Leftist indoctrination in school: Megyn Kelly pulls her kids from school

[Trond]

Sounds like a pretty milk-toast piece of news, but then I read the quotes from the article that is circulating in her kids' school:

'there is a killer cop sitting in every school where white children learn'

'white school districts across the country [are] full of future killer cops.'

'As black bodies drop like flies around us by violence at white hands, how can we in any of our minds conclude that whites are all right?'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8963261/Megyn-Kelly-says-shes-leaving-New-York-far-left-schools-gone-deep-end.html

I'm also reminded that people (in this case teachers) are statistics illiterate. They see some controversial scene play out on the TV or computer screen, and they think "this happens all the time". No, the media are playing you for hate clicks, and getting people killed in the process. Meanwhile, if you look up the numbers, you find that black murder rates are way higher, and that blacks are more likely to kill whites than the other way round.

[Trinculoisdead]

The numbers don't seem to matter: the idea that "black people are dropping like flies" and it's white people's fault because of slavery and the fact that most people in the US have been from Europe since its founding ("white privelige"); that idea is all that matters to those whose worldviews align with it.

There's this idea going around that the suffering of the poor is the fault of wealthy people, and the suffering of the poorest in-general group of people is more important than the suffering of poor people in general. From here you develop this hierarchy of suffering based not on individual experience but on categories of race, sex, gender, wealth, etc. (Intersectionalism).

Applied at the individual level, the idea that a person less fortunate in the circumstances of their birth has a more challenging life ahead of them makes sense. There's a lot more than that that goes into determining whether a person will lead a happy life; but in general one would expect more visible success in such an individual.

However, people are stupid. When you tell them: "hey, life is harder if you're poor, and if you get a poor education, and if your dad skips out on you, and if your older brother is in prison by the time you're in middle school". This makes sense to people, but they don't like nuance and subtlety and having to judge peopls as an individual: it's too much work; they want things quick and simple. Instead, they say to themselves: well, if this easily-identifiable group has it harder than this other easily-identifiable group (hint: it's the skin colour), then I'm just going to put everyone from the first group into the "victim" category, and everyone in the second group into the "priveliged" category.

And then we get shit like biased hiring practices, bestselling books about "white fragility" and "black pain", and we get schools teaching children that the act of being white is synonymous with murder. It's gross oversimplification. It's a disservice to the people who accept this way of thinking, and everyone they judge based on these categories.

[oggsmash]

  Schools all over the country get a chance to opt in to a magazine that is free for teachers.  Teaching Tolerance.  I have a friend who is a teacher, and every teacher gets a copy of this magazine in sent to them 2-3 times per year, with no opting in.  It just shows up, likely volunteered at some higher level in the chain for teachers in the district/region/state to get it.   I read the majority of an issue, and honestly it is largely critical race theory bullshit being pushed very, very hard.  The school he teaches at is in a county that is 69-32 R to D breakdown.   So if a very republican county gets that rag in the teacher's boxes, I feel 100 percent certain that NYC may mandate the reading and have meetings around the magazine, or at least its core tenants of critical race theory. 
   I am sure most teachers in most places may never even open it, but these people, the social marxists, have a very, very firm foothold in the institutions and when they can put shit like that magazine in the open sunlight, it is a bad time.
   
   

[Arkansan]

Shit like this is why we home school our kids.

[Spinachcat]

Many months ago, I saw a post somewhere that said "If you won't home school your kids, why did you have children? Sending your kids to public school is child abuse."

I've grown to appreciate that sentiment much more.

[Pat]

The numbers don't seem to matter: the idea that "black people are dropping like flies" and it's white people's fault because of slavery and the fact that most people in the US have been from Europe since its founding ("white privelige"); that idea is all that matters to those whose worldviews align with it.

There's this idea going around that the suffering of the poor is the fault of wealthy people, and the suffering of the poorest in-general group of people is more important than the suffering of poor people in general. From here you develop this hierarchy of suffering based not on individual experience but on categories of race, sex, gender, wealth, etc. (Intersectionalism).

Applied at the individual level, the idea that a person less fortunate in the circumstances of their birth has a more challenging life ahead of them makes sense. There's a lot more than that that goes into determining whether a person will lead a happy life; but in general one would expect more visible success in such an individual.

However, people are stupid. When you tell them: "hey, life is harder if you're poor, and if you get a poor education, and if your dad skips out on you, and if your older brother is in prison by the time you're in middle school". This makes sense to people, but they don't like nuance and subtlety and having to judge peopls as an individual: it's too much work; they want things quick and simple. Instead, they say to themselves: well, if this easily-identifiable group has it harder than this other easily-identifiable group (hint: it's the skin colour), then I'm just going to put everyone from the first group into the "victim" category, and everyone in the second group into the "priveliged" category.

And then we get shit like biased hiring practices, bestselling books about "white fragility" and "black pain", and we get schools teaching children that the act of being white is synonymous with murder. It's gross oversimplification. It's a disservice to the people who accept this way of thinking, and everyone they judge based on these categories.

I buy almost none of your conclusions. It's not about the poorest of the poor, otherwise they'd care more about extreme poverty around the world and poor white trash, and less about privileged upper class or upper middle class kids who fit in one of the right boxes. It's replacing the privilege of class and wealth over those without those advantages, with identity groups that have been classified as oppressors or victims.

And if they were lazy, they wouldn't put that much work into academic nonsense, spreading their propaganda, and suppressing dissent. To get where it is today took a hell of a lot of work.

[Spinachcat]

I taught poor kids & middle class kids & rich kids of all colors with good homes & bad homes.

Good homes > everything else

And you can't legislate good homes.

[Ghostmaker]

I taught poor kids & middle class kids & rich kids of all colors with good homes & bad homes.

Good homes > everything else

And you can't legislate good homes.

Well, you COULD, but you'd wind up turning the country into a literal police state. Full on 1984.

[consolcwby]

I taught poor kids & middle class kids & rich kids of all colors with good homes & bad homes.

Good homes > everything else

And you can't legislate good homes.

Well, you COULD, but you'd wind up turning the country into a literal police state. Full on 1984.

WIND UP turning?...
I guess you haven't been paying attention then... 

[Ghostmaker]

I taught poor kids & middle class kids & rich kids of all colors with good homes & bad homes.

Good homes > everything else

And you can't legislate good homes.

Well, you COULD, but you'd wind up turning the country into a literal police state. Full on 1984.

WIND UP turning?...
I guess you haven't been paying attention then... 

While I agree the trend has been towards authoritarian policies, we haven't gotten there.

Yet.

And I'm sure it's not for lack of desire in certain worthless fucks who should be pushed out of helicopters.

[Tristan]

  Schools all over the country get a chance to opt in to a magazine that is free for teachers.  Teaching Tolerance.  I have a friend who is a teacher, and every teacher gets a copy of this magazine in sent to them 2-3 times per year, with no opting in.  It just shows up, likely volunteered at some higher level in the chain for teachers in the district/region/state to get it.   I read the majority of an issue, and honestly it is largely critical race theory bullshit being pushed very, very hard.  The school he teaches at is in a county that is 69-32 R to D breakdown.   So if a very republican county gets that rag in the teacher's boxes, I feel 100 percent certain that NYC may mandate the reading and have meetings around the magazine, or at least its core tenants of critical race theory. 
   I am sure most teachers in most places may never even open it, but these people, the social marxists, have a very, very firm foothold in the institutions and when they can put shit like that magazine in the open sunlight, it is a bad time.
   

I can confirm this. I got it sent to me this year at an exceptionally conservative private school and it was a real WTF moment. There was an article by an African American woman on how she would only teach people that "looked like her". I still have no idea how I got on their list.

[Trinculoisdead]

The numbers don't seem to matter: the idea that "black people are dropping like flies" and it's white people's fault because of slavery and the fact that most people in the US have been from Europe since its founding ("white privelige"); that idea is all that matters to those whose worldviews align with it.

There's this idea going around that the suffering of the poor is the fault of wealthy people, and the suffering of the poorest in-general group of people is more important than the suffering of poor people in general. From here you develop this hierarchy of suffering based not on individual experience but on categories of race, sex, gender, wealth, etc. (Intersectionalism).

Applied at the individual level, the idea that a person less fortunate in the circumstances of their birth has a more challenging life ahead of them makes sense. There's a lot more than that that goes into determining whether a person will lead a happy life; but in general one would expect more visible success in such an individual.

However, people are stupid. When you tell them: "hey, life is harder if you're poor, and if you get a poor education, and if your dad skips out on you, and if your older brother is in prison by the time you're in middle school". This makes sense to people, but they don't like nuance and subtlety and having to judge peopls as an individual: it's too much work; they want things quick and simple. Instead, they say to themselves: well, if this easily-identifiable group has it harder than this other easily-identifiable group (hint: it's the skin colour), then I'm just going to put everyone from the first group into the "victim" category, and everyone in the second group into the "priveliged" category.

And then we get shit like biased hiring practices, bestselling books about "white fragility" and "black pain", and we get schools teaching children that the act of being white is synonymous with murder. It's gross oversimplification. It's a disservice to the people who accept this way of thinking, and everyone they judge based on these categories.

I buy almost none of your conclusions. It's not about the poorest of the poor, otherwise they'd care more about extreme poverty around the world and poor white trash, and less about privileged upper class or upper middle class kids who fit in one of the right boxes. It's replacing the privilege of class and wealth over those without those advantages, with identity groups that have been classified as oppressors or victims.

And if they were lazy, they wouldn't put that much work into academic nonsense, spreading their propaganda, and suppressing dissent. To get where it is today took a hell of a lot of work.

Yeah I think we're on the same page there, generally.

[consolcwby]

I taught poor kids & middle class kids & rich kids of all colors with good homes & bad homes.

Good homes > everything else

And you can't legislate good homes.

Well, you COULD, but you'd wind up turning the country into a literal police state. Full on 1984.

WIND UP turning?...
I guess you haven't been paying attention then... 

While I agree the trend has been towards authoritarian policies, we haven't gotten there.

Yet.

And I'm sure it's not for lack of desire in certain worthless fucks who should be pushed out of helicopters.

It's 6 days later ~ Are we there yet? (I'm getting impatient!)