This little thread is actually one of the sadder things I’ve read recently.
It all started here, with a tweet from Dr. Danna Young basically smearing white middle school boys claiming if they’re not ‘pulled out’ they end up in the alt-right pipeline.
The response is pointed, heartfelt and probably fills the heart of every modern feminazi educator with joy because it signifies for them, Mission Accomplished.
And we wonder why the Armed Forces are having trouble recruiting the proper young men…
Combat Controller sends me this little snippet:
Graduates from the world’s top universities will be able to apply to come to the UK under a new visa scheme.
The government says the “high-potential individual” route will attract the “brightest and best” early in their careers. The scheme will be available to alumni of the top non-UK universities who have graduated in the past five years. Graduates will be eligible regardless of where they were born, and will not need a job offer in order to apply.
Successful applicants will be given a work visa lasting two years if they hold a bachelor’s or master’s degree, and three years if they hold a PhD. They will then be able to switch to other long-term employment visas if they meet certain requirements. There will be no cap on the number of eligible graduates.
A quick perusal of the list shows that Hillsdale College is not included, which gives you an idea of which ones are.
Regardless, I think it’s a good idea (as does CC) to target people who have worked hard and achieved something, as opposed to simply taking in the dregs of the world willy-nilly, as the Brits (and we) do.
Speaking of dregs, there are of course complaints from the Usual Suspects, who want to know why no Asian or African universities were included on the list.
Because they’re all shit universities, is why.
It IS the most fundemental issue facing us right now:
The American Left (aided and abetted by some conservatives) believes that the government, not parents, should determine the content of a child’s mind—their ideas, their principles, and their values. A few weeks after McAuliffe’s tone-deaf faux pas, two authors writing in The Washington Post summed up the Left’s position in the title of their op-ed: “Parents claim they have the right to shape their kids’ school curriculum. They don’t.” Parents should have neither the right nor the authority, according to the Post’s writers, to determine the ideas taught to their children. This task should be left to the “experts”—to the experts of the Education Establishment. The authors go on to claim that “education should prepare young people to think for themselves, even if that runs counter to the wishes of their parents.”
And:
“When it comes to society’s interest in protecting children, the legal precedent is unambiguous: The rights of parents come second.” But the question is, if parents’ rights come second when it comes to protecting or educating their children, then whose rights come first? And the authors’ answer is obvious: society’s rights, the government’s rights, the rights of the public-policy experts trump those of parents.
I need to quit now, because bullshit like this makes one of my fingers twitch really badly. Let’s call it this one, just for the official record:
(but I could be lying)
And that’s even after having completed my own kids’ homeschooling many years ago. But despite that, this is a hill I’d be prepared to die on, if called to do so.
Quick reminder to the “experts” and the State-sponsored thugs they use for “enforcement” : if you want to see a serious piece of social upheaval, start fucking with people’s kids. Virginia parents’ reaction to the CRT curricula isn’t even an appetizer.
Our kids are ours. They are not the possession of the State. But go ahead and poke that nest of rattlesnakes with your short little sticks…
Ah yes, using inequity to try to achieve equity:
Universities ‘will give poorer pupils priority’: Private school teenagers will get short shrift in admissions as colleges look to prioritise the disadvantaged
This time, it’s not choosing Blacks over Whites, but poor over wealthy. Yup, I can just see how this will help the poor overcome the “systemic bias” of the British education system. It’s the academic version of the “magic dirt” theory: that somehow, exposing the poor to better education will somehow raise all of them into successful careers after graduation.
Now, I agree that the earlier system of admissions — whereby the son of Lord Snotnose-Dribbling was guaranteed a place at Oxbridge simply he was the future Earl of Dunfartin. But let’s be honest, here: private school education tends to produce better students than state-managed warehouses do. And yes, it’s unfair that a scion of a wealthy (or titled) man should have easier access to places like Eton or Harrow than those of a fishmonger in Whitechapel, ergo a better chance of getting into, say, Cambridge. But denying the “privileged” a place at university in favor of poorer individuals whose grades are worse than the former isn’t much better, is it?
Once again, they’re expecting equality of outcome by “equalizing” admission, when any fool will tell you from experience that it’s a fool’s pursuit.
But the Left have never allowed commonsense, history and logic to interfere with their stupid philosophy, have they?
From Stephen Green at Insty:
Via Insty comes this latest bastardy, in Eureka MO just west of St. Louis:
Faced with complaints from parents about the indoctrination of children, an official in Rockwood School District, Missouri, instructed teachers to create two sets of curriculum: a false one to share with parents, and then the real set of curriculum, focused on topics like activism and privilege.
I should point out that the foul “educator” who sent out this loathsome message is, like First Lady Jill Biden, a Doctor in Education (EdD).
And the next time someone tells me that homeschooling is wrong for children, I’m going to punch them in the face.