanced math entirely while advantages groups continue to receive advanced math instruction in private schools.