This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
It doesn’t work that way. If you’re in a public school, ADA accommodations are legally required, IED plans and extra teachers for the low performing kids are required. There’s no requirement for AP to even be offered. So when the budget cuts come, they cut the non-required elective programs, and AP and advanced courses.
I don’t believe in the ADA or lot of federal regulations anyway. As far as school goes I definitely think it’s most important the smarter kids get the training they need.
That being said atleast for these NYC schools they seem to be spending 50k a year so I would expect they can do both.
The middle class flyover area I grew up in had far less funding and had no problem complying with special ed requirements and having 20 AP courses.
More options
Context Copy link
Would it be wrong to suggest that we should codify requirements to improve education for smart kids too?
Only if your socialism is of the national variety.
If it is, you'll understand that you need exceptionally well-educated students to spread the Revolution and defend your glorious Motherland from enemy pig-dogs. The system is already communist: taking more would be counterproductive, for you need to keep your smartest properly motivated to export/maintain the Revolution by force of arms, so you need to compete with the nations you'd use those arms on. (Exposing them to the bottom 90% would degrade their desire to accept the unequal tax rate, for the same reasons we're talking about now.)
If it is not, you'll understand that exceptionally well-educated students are the enemy, which is why intentionally handicapping them is morally correct. This is still the same communist-type redistribution- from worthful to worthless- but in this system it's front-loaded because this kind of communist lives in a post-scarcity environment where the smart people have already solved all their problems (so you don't need as many of them, which makes them a threat, which means you need to redistribute that superiority lest they turn it on you)[1].
For the National Socialists, they're still working on that, so they can't do this to anywhere near the same degree (and it would undermine the "national" part). Indeed, one further notes that National Socialist is a society in which the male and female roles in society co-operate (which is arguably a large part of why women/redistributionists instinctively hate systems that were more National than Socialist in the popular culture- which is why Red Tribe and Nazi Germany are equivalent to them).
[1] Which gives rise to the Harrison Bergeron story- which I notice describes Cain's perspective of the logical consequence of Abel realizing more gifts than Cain is equivalent to/inherently grants him power over Cain, and hence why Cain must kill him.
National socialism is a compromise between the two (which doesn't itself guarantee competence- the US is more competent than China was more competent than the Soviet Union was more competent than the Italian fascist). When there are no more conditions of reality that the inferior need the superior to destroy, the superior must be enslaved lest he realize.
Which is why Blue states are that way, despite being full of (on paper) superior people. Abel is, quite rationally, afraid; Abel sees it as sinful to build a weapon against Cain, and what modern post-scarcity societies are grappling with is if God will punish Abel for defending himself. Because the Protestant Christian answer is "yes".
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I'm sure you mean IEP, but as typos go, this one's a certified banger.
Don't tell me, are you opposed to strapping IEDs to low performing kids for deployment on the front lines?? This gives them purpose in life and removes their dysgenic genes from the societal pool! A Win/Win!
Pitch this to Brussels - Europe has two problems now - Russia's war on Ukraine and excess of economically unproductive male migrants. Mass deploying your offensive tactics will solve both beautifully.
Mena migrants (including the ones putin sent to invade) will be exempt from conscription while still getting gibs. Meanwhile the few remaining indigenous young adults will be first in line to be used as cannon fodder.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link