Both President Obama and Education Secretary Arne Duncan have called the traditional school day and school year outdated and inadequate for the demands of 21st-century life. Students in countries that routinely outscore the United States on international tests go to school for as many as 230 days each year, 50 more than kids typically attend here. "Go ahead and boo me," Duncan said in April to Denver students. "I think schools should be open six, seven days a week, eleven, twelve months a year."And next, some HBD denialism. I wonder what's so special about Japan, South Korea, Israel, Luxembourg, Netherlands, and Scotland. Must be those long school years and proximity to Canada!
Part of the reasoning here, as Duncan suggests, is the need to compete internationally. Most other industrialized nations have longer school years than we do (see the chart to the right), and there is fairly strong evidence that more time in school means higher standardized test scores.Guess where this is going next:
That last point is worth lingering over. One issue that doesn't come up enough in discussions of extending the school year is that doing so is also, fundamentally, an issue of economic fairness. If you believe in equality of opportunity, then one of the most important things the state can do is provide some baseline level of education that seeks to alleviate vast differences of class."Class" here really includes race as well, a salient point made explicit in most other articles on this topic. Apparently, middle class parents do something magical over the summer that allows their children to retain learning:
This is because wealthy parents can afford to given their children all sorts of edifying summer experiences that downscale parents cannot. And this, as researchers at Johns Hopkins have found, leads to backsliding: Educational advancement across classes tends to be fairly even during the school year. But downscale students actually decline in educational achievement over the course of the summer, while upscale students remain relatively stable.Let's review: Maximize the amount of time children spend in school per year. Summer break exists as merely a vestige of a pre-technological age. Shrinking summer break will moderate the racial and class disparities that arise throughout summer.
By extending compulsory education into a year long task, the leftist think tanks can further inculcate our youth and undermine the importance of kin in childhood development. In doing so, they engage in the idealism discussed here this week, where continual cognitive training is viewed as the "treatment" for natural differences in acuity. Also, note that justification is primarily based on racial and class gaps, implying the main impetus for reform stems from a wholescale Marxist formulation of society. Finally, these pundits muse on the recondite summer activities of middle and upper class parents. Many liberal writers suffer from "Upper East Side" syndrome, a delusion that equates the middle class with those of the highly wealthy elite. Apparently, the middle class has the means to finance obscure educational programs beyond their children playing basketball in the driveway, going to soccer camp, and hiking with family in Colorado. Somehow, these adventures bestow upon their children wisdom not attainable at urban Boys and Girls clubs where summer school tutoring and classes are held.
Yet another example of the "clever sillies". To put it bluntly: It's the kids stupid. (Or the other way around, whichever you prefer.)
67 comments:
Apparently, middle class parents do something magical over the summer that allows their children to retain learning:...
Yeah, it's ludicrous, isn't it? We never did anything over the summer but stay outside all day playing baseball, chasing butterflies, etc. I still remember how the first couple weeks of school, especially in math, reviewed some of what we'd learned last year.
This is how I see it working out. Once the national standard is to be at school the entire year, rich parents will start sending their kids to schools that still have summer break because, well, it's stupid to be in school so much. And in my experience, private schools already have fewer days of class than public schools.
So, we'll have a situation where the rich white kids get to hang out at the beach all summer and still do really well academically while other kids are stuck in an A/C-less school building in July and still performing terribly. Imagine the contortions people will come up with to explain that: "We need to get our nation's youth out of school and onto the streets"
In theory it could work especially if you eliminate 11th and 12th grade.
In practice of course, it would suck.
They would get the shock of their lives at the improvement the strongest students would make. It would slam the summer camping industry. Kids need that time for family and non academic personal development whether swim team, gymnastics. Summer is a time when kids connect with their community. For inner city maybe that means gangs which they want to cut down on, but for normally socialized people it means hobbies, friends, sports, etc. The school is far more socially dysfunctional than these other activities.
You could get rid of school altogether after grade 6 or 7 and the results for everyone would be the same.
Getting rid of summer break? Madness!
To be fair, summer break is time where kids go in the most different directions based upon their parents' class.
Poor NAMs run wild around the hood largely unsupervised reverting to and perpetuating the bad norms there.
The middle class with 1.5 or 2 working parents have to struggle finding some productive and safe activities with good supervision to occupy the three months.
The upper class with 1 or 1.5 working and/or volunteering parents are shuttled around by 1 or more nannies/au pairs to a wide variety of increasingly esoteric activities to stand out from the crowd.
In effect, the government's primary aim is to try and destroy or diminish what has become the contemporary toxic black culture. Without other reforms like the disparate enforcement of discipline, these kids will probably just bring the toxic culture from the street (eg learning is acting white) to the classroom and there will be marginal good to come of all this.
The private elite schools will be very sensitive to their high-paying customers and be free to design fun, enjoyable and enriching programs.
As always, the burden will be carried by the middle class, especially the gifted and talented among them. Shackled to the lowest common deminator standards of public schools, they will denied the single biggest opportunity to pursue their own interests and activities at their own pace. Instead, they will be beaten down, turned off, self-destruct and graduate less prepared for competing in a globalized knowledge economy.
To salvage what little good may lie is such a program, the best idea is a summer academic program focused on the foundations that is only mandatory for students who are lagging based upon performance on standardized tests. Additional optional summer programs that focus on subjects beyond the fundamentals but not included in the curriculum or heavily sport or volunteer-based could be offered to the other students.
This entirely rational proposal, like most constructive improvements in education, would be shouted down based upon disparate impact.
Until our elites at least tacitedly accept HBD, nearly everyone will be hurt by the neverending parade of educational hairbrained schemes engineered to ignore the obvious facts of human diversity.
The last high-profile DC elite to attend public schools (with heavy secret service escort) was Amy Carter over a quarter century ago. The elites somehow always manage to survive unscathed by these asinine proposals.
This has nothing to do with education. If the billions of dollars we've wasted on it haven't improved children's learning, what will?
The real point of this is to enrich the NEA, and by extension the Democrats themselves. More time in school means more unionized municipal employees taking a larger share of municipal budgets. Their larger numbers make them even more entrenched and difficult to discipline. Lastly, this means more dues being paid to the NEA and thus greater political contributions being made to Democrat coffers and more pro-Socialist propaganda on our airwaves and in our schools.
What a stupid idea.
NAM kids probably already think school is too long, not too short.
The only thing this proposal will do (besides cost more) is that it will make NAMs hate school even more.
If this proposal becomes law, then expect a rash of NAMs "dropping out" by Middle School instead of by High School.
Dull students don't enjoy more schooling.
Good point Captain Obvious about the likely impact on dropout rates. I'm sure whitey will be to blame when the inevitable occurs.
My wife has taught at the university, high school, and junior high school level. From talking with friends and neighbors who have taught in the public schools, I wouldn't feel comfortable with her going to work there. Safety is a real concern. Most people agree with this, but then are horrified when I add that if my wife wouldn't be safe somewhere I don't want to send my daughter there.
If at all possible, my wife and I have decided to avoid sending our kids to public schools. This might mean home schooling or a private school. I'm guessing the latter since my wife is teaching for a local private school now. At $5k per year, it isn't cheap but it isn't out of reach either (and it will be cheaper with discounts since my wife works there).
I posted this in the comment section on one of Steve Sailer's recent education posts, but I thought I would post it here as well.
I found this when looking for more information on why Kansas City Schools was closing half of their schools. News articles refer vaguely to a desegregation case so I suspected white flight.
The article is from the cato institute, and the author doesn't address HBD directly. However, it is stunning in describing the resources wasted in that case to try to improve NAM achievement with no results.
Also very interesting is how even with a blank check for funding, they still complained that they couldn't get white students to join these gold plated schools. They weren't complaining that white students were getting better schools, they were complaining that white students didn't want to join the better NAM schools. There is a strange belief that if NAM students can't sit next to whites and asians while at school they are being harmed in some way.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-298.html
How does it work in HBDland?
Black kid: It doesn't matter that this kid has an illiterate welfare mom and no father. Doesn't matter that they have the least competent teachers in the country. Doesn't matter that no one reads to them at home. They can't improve their lives because they are born with the immutable low IQ that Sub Saharans evolved. We've put billions of dollars into remedial programs, head start, after school basketball etc and nothing has worked and nothing will worked. Can't the libs see it's the innate IQ. That's what determines educational level, life success etc.
White kid: OMG! Those freaking liberals. if they make kids stay in school longer it could completely damage their psychology. They didn't evolve to spend time in a school environment. They need to be homeschooled. The require that a parent spend every hour dedicated to their child or else they will be terribly shortcharged. Family environment is what they need to maximize their potential in life.
FemX
Is that another joke we'll all have a good laugh over after a brief 300 word explanation?
"There is a strange belief that if NAM students can't sit next to whites and asians while at school they are being harmed in some way."
La Griffe du Lion makes the point that NAM students seem to benefit (at least statistically, no control group) when they sit next to whites/Asians. However their gains are smaller than white losses. It could also be interpreted that smarter blacks are the ones living in the neighborhoods with whites, while less affluent whites are the ones in schools with relatively more blacks. There are far bigger disparities in schools that are mostly black but have a large chunk of Asians who are doing great despite the uh, school culture.
OneSTDV,
We've discussed this briefly over at my blog, but I thought to revisit it in light of today's post.
What do you propose be done with the left end kids? You previously suggested that they be tracked into the trades, but we all know that Blue Collar work is on the decline and has been for decades. So, where do these kids go? Mind you, I am not disputing your premise here; its only commonsense that everyone cannot be an Einstein.
Your response?
Thanks.
The Obsidian
Dalrock,
I read that cato report on KC schools a while back.
Everyone moved across the state line to Kansas or Catholic schools.
Even though the courts ordered the taxpayers to fund it, the people refused to sacrifice their children to it.
That is basically the same as home/private schooling mindset. You might be able to steal my money, but not my kids.
FemX,
You left out An Inconvient Truth of HBDland:
Chinese immigrant: It doesn't matter that this latchkey kid has illiterate welfare parents both working several jobs unable to spend time with them. Doesn't matter that they have the least competent teachers in the country. Doesn't matter that no one is home because their parents can't read even as much as native-born poor black and hispanic parents. They improve their lives because they are born with roughly average to high IQ of the mainland Chinese underclass but place the highest value on education. We've put virtually no dollars into gifted and talented programs, after school public cram school, elminated any semblance of order via discipline and dumbed down the curriculum but nothing seems to stop most of the talented and highly motivated students from succeeding. Can't the libs see it's the innate IQ. That's what determines educational level, life success etc. The Univ of Calif tried to use poverty as an admission criteria to boost NAM rates, but highly qualified poor asian immigrants crowded them out.
American-born Chinese (ABCs): OMG! Those freaking liberals. if they make kids stay in school longer it could completely damage their education and competitiveness in a globalized knowledge-based economy. They didn't evolve to waste time in a dumbed-down school environment repeating material ad nauseum they should've learned years ago. They need time to supplement their weak education at home, after school cram schools and to culturally enrich themselves with things like violin and piano lessons. They need parents, grandparents and supplemental educational/cultural experiences dedicated to their child or else they will be terribly shortcharged by our wholly inadequate public school education. Family environment is what they need to maximize their potential in life.
Arnie Duncan,
I went to public school with poor as dirt Asian kids and I know where they ended up.
One girl shared a bed with her sister and worked in her family's restaurant every day after school. She hardly spoke English because she came to the US when she was 14. She got an 800 math SAT and a 400 verbal SAT. She went to college and is now doing IT management.
Another girl was the child of vietnamese boat people. Her father died in her childhood and her mother was deeply traumitized from the war and never learned to speak english to anyone. I think she ran a daycare for other viet children. That girl got a 1490 SAT and went to an ivy type school and then went to a top law school.
All those girls had was public school. And it was enough. More public school would not have hurt them. It would not have hurt me either.
If you believe more investment can't help black kids, then it's not going to help white kids either. They do not need this homeschooling/family time bullshit and they don't seem to get any long term benefit out of it either on average.
Young Americans are already mad at Obama about having to fork over money for health insurance they mostly dont use; and now we hear this.
If this proposal goes through, in 10 years the youth vote will be majority Republican. Also, a lot of teachers will be too.
"All those girls had was public school. And it was enough. More public school would not have hurt them. It would not have hurt me either.
If you believe more investment can't help black kids, then it's not going to help white kids either. They do not need this homeschooling/family time bullshit and they don't seem to get any long term benefit out of it either on average."
Depends on how you define benefit.
Will they accomplish more?
Will they be more loyal to their families?
Will they like it?
People are pretty resilient and can still be functional despite sub optimal environment.
However, if homeschooling doesn't hurt them, why is public any better? Maybe it is just like the difference between strawberry and vanilla, just a personal preference. If some moms just want to be with their kids 24/7, who cares? I would disagree that family time is BS, but it surely doesn't need to be 24/7 if that doesn't work for the family.
Would Asians do better if homeschooled?
I'll give an anecdote like you did.
National Math Olympiad, homeschooled Asian kid in 7th grade is a first place winner along with five other white and Asian public and private school high school kids. All male.
Would the 7th grader have accomplished the same if he were in public or private? We can't know, but it didn't hurt him. Also, notice that no schooling environment managed to produce any female winners.
Personally, I am not opposed to any of these schooling environments. People should just go with what is best for them.
Public schooling however will always be most scrutinized because we are all paying a huge sum of money for it.
Obsidian
Where did you go? OneSTDV devoted an entire post for you to free-range on your top 10 HBD questions which were throughly answered to your apparent satisfaction. After your initial rebuttals were addressed, you left no outstanding issues.
One of your questions in that post was what 10 public policies would be adopted with full acceptance of HBD. I offed a number of HBD-based policies which helped both blacks and whites which you seemed to agree with with silent agreement. These included ending easily corrupted affirmative action (put in a transparent hard quota instead if you must), academic tracking, stop wasting billions trying to achieve impossible idealistic goals (eg closing the gap between SE Asian Indian and black NFL cornerbacks ), ending the race-hustling racket, greater inter-racial trust, etc.
I noticed that you abrubtly revisited the topic between various "game" posts on your blog by outlandishly summarizing HBD public policy as elimination of all blacks.
You did not base this upon any prominent HBD blogger, but rather on a single tragically low self-esteem and boarder-line suicidal black persona named David Alexander.
Despite your seemingly congeneial online persona, your black extermination post exposes you as a simply dishonest race agitator and hustler. Your post is just an online hate crime hoax.
Perhaps you share David Alexander's twisted perspective which is why you project your anxieties onto others. Unlike David's depressing resignation, you become energized and this imagined conflict give your life purpose. Sad.
You and David Alexander both need to chill out, realize that averages are not individuals and make the most of what you've been given in this life. You are a lot luckier than the vast majority the approx 6.8 billion people on this planet.
"If you believe more investment can't help black kids, then it's not going to help white kids either. They do not need this homeschooling/family time bullshit and they don't seem to get any long term benefit out of it either on average."
FemX, and yet as examples on the opposite end of the spectrum you cite poor Asian kids who attended public school but nonetheless excelled.
The core of Asian life is "family values" (family time?).
I'm willing to bet that not one of those Asian kids had to wonder who their fathers were, OR had to go through the turmoil of a divorce, OR who, if a few of them went through the turmoil of divorce, they didn't have to go through the icky weird experience of watching their middle aged single parent "dating".
Asians have intact families who push their kids respect their elders, that includes teachers, and to excel in academics.
White and Black American kids don't have this anymore, by and large.
They are products of "hook-ups" or divorces and single parents dating.
The two groups and their approaches to mating and family just cannot be compared. There is no common ground, anymore.
I say you and your Asian classmates excelled precisely because you had strong, intact, non-drama family life.
There is a gulf of difference between losing a father to death and growing up not knowing who your father is or just seeing him every other weekend, and meeting his "girlfriend" or "new wife" when you do.
If Asians ever see a breakdown in their family system, like White and Black Americans have..... that's when you will begin to see the stress of such taking a toll on the academic excellence of Asian students.
"I say you and your Asian classmates excelled precisely because you had strong, intact, non-drama family life. "
Nope. The vietnamese tend to be a very troubled community and my friend's family life was like story book terrible. Her father had been continuously adulterous and he had children from a previous marriage who gave her family trouble.
And I myself do not come from an intact family. I had no problem watching my middle aged parents date and I got along well with my now step mother from the first day I met her. I also got along well with my mother's ex boyfriend. The Indian fear of nuclear family breakdown is just idiotic and based in ignorance. It is so completely stupid to waste your life living with someone you are unable to love or get along with. I've met any number of children who were glad their parents got divorced and several who wish their parents had gotten divorced. Adults who say they wish their divorced parents had remained together are a rarity.
Alright, you may be an exception to the Desi rule, FemX, however, I'm willing to bet you had SOMEONE in your family pushing you to excel in academics.
And your parents may have been divorced and dating, but did you have a steady home or were your moving and bouncing around from town to town and state to state a lot?
Overall, even the most dysfunctional of Desi and East Asian families tend to be more "stable" than even "moderately functional" non-Desi and non-East Asian families.
Just my observance.
Imagine being a 12 year old kid and seeing your single mom in a bathing suit and asking her: "mom, are you pregnant?" and her answering: "I don't know".
And this is from one of the more BETTER non-Desi, non-East Asian parents!
(Refraining from using any other terms in an attempt to be politically correct and polite to the majority demographic here. LOL)
The bottomline is, yes there are pockets of this type of family dysfunction in the Pan-Asian demographic, but they are still a very slim minority.
"I'm willing to bet you had SOMEONE in your family pushing you to excel in academics."
Superficially, but it was enough. It wasn't like my parents checked to see if I did my homework.
"And your parents may have been divorced and dating, but did you have a steady home or were your moving and bouncing around from town to town and state to state a lot?"
My father moved into the next neighborhood a few minutes away. We saw whichever parent we wanted whenever we wanted. My mother technically had primary custody but after that there were no lawyers involved. If I wanted to go home and then go to my dad's house for dinner, that's what I did.
"Overall, even the most dysfunctional of Desi and East Asian families tend to be more "stable" than even "moderately functional" non-Desi and non-East Asian families."
And BTW it would be a mischaracterization to call my post divorced family environment dysfunctional at all. My step mother has always been a loving parent to me and I feel that I am better off with her in my life. There is nothing unstable or sub optimally functional about it.
FemX
If you believe more investment can't help black kids, then it's not going to help white kids either. They do not need this homeschooling/family time bullshit and they don't seem to get any long term benefit out of it either on average."
First off, how about a more respectful tone for the Secretary of Education. Did you hear of the miracles I accomplished in the Chicago Public Schools? I know what I'm talking about little missey.
I suggested summer school for remedial (not black) students who need extra time and instruction to try to grasp the fundamentals they failed to learn in the convential school year. This is a tried and true idea.
Remedial summer school for average to bright students would be a counterproductive form of torture and waste of resources. You and your girlfriends may have tolerated it, but for boys sitting still and reading "The Color Purple" during the existing school year is torture enough.
I never mentioned anything about summer school by race. I simply stated that the statistical underlying reality of HBD would result in a predictable disparate impact and subsequent cries of racism by the usual suspects.
"Family time bullshit"? Whoa! Coming from a broken home, it's sadly not surprising that you don't believe in the value of family. If you're lucky enough to have a strong, well-functioning family, it can be an incredible asset that carries you through life.
1,
After reading this thread, do you still think Asian immigration is good for us?
there is fairly strong evidence that more time in school means higher standardized test scores.
I'm always amazed when Arne Duncan utters something that is remotely true.
Here he makes a good point, for this point is the key determinant of the success seen by the KIPP schools - they keep their NAM students in school 2-3 hours longer per day, the attend schools on Saturday, and their school year is a month longer. All of this extra time works to bring many NAMs up to proficiency levels.
However, what Duncan seems to miss is that the Achievement Gap will likely remain undiminished if both NAMs and non-NAMs are subjected to longer school years.
In times past the prime objective of our nation's schools was to prepare each student to reach to their potential and if achievement gaps ensued, then they were of little import. Today the primary focus of schools is to close the achievement gap, so while Duncan's proposal would indeed raise the performance standard of NAMs in a real and objective sense, the fact that non-NAMs would maintain their lead or even increase it (because they can exploit the learning process more efficiently they can squeeze more gains per unit of instruction time) would be deemed entirely unacceptable.
The only real solution that Duncan can advocate is entirely unacceptable in our culture - NAMs go to school year round and non-NAMs keep on with the current system.
""Family time bullshit"? Whoa! Coming from a broken home, it's sadly not surprising that you don't believe in the value of family. If you're lucky enough to have a strong, well-functioning family, it can be an incredible asset that carries you through life."
It's a bunch of baloney. When my parents were married, they literally lived in a house with a white picket fence. My mother stayed at home, my father went to work. My mother was unhappy, she made my father unhappy and then he married someone who appreciated him. My step mother is the reason I indeed did grow up in a strong well functioning family. She's the one who taught me all domestic skills like cooking, sewing, household organization. She's the one who exposed me to the benefits of WASP culture (and there are also many benefits of my own culture).
I am not a victim or a fuck up because of what some idiots characterize as a broken home. I come from a remodeled and improved family.
But anyways, you show me the twin study where you found that more or less family time made a difference in any measurable outcome. Or where a happy or miserable family environment made a long term measurable difference.
FemX, if your biological Mom was so unhappy, why didn't she DO SOMETHING to make herself happy? She could have worked or gotten outside hobbies and friends. I know several Desi wife immigrants of that generation who kept themselves in isolation OR their husbands and/or Desi family/cultural circle kept them in isolation.
The way to break out of that is to simply go to driving school, get a license, get a car and get a life.
If you're lucky enough to have a strong, well-functioning family, it can be an incredible asset that carries you through life.
FemX,
You missed my part about a strong, well-functioning family being a life asset.
Yes, a Married With Children-type of messed up marriage is bad and divorce may be a better alternative. Neither is good and both are far from optimal.
I'm not sure any twin studies have ever been done to study the effects of divorce. Still, children of divorce suffer a host of problems.
You have a defensive tone about this and it's understandable. We all refashion our realities to accomodate our baggage.
As Robin Williams said at the end of Good Will Hunting, "it's not your fault". But you'll still bear the scars of what your parents inflicted upon you by their poor choices.
On the bright side, a minority have the vision and strength to turn adversity into a motivation to do better for themselves. Good luck.
"
I'm not sure any twin studies have ever been done to study the effects of divorce. Still, children of divorce suffer a host of problems.
"
Matt Ridley has summarized the research. Almost all deletrious effects of divorce such as propensity towards divorce, crime and other behaviors have almost no effect in adoptive families. Adoptive children's behavior correlates with their biological parents as does their liklihood of divorce.
Judith Harris has identified the factor of instability as moving and shifting a child's peer group. In her research, it is moving and changing demographics that correlates with problems, not divorce.
FemX - do you have a link for those claims?
As for your first claim that separated twin studies show divorce and associated pathologies like crime are more genetic than environmental - that's not good news for children of the divorce. It's basically reinforces the convential wisdom to avoid marrying children of divorce who are genetically predisposed to repeat the mistakes of their parents.
This confirms my observation that only a minority have the vision and strength to turn any given adversity into a motivation to do better for themselves. Don't be a statistic.
I can understand why FemX may be so defensive about divorce. If she comes from a typical extended Desi (South Asian, East Indian) family and cultural background, divorce is still THE BIGGEST TABOO.
It's true that Desis take this too far. Staying in an abusive marriage is preferrable to many Desis than the "shame" of divorce.
If FemX moved in Desi circles, then she would have indeed been "shamed" as a child of divorce.
In India even to this day, if even a cousin in your family has been divorced, your parents will have a HELL of a time arranging your marriage.
You have to remember that the appearance of doing something is more useful than actually solving the problem, at least to the political classes.
extending the school year is ... fundamentally an issue of economic fairness. If you believe in equality of opportunity, then one of the most important things the state can do is provide some baseline level of education that seeks to alleviate vast differences of class.
Yes! It's quite simple, really.
According to my calculations, the Black-White test gap will vanish if we send Black kids to school for 794.5 days per year.
Can I haz my Nobel Prizez now?
-Challenged
They should just make it so that kids who score less than a certain percentage on testing or get less than a 2.0 gradpoint average have to take an extra month of school in order for them to "catch up" with the other kids. But the entire summer would be completely unfair.
FemX said:
How does it work in HBDland?
Black kid: . . . Can't the libs see it's the innate IQ. That's what determines educational level, life success etc.
White kid: . . . Family environment is what they need to maximize their potential in life.
You get that two different outcomes are being discussed here, right? The two entirely mutually consistent claims are that black underperformance on cognitively demanding tasks is genetic and that conventional school isn't much fun, isn't too productive at the margin, and too much of it makes you, well, Japanese.
Both blacks and whites would likely be happier with less school and more basketball. Neither blacks' nor whites' long run measurable outcomes would be much influenced by less school and more basketball (at current, excessive levels of schooling). Nothing inconsistent here.
Or maybe you could get around to explaining what error it is in the HBD worldview you think this post exemplifies? 'Cause the whole "my mom is a weenie" thing is not super edifying.
"They should just make it so that kids who score less than a certain percentage on testing or get less than a 2.0 gradpoint average have to take an extra month of school in order for them to "catch up" with the other kids."
Dharma,
This is exactly what they do. They use the state assessments as promotion standards. Kids who fail the test have to go to summer school and retake the test in order to go on to the next grade. If they can't pass it after remediation, they are referred to the Special Ed. department, and given diagnostic testing including IQ tests and put on an IEP (individual education plan) that has objectives for academic growth that are aligned to the curriculum, measurable, and realistically attainable given the student's IQ and learning disabilities. This is all rational and reasonable until some jackass like Arne Duncan comes along and notices that a disproportionate number of NAMs are receiving services and thus imagines there is "discrimination" rather than an honest attempt to meet the students' educational needs.
If they get rid of summer break, Black students will show the IQ Gap to be an illusion, by proving themselves to be smarter than the White Students.
They'll prove this by dropping out en masse, which is the only intelligent response to such Totalitarian Lunacy as a 52 Weeks a Year School Schedule.
The dumbing down of education, including the increasing emphasis on airy fairy "cultural" studies and the like in Universities, is something that very well may have been planned by the powers that be a long time ago to keep the majority of Americans ignorant about the science and technology like this;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-VMfzO94M0&feature=fvw
"Both blacks and whites would likely be happier with less school and more basketball. Neither blacks' nor whites' long run measurable outcomes would be much influenced by less school and more basketball (at current, excessive levels of schooling). Nothing inconsistent here."
You have a study which shows that children are happier when they have shorter school years? It's not as though measuring happiness is impossible. Maybe they are always just about as happy. Maybe their difference in happiness is trivial and soon forgotten. I see a lot of movies where kids celebrate the end of the school year, but this says nothing about the quality of happiness during summer vs the school year.
The Kipp program illustrates that by more time in school results in higher academic performance. If it works for those kids, it probably works for some percentage of other kids. Maybe most other kids.
"Apparently, middle class parents do something magical over the summer that allows their children to retain learning:..."
Yeah, they send them to summer camp. In essence, school over the summer. In the northeast, it is very common for parents to send their children to academic summer camps, not the playtime kind.
The issue is a learning gap. If you put low IQ and high IQ kids in class for 300 days or 100 days of the year, the gap will be there. But that doesn't meant that 300 days is equal to 100 days. Children probably do learn and retain more academic knowledge in 300 days. And learning loss is an issue regarding summer breaks.
Home-schooled kids outperform publicly-schooled kids by a significant margin, yet they spend FAR LESS TIME being schooled. Hmmm...methinks public schools must be wasting kids' time with busy work, brainwashing, and other time-killing, mind-dulling exercises. Honestly, kids could spend 4 hours every morning learning actually useful stuff, and then give them the rest of the afternoon off to play on their own and they'd be MUCH better off than they are now.
I suppose, though, that in ghetto schools, the main purpose of public schools is keeping kids off the streets most of the day. It's essentially a giant babysitting service for little NAMs. But why would middle-class kids need to be treated like potential criminals? Jesus, let them enjoy their summers off.
John Gaulton,
I fully intend to pickup where our discussion left off, but on my blog, as OneSTDV has stated a desire not to engage me or my concerns, which is his right. He, you and anyone else here are welcome to join me at my blog, however to discuss these issues further. I will be taking them up sometime next week, and will let you know when I do.
Thanks for your continued interest!
The Obsidian
Black kid: It doesn't matter that this kid has an illiterate welfare mom and no father.
But then we might ask why there are so many of these dysfunctional parents in the first place. And if society perpetuates these dysfunctions via the welfare state, promotion of sexual revolution, and liberal propaganda which blames everything on "racism." We might also ask what can be done to cause the presumably young black people who create these dysfunctions to act a little more responsibly. But holding people (or at least protected groups) accountable is not within the liberal-PC worldview. Better to blame it all on some amorphous conspiracy called "racism" and then dump millions of dollars into the bureaucracy--and scapegoat Whites.
There have been studies done that show both girls and boys do better when they are taught in mono-sex environments.
In Jr. High boys and girls start taking serious interest in one another and by High School full fledged "relationship drama" ensues, which serves only to distract them from their studies.
Indeed, High School these days looks like one big hookup scene.
I think some parents who homeschool do so because of this.
FemX says:
You have a study which shows that children are happier when they have shorter school years? It's not as though measuring happiness is impossible.
So, you are giving up on the claim of logical inconsistency in the HBD position? You admit it is an empirical issue?
But, now you think the burden of proof is on the people who think children are happier with summer break than without? Seriously?
And, yes, measures of happiness are pretty much a joke, so I, at least, would not believe such a study regardless of what it found.
As for KIPP, there are lots of differences between KIPP and regular schools. One of these is length of instruction. But there are plenty of others, including pretty significant selection of the students (both at the front end and via attrition) and different discipline policies.
KIPP, like many such ed reforms, appears to be a form of crypto-tracking, which pretty much all HBD types are in favor of. Well actually, they are in favor of overt tracking rather than crypto.
Just not bothering with, say, the bottom ten or twenty percent of students in terms of educability would undoubtedly improve things for the others.
"So, you are giving up on the claim of logical inconsistency in the HBD position?"
No. The claim this post makes are logically inconsistent. One claim requires the belief that achievement is genetically determined anyways. The other claim requires belief that children need a lot of time with their families. Need it for what? Not for achievement because that was genetically determined. Not for overall adult levels of crime aversion, educational level, religiosity, family stability etc. because the studies say that those are also very largely genetically determined.
The liberal belief is the social economic status causes life quality because SES causes access to nutrition, crime avoidance, safer neighborhoods and therefore more stable family environments. The paleoconservative belief is that family values cause life quality because family values cause safer neighborhoods, focus on education, better nutrition and therefore better SES.
The data says neither causes the other. Innate predispositions such as IQ and temperament cause both SES and family and relationship behaviors. Keeping the low IQ in school for three more months will not make US academic test scores equal to those of Japan. Keeping the high IQ away from their families and in school instead will not in any way make them less socially functional.
"Home-schooled kids outperform publicly-schooled kids by a significant margin, yet they spend FAR LESS TIME being schooled."
That IS consistent with the data about hereditary determinism.
Normally, a high degree of a child's intellectual propensities and behaviors are determined by genetics. Beyond that, a number of environmental factors come in to play. The country he lives in determines the language he speaks. The ethnic community he comes from determines his religious background. His parents jobs determine his social class. But the most major environmental factor on a child after the macroenvironment is not the family but the peer group.
If you homeschool, you become the child's major peer group. So rather than a peer group of IQ 100 7 yr olds, your child gets an IQ 120 college educated adult. This does help knowledge transferral to the child, so at least during school age, home schooled children can outperform relative to what their IQs would normally predict.
However, taking a regular school kid out of school for the summer so that he can play outside with friends most of the time and come home to let his mommy make him milk and cookies does not confer that benefit. In that case, the child's major environmental factor is still his peer group which is an IQ 100 7 yr old.
"No. The claim this post makes are logically inconsistent. One claim requires the belief that achievement is genetically determined anyways. The other claim requires belief that children need a lot of time with their families. Need it for what? Not for achievement because that was genetically determined. Not for overall adult levels of crime aversion, educational level, religiosity, family stability etc. because the studies say that those are also very largely genetically determined."
I never took you for being such a pragmatist.
How about letting kids have some time off to enjoy their childhood? Giving kids time off to spend with their families because it's an important part of life, independent of adulthood outcomes.
How about childhood being valuable merely by itself? Merely because it represents a time when kids can have fun and roll around in the goddamn mud.
Nothing I said is inconsistent. You're just projecting an argument so that you can spew your anti-HBD, liberal creationist, pro-NAM apologetics.
FemX, don't you work in a job trying to improve minority educational outcomes? How's it going (without giving to much personal info away)?
2 Yr Old Baby with 156 IQ;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1mhx42dGxo&feature=channel
Obsidian
I was disappointed to see you unable to find any fault in the the replies to your specific 10 Questions on HBD or your rejoinders yet you you recently claim HBD public policy equals black genocide.
It not honest of you to claim that OneSTDV does not want to engage your or your HBD questions when he devoted an entire post on his to your without any limits or censorship (61 posts already, many lengthy). OneSTDV's stated impatience with you, like mine, is for your repetive and dishonest debating that effective become topic-derailing spam rather than for any content you post.
I understand you'd like to change the venue to your blog. However, you have been known to censor, edit and continously reframe, evade or misdirect the discussion there. To wit, you repeatedly ask the same HBD questions and, when answered, simply ignore the most answers to pick the most evil possibility no one gave you like black genocide. This is simply a hate crime hoax.
If you genuinely have honest concerns about HBD, please post them at our well-established discussion where we both can continue it fairly and uncensored.
I'll cross post this comment to your "HBD in a Nutshell (=black genocide)" post and our original OneSTDV post containing our entire dialog. I hope that your readers catch up on the background of our discussion by reading your 10 ten HBD questions and the many replies you received.
I invite you again to engage in a more honest dialog on our original OneSTDV post where I will sincerely attempt to respond.
You can be better than than O.
Holla back
FemX
No. The claim this post makes are logically inconsistent. One claim requires the belief that achievement is genetically determined anyways. The other claim requires belief that children need a lot of time with their families.
Why the absolutes? Don't you work with people?
I've never heard any deep thinker on HBD attributes 100% of intelligence or motivation (the two biggest factors for academic success), to genetics.
Negative environments can significantly depress expected baseline intelligence or life outcomes more than positive environments can raise them. It's trivial to significantly stunt a child's emotional and intellectual growth but impossible to turn a lazy sociopathic IQ70 dullard into an diligent empathetic IQ120 genius.
Imprisoning average, but particularly bright students, in classrooms with below-average kids in today's dumbed-down and undisciplined public school environment is unnecessary, punishing and harmful.
Keeping students in school that have nothing to teach them during the normal school year much less during summer is stunting and harmful to their development and future opportunities.
Summer is last major block of time for kids to independently explore interests (music, sports, reading, etc), freely socialize with self-selecting peers or absorb their family and cultural values and avoid indoctrinated by our debased mass culture. This is not something most any sane parent would argue has no difference on life outcomes like self-confidence and happiness.
I could see summer school being offered optionally on the grounds of financially helping out working parents. But to mandate this is oppressive and harmful to the vast majority of students since it will be basically geared to help the dimmest students who are failing.
I'm always struck by the hypocracy of liberals like yourself who apparently hold such deep seated emotional views on education yet appear either (1) have no children or (2) manage to escape the consequences of your convictions.
Hi John Gaulton,
Replies below:
JG: Where did you go? OneSTDV devoted an entire post for you to free-range on your top 10 HBD questions which were throughly answered to your apparent satisfaction. After your initial rebuttals were addressed, you left no outstanding issues.
O: Yes, that's correct; in light of OneSTDV's stated desire not to engage me further, I took the liberty of continuing the conversation over at my blog, which you are more than welcome to participate.
JG: One of your questions in that post was what 10 public policies would be adopted with full acceptance of HBD. I offed a number of HBD-based policies which helped both blacks and whites which you seemed to agree with with silent agreement.
O: I've copied your replies to my blog.
JG: These included ending easily corrupted affirmative action (put in a transparent hard quota instead if you must), academic tracking, stop wasting billions trying to achieve impossible idealistic goals (eg closing the gap between SE Asian Indian and black NFL cornerbacks ), ending the race-hustling racket, greater inter-racial trust, etc.
O: We will examine all of this in greater detail on my blog in the coming week.
JG: I noticed that you abrubtly revisited the topic between various "game" posts on your blog by outlandishly summarizing HBD public policy as elimination of all blacks.
O: I didn't know that I had to have a certain kind of sequencing in the way I choose to post topics on my blog. At any rate, the posrt you are referring to was admittedly polemical, but often such a device is useful to highlight the issues under examination in the simplest terms. You are free to give voice to your concerns there if you like.
JG: You did not base this upon any prominent HBD blogger, but rather on a single tragically low self-esteem and boarder-line suicidal black persona named David Alexander.
O: The very same things could be said of HBD bloggers themselves, ie, tragically low self-esteem and the like. I'd rather focus on the arguments rather than the personas making them, don't you agree?
JG: Despite your seemingly congeneial online persona, your black extermination post exposes you as a simply dishonest race agitator and hustler. Your post is just an online hate crime hoax.
O: Well, you are welcome to your opinion. As I am mine.
JG: Perhaps you share David Alexander's twisted perspective which is why you project your anxieties onto others. Unlike David's depressing resignation, you become energized and this imagined conflict give your life purpose. Sad.
O: My or DA's mental/emotional stagte, motivations, etc, are irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Surely you can do better than that, John.
JG: You and David Alexander both need to chill out, realize that averages are not individuals and make the most of what you've been given in this life. You are a lot luckier than the vast majority the approx 6.8 billion people on this planet.
O: And you and those of your ilk need to realize that its not cricket to give unsolicited advice. If and when I want to know what you think about a particular personal problem I have I'll be sure to ask you for it.
The Obsidian
John Gaulton,
Replies below:
JG: I was disappointed to see you unable to find any fault in the the replies to your specific 10 Questions on HBD or your rejoinders yet you you recently claim HBD public policy equals black genocide.
O: I have addressed your responses on my blog. You are welcome to respond in kind.
JG: It not honest of you to claim that OneSTDV does not want to engage your or your HBD questions when he devoted an entire post on his to your without any limits or censorship (61 posts already, many lengthy). OneSTDV's stated impatience with you, like mine, is for your repetive and dishonest debating that effective become topic-derailing spam rather than for any content you post.
O: Then the problem is in what one considers "spam" and "content" which is in the eye of the beholder. This is easily solved by moving the discussion to my venue. You are welcome to participate.
JG: I understand you'd like to change the venue to your blog. However, you have been known to censor, edit and continously reframe, evade or misdirect the discussion there. To wit, you repeatedly ask the same HBD questions and, when answered, simply ignore the most answers to pick the most evil possibility no one gave you like black genocide. This is simply a hate crime hoax.
O: You are gravely mistaken. The way in which I handle my blog and why is clearly posted on my blog, you are free to review it for yourself. The discussions regarding HBD or ongoing there, and you are most welcome to participate, as are anyone else here reading this, includign Mr. OneSTDV himself.
JG: If you genuinely have honest concerns about HBD, please post them at our well-established discussion where we both can continue it fairly and uncensored.
O: OneSTDV has stated a desire not to engage me on these issues and I respect his right to run his house in any way he wishes. I have a blog, and I choose to continue the discussion there. You are welcome to participate.
JG: I'll cross post this comment to your "HBD in a Nutshell (=black genocide)" post and our original OneSTDV post containing our entire dialog. I hope that your readers catch up on the background of our discussion by reading your 10 ten HBD questions and the many replies you received.
O: Thanks.
JG: I invite you again to engage in a more honest dialog on our original OneSTDV post where I will sincerely attempt to respond.
O: Both threads devoted to this topic on my blog are quite open to any to participate, including and especially you, John. We'll pick it up over there.
JG: You can be better than than O.
O: Indeed, there is always room for improvement. See ya at my place! :)
Holla back
The Obsidian
John Gaulton,
The following links will direct you and the other readers to recent HBD-related discussions obtaining at my blog:
In response to OneSTDV's recent "Obsidian Once & For All" post: http://theobsidianfiles.wordpress.com/2010/03/09/onestdv-throws-down-the-gauntlet/
The post where I quote David Aleaxander at considerable length and to which you seem to take issue with: http://theobsidianfiles.wordpress.com/2010/03/13/hbd-public-policy-in-a-nutshell-agree-or-disagree/
And finally, here's my post where I outline how I run my house and why:
http://theobsidianfiles.wordpress.com/2010/02/19/clarity-is-better-than-agreement-a-houskeeping-cleaning-moment/
Again, looking forward to chatting it up with ya at my place. :)
Holla back
O.
"How about letting kids have some time off to enjoy their childhood?"
Where is your data?
Like I said, I see movies where kids are super happy about summer vacation. But I also see movies where the computer genius who saves the world is a black teenager.
Where is your data that shows that kids that play during summer are happier than children that are in a structured educational program? If you don't have it, you are just make believing that 3 months of playtime is a good thing.
"Giving kids time off to spend with their families because it's an important part of life, independent of adulthood outcomes. "
Important for what?
"Nothing I said is inconsistent. You're just projecting an argument so that you can spew your anti-HBD, liberal creationist, pro-NAM apologetics."
You are an idiot. I am not a liberal creationist and that should be obvious. I am as hereditarian as the data says I should be. You assign your random biases to data interpretation and come up with conclusions that make no sense such as this one. There is no war on childhood. For 10,000 years childhood was the time when parents relied upon their property for extra labor around the household. That is what we evolved to tolerate. Everyone knows that that is exactly what summer off from school was created for. It was not created so that children could enjoy months of leisure time, which is a completely modern luxury.
"This is not something most any sane parent would argue has no difference on life outcomes like self-confidence and happiness."
I completely do not give a shit what any parent thinks and nor should I. You show me the data that presents the long term benefits of being at home during summer vs in classes. You show me the data that shows how those at home vs summer school have some kind of different form of socialization, emotional attachments, long term knowledge acquisition. And then show me that this difference is caused by the environment and not by the genetic predisposition of the families.
Data or GTFO. I am the total opposite of a liberal creationist for that reason. You guys are not.
Where is your data that shows that kids that play during summer are happier than children that are in a structured educational program?
Most mindboggling comment ever. How can there be an adult who never was a child?
From FemX:
Kids aren't happier playing during the summer instead of being in school.
It's not important that kids spend quality time with their parents, siblings, and other family members.
Wow. How can I even argue with someone asserting stuff like that? Those statements are even more reality-denying than liberal creationism.
I'm starting to seriously consider that FemX was a prank account and now the real person (probably an angry anti-racist omega male with an Indian fetish) is coming out.
It's not important that kids spend quality time with their parents, siblings, and other family members.
Wow. How can I even argue with someone asserting stuff like that? "
That assertion is not from FemX. That assertion is the basic implication of the most detailed case study of twins separated at birth
http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/w/wright-twins.html
One had an abusive and impoverished family environment. The other had a rich and loving family environment. Both twins were almost the same in personality profile when examined decades later.
So no, spending time with your siblings and parents doesn't matter for purposes of causing some kind of long term positive outcome. Again, don't bark at me. That's what the twin studies of hundreds and hundreds of twins imply. You like "HBD" when it gives you the conclusion that you want, which is that blacks can't be helped. You get pissy at me when the same exact research implies that family time with middle class loving white parents does exactly the same zilch for whites as it does for blacks.
"Negative environments can significantly depress expected baseline intelligence or life outcomes more than positive environments can raise them. It's trivial to significantly stunt a child's emotional and intellectual growth"
You have data that supports this? Because I have data that contradicts it.
"Helmreich (1992) interviewed a randomly selected group of 211 survivors and compared them to a U.S. born group of 295 Jews. Data suggested that some of the survivors not only managed to resume their lives but also tended to be more successful than other U.S. born Jews of a comparable age. According to Helmreich (1992), the resilient traits (such as adaptability,
initiative, and tenacity) that enabled Jews to survive the Holocaust may have also accounted for their later success and such characteristics may have been passed on to their children"
http://www.aaets.org/article96.htm
There are books that examine the success levels and lives of hundreds of children who survived the holocaust. And as it turns out, the children of the holocaust were MORE successful than there American counterparts.
Look at history people. Your ancestors routinely survived their mothers dying in childbirth, famine, small pox, political violence. In fact most of your ancestors dealt with most of those things in their lifetimes. And not just in their lifetimes- they handled them in their childhoods and grew up to be functional hardworking people who did not abandon their own families.
Not famine, not plague, not even Aushwitz could quell the brute resilience of mental inheritance. Don't think for one second that those poor wittle kiddies need mommy and daddy and playtime during summer or else they'll live lives of quiet desperation. The kids will be fine one way or the other.
In any case, OneS, you have the simplest form of data that supports your view here? Two groups of kids of the same IQ level, one group has school year round and one has summers off. What are the long term performance differences between these groups.
Data or GTFO.
So the only thing that matters in life is educational attainment and adulthood income?
How about cultivating a familial bond, enjoying one's childhood and having a great number of memories to look back on? How about not being stuck in a classroom for 12 years and instead being able to socialize with a chosen peer group? Playing sports, running through the woods, playing house and dress up and having sleepovers with lots of candy and soda?
I guess in FemX's world none of those things matter. Seriously, did you not have friends as a child? Were you not invited to birthday parties or something?
I can't believe I'm arguing that these experiences are worthwhile.
It's ironic that you've also always expressed incredulity regarding HBD. Now you're basically a genetic determinist?! Almost no HBDers are even that hardcore.
FemX
The Holocaust is too general of an experience to depress expected baseline intelligence or life outcomes. As bad as it was, especially given the high culture and technology of Germany in the 1940s, human history starting from the Old Testament and Koran are filled with ethnic and religious genocides, enslavement and other acts of man's inhumanity to man.
I'm sure studies could have been made of Japanese and Korean immigrants fleeing famine, disease, and war in Asia only to arrive in America and doing quite well for themselves too.
No, to permanently screw up a kid intellectually, socially or otherwise, systematically expose them to alternating neglect and extreme abuse from birth onward as is occasionally sensationalized in the crime reporting. Thankfully, there are no human experiments on such things, but there have been mild ones on primates and animals that suggest altered development.
If they didn't lose the will to live, you would easily have one totally and irreversibly screwed up individual. Perhaps this is seen in the more common occurrence of a disproportionate % of molesters have been molested themselves, loose women having been raped as children, etc although it would be hard to disentangle any possible genetic component.
It's impossible to think of any large scale study on the effects of such extreme abuse and neglect. Still, it's impossible to image that locking a kid in a dark closet and feeding them under the door crack for the first 18yrs of his/her life is not going to depress their expected intelligence, social adjustment or mental well-being.
(This is in response to Obsidian's recent attempt in another OneSTDV post to divert, reset and otherwise derail our conversation here)
Obsidian
Look, I understand your squid ink shtick doesn't work without your ability to manipulate the venue. But please don't keep repeating the empty excuse that OneSTDV doesn't want you to follow-up on our lenghy conversation in a post he *dedicated* to you and invited your top HBD questions.
True, OneSTDV and others have lost patience with you for hijacking other posts with the same intermiable squid ink. People can only answer your same "what do you suggest" questions so many times before they lose patience with you and see bad faith.
As explained several times to you, many people have invested a great deal of time responding to your HBD posts. You have left off with none of your top 10 HBD questions unanswered, so what is there to continue with at your blog? Unlike OneSTDV to date, you have been known to edit, delete or otherwise censor comments for questionable reasons.
I apologize if I hit a sensitive chord in trying to offer you potentially helpful advice. If you are sincere and not just a troll, you really should just chill and count your blessings. Villifing everyone in conversation with you as wanting to exterminate blacks reveals your own insecurities and paranoias than anything about HBD.
Holla back on our dialog if you have any more questions about your 10 ten HBD questions. I'll be happy to continue our conversation in the open and uncensored forum we have dedicated to your HBD concerns.
Peace
You like "HBD" when it gives you the conclusion that you want, which is that blacks can't be helped. You get pissy at me when the same exact research implies that family time with middle class loving white parents does exactly the same zilch for whites as it does for blacks.
We get pissy because you're arguing against a proposition no one here has advanced.
Hi John,
replies as follows:
JG: Look, I understand your squid ink shtick doesn't work without your ability to manipulate the venue. But please don't keep repeating the empty excuse that OneSTDV doesn't want you to follow-up on our lenghy conversation in a post he *dedicated* to you and invited your top HBD questions.
O: OK-I am not interested in continuing the conversation here. I wish to continue at my forum. You are free to join in, or not. period. Is that direct enough for you, John?
JG: True, OneSTDV and others have lost patience with you for hijacking other posts with the same intermiable squid ink. People can only answer your same "what do you suggest" questions so many times before they lose patience with you and see bad faith.
O: I ask because said solutions are never presented. Pardon me for liking to have a solution proposed for every problem noted.
JG: As explained several times to you, many people have invested a great deal of time responding to your HBD posts. You have left off with none of your top 10 HBD questions unanswered, so what is there to continue with at your blog? Unlike OneSTDV to date, you have been known to edit, delete or otherwise censor comments for questionable reasons.
O: I have already spoken to these fallacious claims, by giving you and everyone else here the direct link to my post outlining why I choose to run my blog in the way I deem fit. *shrugs*
JG: I apologize if I hit a sensitive chord in trying to offer you potentially helpful advice. If you are sincere and not just a troll, you really should just chill and count your blessings. Villifing everyone in conversation with you as wanting to exterminate blacks reveals your own insecurities and paranoias than anything about HBD.
O: No apology is necessary, just an awareness of the simple fact of life that when people don't specifically seek you out for advice, you shouldn't attempt to offer it. I have no insecurities about HBD, my many posts on the subject speaks to this, and even if I did, how does that inform the current debate? Nor have I argued that HBDers want to exterminate Blacks - what I've done is posted up a series of comments by a frequent HBD blog commenter, and then opened the floor to others as to whether they agree or disagree. Clearly, you disagree. Then I invite you to officially register said dissent at my blog where the actual conversation obtains. what, John - you scurred? ;)
JG: Holla back on our dialog if you have any more questions about your 10 ten HBD questions. I'll be happy to continue our conversation in the open and uncensored forum we have dedicated to your HBD concerns.
Peace
O: As I've already said, OneSTDv has made his position known on the matter; that you refuse to take me on up my open invitation to continue this conversation at my blog isn't a problem I can or should attempt to solve.
Salaam
O.
FemX says . . .
The claim this post makes are logically inconsistent. One claim requires the belief that achievement is genetically determined anyways. The other claim requires belief that children need a lot of time with their families.
Could you provide quotes? As is clear from my responses, I don't think this is being claimed, depending on what you mean by "need." Furthermore, claims this strong are not necessary to carry the argument. The claimed benefits from extra schooling are dubious, and the benefits of not-schooling are obvious.
Post a Comment