9 ms·

From my view it’s the right that is making education more arduous, especially for teachers at every step of the process. I haven’t seen anyone on the left try t

From my view it’s the right that is making education more arduous, especially for teachers at every step of the process. I haven’t seen anyone on the left try to censor teachers or cut their funding. “Girls who code” was huge at my inner city high school. Funded by the left. Democrat politicians fought constantly to make the schools better while republicans campaigned on vouchers that would mean poor students are stuck in schools with less funding while rich ones get a cheaper private education. I think you’re falling for the trap of only ingesting the “outrage” news and letting the normal stuff pass you by(maybe I'm just projecting because i fall for that all the time unfortunately). > more rigorous curriculum for all instead of for the elite students This is called common core and was implemented with widespread bipartisan support. Really we all agree on most things. That’s not to say there aren’t problems with the left. You just seem to have misunderstood them. For example, charter schools seem to be a good solution that combines choice with not leaving out those unable to pay. Yet both sides seem adamantly against them for their own reasons. > by merely asking such questions I'm a far right, a racist, and of course, a fascist Now we're really getting into speculation territory, but my hunch is that you've gotten these negative reactions because the people you are talking to/arguing with believe they are already supporting these initiatives and therefore that your complaints are in bad faith.

hintymad 4y ago
I really wish that education is a bipartisan issue. It's really not about left or right. What I was criticizing is not any specific policy but that the elites, whatever parties they belong to, use morality to block legitimate discussion of tough problems. It just so happens that the left love to put people into racists and fascists group, or so when I am being subject to exposure bias. > vouchers that would mean poor students are stuck in schools with less funding while rich ones get a cheaper private education. This is the discussion I wish we have more. That is, someone says that voucher is all about giving freedom and forcing teachers to teach better, but in reality it may work just the opposite. And we should really discuss its pros and cons without attacking each other's motives. > You just seem to have misunderstood them Maybe so, as I'm subject to exposure bias. I just can list equal number of examples that show how the left pushed their agenda too. Let's start with Gebru. When LeCun said that bias in model was the result of bias in data, Gebru attacked him for being a bigot. When Gebru was fired from Google, how many media spent even a single paragraph to discuss the quality of her paper, which was the root of the whole debacle, while being busy attacking Google for being racist or misogynist? Or search Allison Collins. When she was criticized for her policy, she said "“Many Asian believe they benefit from the ‘model minority’ BS. In fact many Asian Americans actively promote these myths. They use white supremacist thinking to assimilate and get ahead". When school boards lower their academic standards, they cite racism (again, they maybe right, but it's wrong to attack anyone who questions their conclusion). When students performed worse in maths, multiple school boards claimed that maths are racists or there are racisms in maths curriculum. When people were talking about bringing manufacturing back to the US, a pundit said along the line that it was poor white people wishing to bring back their power. When people asked why some Asians get ahead in the us, multiple Opinions and anchors argued that it's because Asians are closer to white. When people are talking about students' reading and maths proficiency were trending downwards, how many articles immediately claimed that the issue was racism? Of if we go back, how many people would call you a racist if you questioned Warren's claim that she was a native American? So, yes, I'm not happy with what I saw, but I saw the aforementioned examples and more from WaPo, from NYT, from The Atlantic, from Reuters, from MSNBC, from school boards, and from politicians. So, I don't know what kind of misunderstanding I can avoid.
- colinmhayes 4y ago
  A couple thoughts here. First, politics is inherently divisive. Just like facebook figured out that divisiveness drives engagement and so have politicians. The craziest voices end up most amplified as everyone who opposes them loudly shouts about how crazy the other side is. Just like I don't believe there is widespread support for book banning on the right I don't see the support for SF style school boards. If you want to know what dems actaully support just listen to a biden speech on education or better yet read the platform here https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/providing-a-world-class-education-in-every-zip-code/ https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/providin.... You'll notice that the main focus regarding race is funding for bussing programs and other methods of integrating schools, and that the focus is on income more than race. The republicans decided not to publish a platform in 2022 for whatever reason but they gave us this to explain themselves https://ballotpedia.org/The_Republican_Party_Platform,_2020 https://ballotpedia.org/The_Republican_Party_Platform,_2020. I will say that recent laws in Florida have been concerning, but obviously the same is true for SF, and I blame presidential posturing more than ideology for the Florida stuff. I realize it can be difficult to separate the rhetoric from the actual bills and laws being passed, but it is extremely important to do so, and to call out troublesome ones no matter where they come from. I think taking pundits with a grain of salt is about as much as we can do as individuals, but it sure would be nice to figure out a way to better inform people(on both sides) of facts, because more and more I just see people parroting their talking points past each other instead of steelmanning. Because if we forget about the pundits we end up with stuff like common core. Common sense rules that can make everyone better off aren't what pundits are selling, their incentives aren't properly aligned unfortunately.

hintymad 4y ago

I really wish that education is a bipartisan issue. It's really not about left or right. What I was criticizing is not any specific policy but that the elites, whatever parties they belong to, use morality to block legitimate discussion of tough problems. It just so happens that the left love to put people into racists and fascists group, or so when I am being subject to exposure bias. > vouchers that would mean poor students are stuck in schools with less funding while rich ones get a cheaper private education. This is the discussion I wish we have more. That is, someone says that voucher is all about giving freedom and forcing teachers to teach better, but in reality it may work just the opposite. And we should really discuss its pros and cons without attacking each other's motives. > You just seem to have misunderstood them Maybe so, as I'm subject to exposure bias. I just can list equal number of examples that show how the left pushed their agenda too. Let's start with Gebru. When LeCun said that bias in model was the result of bias in data, Gebru attacked him for being a bigot. When Gebru was fired from Google, how many media spent even a single paragraph to discuss the quality of her paper, which was the root of the whole debacle, while being busy attacking Google for being racist or misogynist? Or search Allison Collins. When she was criticized for her policy, she said "“Many Asian believe they benefit from the ‘model minority’ BS. In fact many Asian Americans actively promote these myths. They use white supremacist thinking to assimilate and get ahead". When school boards lower their academic standards, they cite racism (again, they maybe right, but it's wrong to attack anyone who questions their conclusion). When students performed worse in maths, multiple school boards claimed that maths are racists or there are racisms in maths curriculum. When people were talking about bringing manufacturing back to the US, a pundit said along the line that it was poor white people wishing to bring back their power. When people asked why some Asians get ahead in the us, multiple Opinions and anchors argued that it's because Asians are closer to white. When people are talking about students' reading and maths proficiency were trending downwards, how many articles immediately claimed that the issue was racism? Of if we go back, how many people would call you a racist if you questioned Warren's claim that she was a native American? So, yes, I'm not happy with what I saw, but I saw the aforementioned examples and more from WaPo, from NYT, from The Atlantic, from Reuters, from MSNBC, from school boards, and from politicians. So, I don't know what kind of misunderstanding I can avoid.

colinmhayes 4y ago
A couple thoughts here. First, politics is inherently divisive. Just like facebook figured out that divisiveness drives engagement and so have politicians. The craziest voices end up most amplified as everyone who opposes them loudly shouts about how crazy the other side is. Just like I don't believe there is widespread support for book banning on the right I don't see the support for SF style school boards. If you want to know what dems actaully support just listen to a biden speech on education or better yet read the platform here https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/providing-a-world-class-education-in-every-zip-code/ https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/providin.... You'll notice that the main focus regarding race is funding for bussing programs and other methods of integrating schools, and that the focus is on income more than race. The republicans decided not to publish a platform in 2022 for whatever reason but they gave us this to explain themselves https://ballotpedia.org/The_Republican_Party_Platform,_2020 https://ballotpedia.org/The_Republican_Party_Platform,_2020. I will say that recent laws in Florida have been concerning, but obviously the same is true for SF, and I blame presidential posturing more than ideology for the Florida stuff. I realize it can be difficult to separate the rhetoric from the actual bills and laws being passed, but it is extremely important to do so, and to call out troublesome ones no matter where they come from. I think taking pundits with a grain of salt is about as much as we can do as individuals, but it sure would be nice to figure out a way to better inform people(on both sides) of facts, because more and more I just see people parroting their talking points past each other instead of steelmanning. Because if we forget about the pundits we end up with stuff like common core. Common sense rules that can make everyone better off aren't what pundits are selling, their incentives aren't properly aligned unfortunately.