Supreme Court rejects affirmative action at colleges as unconstitutional

[Thaluikhain]

Also, posted in another thread by Thaluikhain but highly relevant here to the point I've been making:

Funny events in anti-woke world

Lucifer would have more class than this lot. Fleming has more class than these assholes! Fleming! Mundus too! Hell, throw in the The Devil from Cuphead, and Satan from South Park! Somebody make a large transmutation circle.

forums.escapistmagazine.com

The Florida Board have accepted a curriculum by an non-accredited, explicitly right-wing organisation conservative advocacy group. Useful to contextualise them banning BLM flags in the classroom and firing teachers over it.

That was Trunkage there.

Well, even by that standard, you run into a number of problems, in that:

a) There's no shortage of groups that far-right types want to eradicate

b) It strikes me that if you were worried about far-right types, you wouldn't want to advertise the presence of their targets in a location. Homophobes roaming the street are going to zero in on a school with pride flags rather than one without it.

c) Under the criteria of "targeted for extermination," there's no shortage of groups in the world that have been (are, in some cases) targeted for such a fate, so do they get flags too? Should we fly the Israeli flag for Jews, for the flag of East Turkestan for Ughyrs? I'll grant you that the pride flag isn't inherently political in the way that a national flag is, but otherwise, it's the same criteria.

d) Is it just far-right, or other groups?

 

[Ag3ma]

That was Trunkage there.

Oops. Sorry, Trunkage.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

But apart from that, nothing. I can't even remember a classroom where the Australian flag was draped, or anything similar on permanent display. So at least where I'm from, I just find the idea of flags being on display in classrooms bizzare (I mean, the American flag in American classrooms kind of makes sense, I don't know if pledging allegiance to it is still common or not, but that's about it.)

Every single day without fail and with a significant portion of the country wanting it to be mandatory for every student to participate, First Amendment be damned.

And if the rationale is that the pride flag needs to be on display to make LGBT students feel welcome...well, sure, every student should feel welcome in a school, but the conditions that might make a student feel unwelcome based on inherent traits stretch ad infinitum.

Also, backlash effect.

How is this argument not just "teacher shouldn't be allowed" with extra steps?

Gonna be honest with you boss, fucking nobody is clicking on that video

 

[Ag3ma]

This reminds me of the debate we had over themes in stories, where you insisted that every story had a theme, even if it's at its most basic (said examples including Mary Had a Little Lamb). But that aside, I can only disagree. The original example was the difference between a group like Greenpeace, and the CVA, which by your criteria, is still inherently political, just not controversial. But by this standard, literally every single thing ever is political, the only question is whether it's controversial or not. Mary Had a Little Lamb would be inherently political by its mere existence, but only worthy of note if it started being used to promote veganism or something.

Fundamentally, everything you experience forms your view of the world. Your view of the world then influences your actions, and those actions in the social sphere determines, even if in a very small way, wider society. As politics is the organisation and decision-making of society, what determines your situation, beliefs and action has political implications. Which is everything. But we can argue many things are sufficiently trivial that they are basically apolitical, like Mary Had A Little Lamb.

Where this mostly applies is that a lot of things people think are apolitical are potentially not. I think this is particularly true of a lot of social norms and the status quo. These are often assumed to be neutral, "the way it is", etc. and it is only deviation from that norm that is political or politicised.

This is all tangential to the previous discussion re. flags because I think it's interesting to consider at some level. Otherwise...

Politicization is bad, period. I've posted examples in both the "woke" and "anti-woke" threads of politicization of education across all levels of education from all kinds of sources, and I've already said that I think it sucks that the teacher was fired, but my original question was why the BLM flag was hanging there in the first place.

Honestly, I've forgotten where I had been going with this in the first place myself, so I'll save both of us from prologing it unnecessarily.

 

[tstorm823]

So when you say we should avoid "politicising" topics in school, what does that mean in practice for something like history? Do you mean we should avoid the contentious elements of modern history, in order to placate either side of the political divide? Suffice it to say that's not actually being apolitical; it's just shying away from a teacher's duty to inform.

I think a step back in the conversation could reveal the difference here: flags. There is a distinction to be made between teaching a political concept and expressing fealty to a political entity, and flag flying is probably the line not to cross there.

Teaching about the confederacy is obviously acceptable. Showing the symbols of the confederacy becomes more controversial. Flying the Confederate flag in your classroom as a personal statement is not acceptable.

Teaching about BLM is obviously acceptable. Showing symbols of BLM is more controversial. Flying the flag as a personal statement is not acceptable.

 

[Silvanus]

I think a step back in the conversation could reveal the difference here: flags. There is a distinction to be made between teaching a political concept and expressing fealty to a political entity, and flag flying is probably the line not to cross there.

Isn't it borderline obligatory to display the American flag in American schools? Its certainly not fringe.

Teaching about the confederacy is obviously acceptable. Showing the symbols of the confederacy becomes more controversial. Flying the Confederate flag in your classroom as a personal statement is not acceptable.

Teaching about BLM is obviously acceptable. Showing symbols of BLM is more controversial. Flying the flag as a personal statement is not acceptable.

So, in those cases, the flags represent quite specific movements. The rainbow flag represents acceptance of LGBT people, and is no more specific than that-- it implies no political inclinations, no countries, nothing else except a community of people who undeniably exist.

 

[Trunkage]

Oops. Sorry, Trunkage.

Yeah, finally getting the recognition I clearly deserve

 

[Trunkage]

(If you want to get a flag for every single individual who ever wants to feel "safe," you're going to run out of space for flags very quickly.)

Just going to point out that the Pride flag is meant to represent everyone. Like, all the colours are different people, like the Olympic flag

Then a bunch of people decided this was not appropriate and didn't represent them, like Christians, for obs reasons. Also, transpeople, so that's why there is a second flag

 

[Trunkage]

I'm sorry, but that comes off as semantics. Your argument seems to be that everything is political, it's just that recent history is more contested than earlier history. Which is a statement that I, and most people would agree with, but you seem to be objecting to the use of "political" rather than "controversial."



Come on, you're smarter than that, and I've already answered that question in this thread. To reiterate what I've already said near-verbatim, no-one is seriously suggesting that politics be removed from history, that's insane. When people say "keep politics out of the classroom," it's referring to real-world politics influencing it. If you want an example of this, you can check the DeSantis Guardian article link in the AntiWoke thread as politicization of a subject.

If you're questioning the contentious aspects of modern history, again, all I can is be as factual and as neutral as possible. And I get it, what's "neutral" to one person may not be "neutral" to another, especially if the people both have a stake in said history. I don't think it's possible to teach history without pissing at least one person off, that isn't to say the effort to be made. If a teacher's doing their job well, they'll present the facts, answer questions as honestly as they can, encourage class discussion, and set assignments that allow numerous points of view to be put forth (cliche example, I know, but the question of the Treaty of Versailles and whether the terms were justified or not).

You know, at school, I was told about 1788, and the referendum of 1967, White Australia Policy and Eddie Mabo. As in, I was just told they existed. No real further information about why they happened or what impact they had on society. Maybe a sentence to sum up what happened

Then around the apology, I realized that they weren't telling me things about those events to be 'not political.' Not political is just a synonym for being politically correct

And, it's just creating safe space for white people in case they might feel guilty for their ancestors misdeeds

 

[Thaluikhain]

You know, at school, I was told about 1788, and the referendum of 1967, White Australia Policy and Eddie Mabo. As in, I was just told they existed. No real further information about why they happened or what impact they had on society. Maybe a sentence to sum up what happened

More than I was taught.

Though, in English we did do op-eds about the plight of Aboriginal people, which in my case was worse than useless, because they were mixed in with op-eds about how mobile phones give you cancer and the like, so they got mentally thrown in the "rubbish English teachers say" pile.

 

[Trunkage]

More than I was taught.

Though, in English we did do op-eds about the plight of Aboriginal people, which in my case was worse than useless, because they were mixed in with op-eds about how mobile phones give you cancer and the like, so they got mentally thrown in the "rubbish English teachers say" pile.

I distinctly remember there being no criticism of the White Australia policy. Which, today, seem like a MASSIVE oversight

But then I was born into a community that always criticized Cherbourg (like an Indigenous Australian reservation) and they thought that wasn't being political. And it located 2 hours drive away and nobody had any real contact with them. I still get talked to about the Indigenous Australians are going to take away all our land

 

[tstorm823]

Isn't it borderline obligatory to display the American flag in American schools? Its certainly not fringe.

Yes, but it's also in America. The statement of flying an American flag in America makes no distinction between you and anyone else there.

So, in those cases, the flags represent quite specific movements. The rainbow flag represents acceptance of LGBT people, and is no more specific than that-- it implies no political inclinations, no countries, nothing else except a community of people who undeniably exist.

This makes a distinction between people. If you fly any flag other than that of the place you are in, you are designating yourself part of a group that does not necessarily include everyone present. The action is inherently divisive. And sometimes that's a correct, appropriate thing to do, sporting events being the simplest example. But taking an inherently divisive, performative action as a school teacher is problematic.

 

[tstorm823]

Just going to point out that the Pride flag is meant to represent everyone. Like, all the colours are different people, like the Olympic flag

Then a bunch of people decided this was not appropriate and didn't represent them, like Christians, for obs reasons. Also, transpeople, so that's why there is a second flag

That's not actually the history of the pride flag. It was commissioned specifically to represent the gay community, with the colors representing different aspects, not different sexualities. More info here:

A Brief History of Our LGBTQIA2-S Pride Flag - Department of Mental Health

June is Pride Month! You may have seen different kinds of Pride flags at community events and parades, outside people’s homes, on crosswalks, and even raised over Capitol buildings throughout […]

dmh.lacounty.gov

Furthermore, this flag was developed in the context of a gay rights movement that was at a crossroads: the community was divided between two groups: those who wanted to imitate the Civil Rights Movement and hold marches in serious business attire, and those who wanted to embrace eccentricity and hold colorful parades instead. The original pride flag was debuted at one such colorful parade, the vibrant colors if anything were a statement of defiance against boring gray normalcy, far from a symbol of universal inclusion.

 

[Hawki]

How is this argument not just "teacher shouldn't be allowed" with extra steps?

...because it isn't?

I've already detailed my thoughts on flags earlier in the thread. If your view is that teachers should be able to fly whatever flags they choose in the classroom regardless of content or context, that's your prerogative, but I can only say to that what I've already said earlier.

Gonna be honest with you boss, fucking nobody is clicking on that video

Your loss.

Teaching about the confederacy is obviously acceptable. Showing the symbols of the confederacy becomes more controversial. Flying the Confederate flag in your classroom as a personal statement is not acceptable.

Southern pride!

 

[Silvanus]

Yes, but it's also in America. The statement of flying an American flag in America makes no distinction between you and anyone else there.

It's a statement of political support for the country. It makes a distinction between American people and everyone else.

This makes a distinction between people. If you fly any flag other than that of the place you are in, you are designating yourself part of a group that does not necessarily include everyone present. The action is inherently divisive. And sometimes that's a correct, appropriate thing to do, sporting events being the simplest example. But taking an inherently divisive, performative action as a school teacher is problematic.

No, displaying a rainbow flag does not designate yourself part of the group. It simply expresses acknowledgement that people of that group should be treated equally. That should be exactly as uncontroversial as a teacher saying kids of all races should be treated the same.

 

[tstorm823]

It's a statement of political support for the country. It makes a distinction between American people and everyone else.

A national flag can do that, but not in this context. If I go to the Olympics and see the Union Jack, that is making a distinction between me and those from the UK. If I fly to London and see the Union Jack, that is welcoming me to the UK. If you are in the US, in a government run facility, the US flag is not distinguishing between anyone, it is a symbol of where you are standing.

No, displaying a rainbow flag does not designate yourself part of the group. It simply expresses acknowledgement that people of that group should be treated equally. That should be exactly as uncontroversial as a teacher saying kids of all races should be treated the same.

Only people of your political persuasion think that the flag has that meaning, which is the group you would be expressing participation in.

 

[Silvanus]

A national flag can do that, but not in this context. If I go to the Olympics and see the Union Jack, that is making a distinction between me and those from the UK. If I fly to London and see the Union Jack, that is welcoming me to the UK. If you are in the US, in a government run facility, the US flag is not distinguishing between anyone, it is a symbol of where you are standing.

Flags at the Olympics serve the purpose of easily communicating who is taking part, and distinguishing competing athletes from one another-- as well as (from the fans) expressing support for specific athletes.

In schools, it's very explicitly a statement of support, hence why schoolchildren are instructed to "pledge allegiance to the flag". Allegiance.

Only people of your political persuasion think that the flag has that meaning, which is the group you would be expressing participation in.

No, anyone who isn't invested in discriminating against certain groups or people sees it that way.

 

[Bedinsis]

Only people of your political persuasion think that the flag has that meaning, which is the group you would be expressing participation in.

If that's the case then why do major companies display the rainbow flag and/or rainbows during pride month?

 

[Gordon_4]

If that's the case then why do major companies display the rainbow flag and/or rainbows during pride month?

Mainly to be craven, barely fair weather friends.

 

[tstorm823]

If that's the case then why do major companies display the rainbow flag and/or rainbows during pride month?

Because multiple major finance groups direct money based on which companies perform public demonstrations of support for left-wing politics.

No, anyone who isn't invested in discriminating against certain groups or people sees it that way.

Not even all of those groups are fond of that flag.