(08-01-2023, 12:36 PM)NYC4jags Wrote:

(08-01-2023, 12:34 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: It's amazing how you can google when it's convenient. Otherwise, you need a link, lol. 3 pages in and we don't even discuss the truth of the issue.


Yeah, well, I did acknowledge it. I started off by acknowledging it could be seen in bad taste. You made a whole comment about it before somehow suggesting that I can't acknowledge it. That's neato, pal.

It doesn't change the fact that it's true, and it's a very small snippet of a much larger curriculum. It's one piece of information that is part of many other pieces of information. Some good, Some bad. None of you leftist nuthuggers care about context. Take any comment out of context and claim it's bad, then shout it from the rooftops until everyone is bleating the same tune. I went through all of the new standards and I can't find anything untrue. It definitely focuses more on the positive contributions of blacks and their ability to persevere through hardships. I can see why that's TERRIBLE for the left. Blacks gotta be victims. We can only shape the world view one way.

Both visions are valid and have their place. I can say that. Where you at?

Really weird how you harp on this so much. Not sure what your hangup is. 

It's horribly inaccurate. So many black figures are heralded constantly by folks on the left as heroic figures in civil rights, artistic pioneers in music, landmark contributors to American literature and poetry, and of course the majority of our heroes in the world of sport have been black since integration became the norm. 

Most of my heroes are/were black. I don't feel any need to paint them or the contemporary people of color in my life as victims. Some of the folks from prior generations endured hardships - but that is just part of their story. Not their identity. 
I've even been on record here three or four separate times supporting a roll back on any affirmative action efforts that can be verified as having outlasted their originally intended usefulness.  

Its just very easy to see that DeSantis thinks he's leading a crusade against all things "woke"  and has an agenda that is not based on historical accuracies or improving education in the state of FL. He's just waging a petty war of politics and trying to indoctrinate children with white christian nationalist values. 

Like many on the right, he believes that schools are systematically indoctrinating kids to be too progressive in their thinking. So he's trying to eradicate that and inject some other messaging that has no place in public schools. The "problem" he perceives is minuscule if it even exists  - and could most be improved by simply funding the institutions, their teachers and unifying those teachers' training and certification properly.

Instead - he's trying to let some fly by night propaganda org shoehorn a bunch of wacky conservative indoctrination into the curriculum. Prager U is unapologetically on a mission to convert the way people think and sway them to a conservative viewpoint. If you were to agree with DeSantis' fear that institutions are indoctrinating children one way - why in hell should it be OK to indoctrinate them some other way??

How about working on an educational curriculum centered on wholesome education without any garbage dogma from either angle?

That would make a hell of a lot more sense. 
Instead he tries to force students and teachers to register their political convictions with state institutions - and starts force feeding a bunch or garbage into curriculum.

It's really weird how you can't see it. The left has a platform that is built on victimization. And, while I think it's good to have people who lookout for the oppressed and downtrodden, I think the left has a group of intellectual elites who marginalize entire groups of people because they see them as inherently victims. While I think some of this is unintentional (because I believe many professors and thought leaders have good intentions), I also think there is a subgroup of academics and thought leaders who know this victimization is a tool for power. They are opportunists who are out to sow discord for their own gain. Again, this is multilayered. Some sow discord because they have a vision for a different future (critical theory), and others because they just want power and fame (Kamala Harris). 

I don't believe this debate we're having over one line of an entire curriculum was brought to the forefront in good faith. I think it's brought about because it's a threat to Democratic power. They need the black vote. They get the black vote by pedaling victimhood and promising to solve it. They don't. They haven't. They can't. It will undo their influence. I don't accuse the leftist base of this, but their leaders. This is what I mean when I say blacks must be victims. I know you don't believe that, but the people who lead your party will never relinquish the idea that only they can solve this problem. Speak out against them and you will be accused of being a racist or uncle tom. 

I agree that DeSantis is on a crusade against "woke." I happen to think "woke" is a problem. I look at this curriculum and see a series of facts that gathered together in a way that displays the truth of the horrors of slavery, while also pointing out that blacks persevered and have agency, even when faced with terrible oppression. As I've already stated, they followed Booker T. Washington's model from "Up from Slavery." I think that's a better message than victimization. 

As to the Prager U bit, none of that is a part of the curriculum. They are just authorized videos. When you're a teacher, you can only show approved videos to your students unless you want to get permission from the administration. I never had to get permission from an administrator to show my kids BrainPOP or Khan Academy videos. As far as I know, Prager U was just added to the list of authorized videos. There is nothing wrong with that as the individual teacher can choose what or what not to show. I know they are right leaning, but that doesn't mean that all of their content is bad, nor does it mean it should be automatically disqualified. Likewise, the many resources that are currently available just happen to be largely left-leaning. It's ok to have balance. 

If DeSantis wasn't a presidential candidate, this almost certainly wouldn't make the front page. I have been saying for the last two years that everyone who thought DeSantis would bring the country together (unlike Trump), was failing to grasp the onslaught that he was going to face from the political and journalistic elites who would do everything in their power to tarnish him. We're seeing the effects of that now. I don't think he's perfect. In fact, I mistrust him. That said, this has been a pretty typical pattern for the last 30 years.

---