+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 13 12345678910111213 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 256

Thread: Desegregation: Harmful or Helpful?

  1. #1
    Mourning in America madanthonywayne's Avatar
    Posts
    12,306

    Desegregation: Harmful or Helpful?

    From another thread:
    http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archive...latest_colo.php

    Catastrophe in Kansas City

    The effort to integrate the Kansas City public schools is one of the most costly, misguided, and ineffectual programs ever undertaken in America in the name of racial equality. This billion-dollar effort has been so utterly a failure that only good can come of it. Catastrophe as complete as this may shake even a liberal’s confidence. This may well be the high-water mark of the astonishing efforts whites have made to build a society in the name of an illusory equality.

    Kansas City came to national attention ten years ago, when federal District Judge Russell Clark ordered the school district to build and staff the best, most expensive public schools in the country—perhaps in the world. They were to be so dazzlingly good that they would both lure white students out of their safe suburbs and raise black student achievement to the white level. Judge Clark was even willing to wield dictatorial power to get what he wanted, looting both the city and the state to fund the gold-plated schools that desegregation was thought to require.

    Of course, the grand experiment failed. The wondrous schools were duly built but blacks learned no more in them than before. Whites stayed in the suburbs. And now a recent Supreme Court decision will probably cut off massive subsidies from the state, leaving the city with a hugely expensive system to run and no money. If Kansas City cannot dream up new ways to make whites pay for them, the dream schools will slide back into the ramshackled mediocrity from which Judge Clark thought he had lifted them.

    Separate and Equal

    The Kansas City, Missouri school district first opened in September 1867, with four schools for whites and one for blacks. The state constitution, like that of sixteen other states at the time, required segregation. A law passed the following year reaffirmed segregation, but required that black schools be equal to white.

    Eventually the city was operating one high school and 14 elementary schools for blacks. Almost all of these schools were north of 27th Street, which was the traditional boundary of the Negro quarter. The city also made a serious effort to make the schools equal. Black teachers were paid the same salaries as white, and in most years the city spent approximately as much on black students as it did on whites. During the 1936-37 school year, for example, it cost $79.31 to educate each white elementary school pupil (about $825 in today’s money) and $69.10 to educate a black pupil. In 1940-41, however, the district spent $118.61 on each black high school student but somewhat less—$110.43—on whites.

    Even if there was rough equality in the operating budget, blacks were sometimes slighted in the capital budget. Their schools were often old and overcrowded. In 1949, parents of students at the all-black Bruce elementary school sued the city to replace rickety buildings. The Missouri Supreme Court upheld a lower-court denial of relief, arguing that although the Bruce school had no auditorium, gymnasium, or cafeteria, there were white schools in the state that were no better off. Moreover, since the curriculum at the Bruce school was equivalent to that of white schools, the black parents had no grounds for complaint.

    The 1950s are now acknowledged to have been the salad days for Kansas City public schools. Sixty-nine thousand students (77 percent of them white) got what was, by today’s standards, a superb education in their segregated schools. The beginning of the end was, of course, 1954.

    That year, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education that segregated schools were unconstitutional. Kansas City obediently prepared to desegregate. A color-blind plan was drawn up whereby students would simply attend the schools nearest them, whether they had been all-black or all-white.

    Desegregation proceeded so smoothly in 1955 that the Kansas City Star did not even write a story about it. There were no disturbances because housing in the city was so segregated that only a handful of students were affected by integration. Moreover, almost 90 percent of the 921 white children who were to have attended formerly-black schools quietly moved out of their neighborhoods over the summer. When the school year began, only 117 of them were left to integrate the black schools. Their numbers dropped very quickly, and soon voluntary desegregation in Kansas City fit the pattern found all over the country: Almost the only people who crossed the color line were the children of ambitious black parents who wanted their children to attend white schools.

    Whites began to drift towards the suburbs, and in 1970 the school district lost its white majority for the first time. Most schools, however, were still either overwhelmingly white or overwhelmingly black. By the mid-1970s, two-thirds of the students were black, and the district was showing all the stigmata of a black institution: crumbling buildings, poor discipline, declining test scores.

    With so few white students to go around, meaningful integration was no longer possible, and by 1977, the school board was desperate. That year, it sued everyone in sight, in the hope of dragging 18 white, suburban school districts into a single, huge district. Forced busing would then flush precious white children out of the suburbs to rejuvenate Kansas City; and the suburbs would be taxed to pay for it.

    Judge Russell Clark got the case but did not make important decisions until six years later. In 1984, he let the terrified suburbs off the hook. Following a 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision, he argued that since the suburban districts were not responsible for residential segregation they could not be forced into a shotgun marriage with Kansas City.

    It was the next year, 1985, that he hit upon the final solution to the segregation problem: urban schools so extraordinary that bigoted whites would voluntarily abandon their suburbs and private schools to flock to the city and sit next to blacks.

    Judge Clark was realistic enough to realize that these schools would have to be spectacular, and spectacular they are. Of the more than $1.4 billion that has been spent in ten years on this “desegregation” plan, $418 million has gone for renovation and new construction, though not always wisely. After a $1 million patch-up of Central High School did not raise it to Judge Clark’s standards, the old school was torn down and the district sank $32 million into a gleaming new one.

    Paseo High was another school that Judge Clark pronounced unsalvageable. Built from a type of limestone found nowhere else in the country, it was a cherished architectural landmark. The judge didn’t care. Protesters watched in tears as the school was dynamited on his orders.

    The district now has 12 brand new schools—scores of houses had to be bulldozed to make way for some of them—with equipment to make a teacher’s head swim: planetariums, olympic-size swimming pools with underwater observation windows, dust-free diesel mechanics rooms, at least one mock-United Nations wired for simultaneous interpretation, radio and television studios capable of real broadcasting, video editing and animation labs, a moot court complete with jury room and judges chambers, a model Greek village to teach participatory democracy, elementary schools with one personal computer for every two children, etc. etc. These are the famed “magnet schools” that were supposed to attract white children like so many iron filings.

    Another $900 million has gone for special staff to operate these wonders, and across-the-board raises for teachers and administrators. There are German- and French-language elementary schools which, of course, must be staffed with native speakers. The former coach of the Soviet Olympic fencing team has been hired—along with an interpreter—to teach Missouri rubes the finer points of sword play. It has been, in short, an unprecedented orgy of spending, overseen by school superintendent, Walter Marks, who has been pleased to see the salary for his position leap from $75,000 to $140,000.

    Where did the $1.4 billion come from? Judge Clark raised it through two astonishing acts of judicial dictatorship. In 1987, he unilaterally raised Kansas City property taxes, first from 2.05 percent to four percent and eventually 4.96 percent—the first time in American history that a federal judge has levied taxes. This breath-taking usurpation of power simply ignored an amendment to the Missouri constitution that requires a two-thirds supermajority vote to raise property taxes past 3.25 percent. Judge Clark even tried to impose a surcharge on income taxes, but an appeals court struck this down as an invasion of the province of the state legislature.

    When it became clear that Kansas City could be bled no further, Judge Clark decided to pillage the state—but on what grounds? In a flourish of legal non-reasoning, he decided that the state had contributed to segregation in Kansas City by permitting such things as restrictive covenants in deeds and by doing nothing to mix up the races. In penance for these past crimes, the state has been forced to pay more than $800 million to make the city’s schools fit for suburban white people. Needless to say, the state attorney general has repeatedly contested this exaction, but until June (see below) had lost every court battle.

    The astonishing thing is that ever since 1955 there has been no school segregation in Kansas City. By the time of Judge Clark’s decisions, no one was even pretending that the city or the state or the school district was discriminating. By no sane reading of civil rights laws can Kansas City be found guilty. It had bad public schools and two-thirds of the students were black. In the never-never land of Judge Clark’s mind, this was unacceptable. It could only be the result of racism, and not just any old racism; this was Government-perpetrated racism in violation of the United States Constitution.

    Because he was springing to the defense of that holy document, he appointed himself school district dictator, with the power to eliminate everything he considered a “vestige” of discrimination. In a crowning act of folly, he decreed that he would continue to run the schools until the test scores of black children were appreciably the same as those of whites. So long as blacks did not do as well as whites, the segregation of ages past was still doing its evil work.

    Complete Failure

    What have been the results of this grand experiment? Instructional costs, not including costs of the building program, have more than doubled from $3,094 per pupil per year to $8,000 (during the same period, the state average rose from $2,470 to $3,760). Average classroom size has decreased from 38-47 to 22-27, and the number of school librarians has shot up from 13 to 56. Ten years ago the district had no “counselors” for elementary school students. Now it has 53 of them. All this luxury is lavished on only 36,350 students as opposed to a high of 69,000 in the 1950s. The overall operating budget has leapt in seven years from $142 million to $500 million while the number of students has stayed the same.

    Whites have not behaved like iron filings. A comparison of the 1985-1986 school year—the first year of the “magnet” program—with that of 1992-93 shows that white attendance has continued to drop slightly, from 26.4 percent to 25.2 percent. Every year some 1,400 suburban students take the bus into town, but the white turnover rate is very high; most whites go back to suburbia after one or two years. The district has an annual “marketing and recruitment” budget of $1.8 million to lure other whites into town to take their places. Martin Luther King Middle School, which requires uniforms for all students and emphasizes the study of Latin grammar (!), has the best reputation among whites—and manages to attract only 55 students from the suburbs.

    The small number of Kansas City whites who send their children to public schools have developed a recognizable pattern of patronizing only the lower grades. The racial performance gap is narrower at these ages and adolescence has not yet turned many blacks into predators and trouble-makers. When it is time to enter four or fifth grade, most white children go to the suburbs or to private school.

    What effect has more than a billion dollars had on school performance? During the seven years of Judge Clark’s dictatorship, the dropout rate has climbed from 6.5 percent to 11.4 percent and the average daily senior high school attendance rate has dropped from 81.5 percent to 76.2 percent. The racial gap in achievement levels has remained unchanged, starting with a gap of several months in first grade and growing to two or three years by graduation. Test scores on standardized tests—essentially unchanged—are highest in the elementary grades, which have the most whites.

    In short, nothing has turned out as Judge Clark hoped. It is probably true, as the district lamely argues, that even more whites would have fled the district were it not for fencing coaches and planetariums. The district is nevertheless more nonwhite than ever and the racial performance gap continues to yawn, just as it does in every school in every district in every city in every state.

    In the white suburbs, in places like Raytown and Lee’s Summit, schools spend less than half the money Kansas City does on each student and get much better results. The Blue Springs district, for example, spends $3,403 per pupil compared to $8,000 per pupil in Kansas city. By the third grade, its students are already 70 to 80 points ahead of Kansas City on the Missouri standardized test (graded from 200 points to 595).

    If anything, the school district faces its worst crisis ever. Superintendent Walter Marks, who happily spent hundreds of millions during his three years on the job, was fired in February. In 1994 he managed to find 14 reasons to leave town on school business. Worse still, during a paid leave of absence for back problems, he was filmed by a hidden Kansas City television crew carrying lumber into his new home in Florida. The crew also caught him bounding onto the airplane to come home, but by the time it got to Missouri he had to hobble off with a cane.

    The search for a replacement has been hampered by a June decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that finally reins in Judge Clark, and may end the annual tribute from the state. In a 5-4 decision, in which the Clinton administration entered a motion in support of the status quo, the court invalidated most of Judge Clark’s efforts to fight “segregation.” Since the suburban school districts were not drawn along racial lines and cannot be blamed for “segregation” in Kansas City, Judge Clark did not have the authority to consider them as part of his solution. The actions he took to make the city schools more attractive to suburban students were therefore improper.

    No one is going to make him tear down the luxury schools. However, he bypassed the collective bargaining procedure to grant raises to school employees in the hope of making the schools more attractive to suburban whites. The raises may be rolled back.

    In a remarkable fit of common sense, the Supreme Court ruled that scores on standardized tests are a ridiculous measure of integration, and that the state of Missouri cannot be held financial hostage to poor black performance. After pouring over $800 million into this colossal blunder, the state may finally be off the hook.

    Of course, Kansas City has become addicted to the $100 million or so every year that Judge Clark made the state hand over in operating expenses. The city is in a panic at the prospect of running the schools without state money. Once that money is gone, who is going to fix the video editing machine when it breaks down? Who is going to pay the security guards who keep the personal computers and machine shop tools from walking out the door? Who is even going to do simple maintenance on the huge, new, fancy school buildings?

    To hazard a prediction, unless Kansas City can find fresh whites to bleed (see sidebar), in 10 years its public schools will be worse than ever. About the time the fencing coaches are laid off, the few remaining whites will lose their taste for the exotic and will clear out. The schools will become grimmer and more savage. As they do in Chicago, Newark, and the Bronx, exhausted teachers will maintain the barest facade of scholarship in what will come to resemble holding pens for young blacks and Hispanics. The only difference will be that in Kansas City, this familiar chaos will reign in what was once the most costly and ambitious school district in the country.

    Of course, the Kansas City debacle has been a valuable experiment that has yielded fine data. Anyone but a dreamer could have predicted the results perfectly, but now they are clear enough to startle a liberal: (1) Not even the most opulent schools will tempt more than a handful of whites voluntarily to attend classes that are majority black, and (2) no amount of money can bridge the racial gap in academic performance.
    Quote Originally Posted by Genji

    As a KC resident I recall all the news about this. It never ends. The District is still in chaos, there is regular violence in the schools, scores are rock bottom and everyone that can makes damn sure their kids don't go to KCMO schools. KC is huge, city limits wise, and extends north of the Missouri river for 30 miles. Residents there (overwhelmingly white suburbs) were incensed that moves were being made to bus KCMO kids to their all white districts. The plan failed and resegregation is back on track. The fancy, state of the art schools built with the billions paid by taxpayers are routinely vandalized, some even burned. The only patrons of KCMO schools are those that can't get out.
    The article posted and Gengi's comments afterwards illustrate what an utter disaster desegregation has been. It's not that I think that blacks should not be allowed at white schools. It's the judicial tyranny that attempted to force white kids to go to majority black schools that were not in their neighboorhood.

    The original lawsuit {Brown v/s Board of Education} complained that a black kid had to pass a couple white schools to get to the black school, so why couldn't she just go to the white school. How did the brilliant judges fix this problem? By bussing white kids all over the place to achieve some ideal racial mixture.

    Judges forgot that humans have free will and will not be treated as pawns for some jackass judge to achieve his perfect rainbow of colors at a given school. When faced with their children being bused to all black schools, whites either moved completely out of the district beyond the reach of judicial tyranny, or sent their kids to private schools. Meanwhile, the inner cities became more and more black, poorer and poorer.

    I have personally been affected by this. For about six years I lived in a mostly white town surrounded by mostly black towns. It had one of the best school systems in the state of Illinois. Then there were some lawsuits, and the next thing you know our school system is integrated with the surrounding mostly black and far inferior school systems.

    Suddenly test scores fell precipitously. There were fights, drug problems, racial tension. My son's school went from about ninety five percent white to seventy percent black.

    Soon all of our friends were moving out of the town. Indeed, out of the county beyond the reach of lawsuits. After a couple of years, we followed. Moving to Indiana, to what is arguably the best school district in the state.

    My son, who was one of the top ten students at his school in Illinois, tested into remedial English at his new school. He's finally back into normal English and stayed in advanced math.

    Meanwhile, our old town {Crete, IL} now has one of the worst school districts in the state of Illinois.

    The moral? All this concern with racial balance at schools serves only to drive all the whites completely out of the county and leaves no tax base to fund the black students that remain. Furthermore, it is a distraction from the real issues.

    Students should go to school where they live.
    If that means defacto segregation, so be it. Let the whites know their kids can safely go to their neighboorhood school without fear of being bussed into the ghetto, and some whites might just stay around. Then you can focus on education, not racial balance.

    Also, this story puts paid to the notion that money has anything to do with education.

  2. #2
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    23,053
    Forced integration simply will not work ...ever! In fact, think about it ......forced anything has never worked in almost any endeavor of mankind sicne the beginning of history. Oh, sure, maybe for a short, short time, but it was always a disaster-in-the-making ...even from the start.

    Baron Max

  3. #3
    big brown was screwed up
    Posts
    1,867
    forced anything can work if there is adequate education and familiarity. Note my conditions.

  4. #4
    Moderator of B&E forum
    Posts
    18,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Baron Max
    ...In fact, think about it ......forced anything has never worked in almost any endeavor of mankind sicne the beginning of history....
    Perhaps a little over stated, but I think often this not incorrect; however, you seem to think/presume that segregation is somehow natural and "unforced." I think "segregation"* is one of he better examples of FORCED behavior being successful,** but note it is so because it is instilled at such an early age that it does not appear to be forced on you.

    It seems to me that Breck (in “three penny opera” - I think) had how segregation is forced /created just about correct, or perfectly described:

    "You have to be careful taught - before you are six or seven or eight - to hate all the people your relatives hate - you have to be taught, before it too late, to hate all the people your relatives hate." (or something like that in English translation for the German original.)

    If you go see young children playing a orphanage or any place where the society has failed to teach much to them, including: to hate all the people your relatives hate, those ignorant (untaught) kids play together without regard to skin color or other racial characteristics.

    Clearly your tacit assumption that segregation is natural and not FORCED onto children by the social indoctrination system - is false.
    -------------------------------------------
    * The segregation in India is not racial, but they need some help knowing who is high class (women with painted dot on center forehead) and who is not. That is also a forced segregation that, if you are non-Indian, you make more easily recognized as social force in action.
    **"successful" in the Darwinian sense that it survives, not in the sense it is an aid to the society as good brains in the "wrong" bodies often fail to get developed to the detriment of the society. (However, the Baron and I have had this discussion before.)
    Last edited by Billy T; 09-23-06 at 11:46 AM.

  5. #5
    Moderator of B&E forum
    Posts
    18,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Chatha
    forced anything can work if there is adequate education...
    I agree. note my post just made. I.e. many societies have adequate "education" to make segregation work.

  6. #6
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    23,053
    Quote Originally Posted by Billy T
    If you go see young children playing a orphanage or any place where the society has failed to teach much to them, including: to hate all the people your relatives hate, those ignorant (untaught) kids play together without regard to skin color or other racial characteristics.

    Clearly your tacit assumption that segregation is natural and not FORCED onto children by the social indoctrination system - is false.
    As you might guess, we hear/read that bullshit often, but it's just one more idiotic ideal that doesn't and can't take into account the normal and natural ideal of the family structure.

    Of course children are taught by their parents! What? ...you'd have all children taken at birth and raised by liberal doo-gooders?

    No, you're making that statement with complete disregard of the basic human family structures and, I might add, the basic human rights that we all so dearly love to wave around in triumph.

    So ...is this to say that you'd take away the rights of families and parents in order to FORCE your ways and methods and thoughts onto the children? And that's better?

    Baron Max

  7. #7
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    23,053
    Quote Originally Posted by Billy T
    I agree. note my post just made. I.e. many societies have adequate "education" to make segregation work.
    Forced education? Take the kids from their parents and "teach them the "right" ways of the world"???

    So ...you don't give a fuck about the parents' rights? You'd force integration education onto the little kids ......do it my way, goddammit, or we'll kill you!!!

    Baron Max

  8. #8
    Humans are ONE
    Posts
    3,372
    As an alternative perspective, I can say that while here in South Africa there has been no forced desegregative bussing since Apartheid fell, from what I've seen the English speaking public schools have become quite well mixed and private schools are following (although more slowly). Afrikaans speaking schools more slowly yet since few black people wish to be educated in that language.

    Many children are growing up without the prejudices of the previous generation.

    Of course, unlike the US, blacks here are a definite majority, which might make a difference.

    Once the colour barrier is breached, the largest barrier is, I think, language - mainly between whites (very few of which speak an African language, unfortunately) and those blacks who aren't proficient in English.

    Quote Originally Posted by Billy T
    "You have to be careful taught - before you are six or seven or eight - to hate all the people your relatives hate - you have to be taught, before it too late, to hate all the people your relatives hate." (or something like that in English translation for the German original.)
    That sounds remarkably like a song from the American Musical South Pacific.

  9. #9
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    23,053
    Quote Originally Posted by Zephyr
    Once the colour barrier is breached, the largest barrier is, I think, language - mainly between whites (very few of which speak an African language, unfortunately) and those blacks who aren't proficient in English.
    Interesting observation. And also interesting is that the blacks in America seem to be going out of their way to invent their own form of "english" as a way of defining their culture and ethicity ....instead of learning regular English as taught in schools and used in business. I.e, they're actually segragating themselves from the mainstream of American life ...doing it intentionally!

    Baron Max

  10. #10
    wht r u tlkng abt?

  11. #11
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    23,053
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickelodeon
    wht r u tlkng abt?
    Very, very intelligent response, Nick! thanks,

    Baron Max

  12. #12
    Moderator of B&E forum
    Posts
    18,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Baron Max
    ...They're actually segragating themselves from the mainstream of American life ...doing it intentionally!....Baron Max
    No, you are presuming again.

    The English dialect spoken by blacks has been well studied and conforms to the theory Chompsky has advance as part of man's natural linguistic genetic heritage (Its rules - internal structures, for example how a declarative sentence is converted into a question , things about how an "imbedded clause" can relate to the main part of the sentence etc - I have forgotten most of this, but it is amazing how all human languages are governed by a genetic endowment structure) A "intentionally developed" language, like Esperanto, is artificial and does not follow the "human system of languages" rules of our genes. A bunch of professor made it up, trying to make use of different language to give it international appeal - long before Chompsky totally changed what is "linguistics" (the study of language).

    Typical of the true American black variant of English are structures that are wrong in Standard English but completely consistent, unlike Esperanto, with humanity’s genetic endowment. For example they will say: "He be coming tomorrow." instead of "He is coming tomorrow." Their version is no more wrong than old English of Queen Elizabeth’s time is wrong. I dare your to try to read even a page of Beowulf. - I tried once and what I could get from it was mostly due to fact I also knew German at that time.

    All the modern linguists will tell you are wrong! - American black dialect or variant of English is a natural, not made up, language. Any historian of language will tell you that its roots/ structure are older than English and common to several still living African dialects.

    Summary:
    Your are just ignorantly presuming something that is demonstrably false. (However, you would need to understand more of what Chompsky has taught us about language to realize this.)
    Last edited by Billy T; 09-23-06 at 05:53 PM.

  13. #13
    Mourning in America madanthonywayne's Avatar
    Posts
    12,306
    Quote Originally Posted by Billy T
    The English dialect spoken by blacks has been well studied and conforms to the theory Chompsky has advance as part of man's natural linguistic genetic heritage
    Your are just ignorantly presuming something that is demonstrably false. (However, you would need to understand more of what Chompsky has taught us about language to realize this.)
    Who cares whether of not it is natural, it's not the language the rest of society speaks. By speaking a different language, whether it follows Chompsky's rules or not, blacks are segregating themselves.

  14. #14
    Moderator of B&E forum
    Posts
    18,453
    Quote Originally Posted by madanthonywayne
    Who cares whether of not it is natural, it's not the language the rest of society speaks. By speaking a different language, whether it follows Chompsky's rules or not, blacks are segregating themselves.
    I agree. All who do not learn to speak the currently accepted version are "segregating themselves", and much worse, limiting their opportunities socially and economically. My point was they are not doing it "intentionally" -it is just a natural evolution of their African language structures adapting to living in a English dominant culture.

    Have you ever been to Orakoke* Island, off the NC coast? 35 years ago (or more?) when I went camping there, I learned that scholars who want to understand the English of Queen Elizabeth’s time often come there, at least back then, as that was the only place in the world still speaking the English of Queen Elizabeth’s time. That is probably all destroyed now, with the children of these speakers working in some Hilton Hotel, speaking proper English to the guests. Ah "progress" is unstoppable!
    -------------------
    *spelled wrong very likely
    Last edited by Billy T; 09-23-06 at 06:12 PM.

  15. #15
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    23,053
    Quote Originally Posted by Billy T
    I agree. All who do not learn to speak the currently accepted version are "segregating themselves", and much worse, limiting their opportunities socially and economically.
    Okay! For all your learned bullshit in your earlier post, I see that you fully agree with me .....they're segragating themselves!!

    So .....fuck 'em!

    Baron Max

  16. #16
    I always thought the purpose of busing was to get little kids used to the idea of long commutes.

  17. #17
    Mourning in America madanthonywayne's Avatar
    Posts
    12,306
    Quote Originally Posted by Fraggle Rocker
    I always thought the purpose of busing was to get little kids used to the idea of long commutes.
    I guess that makes as much sence as the theory that black kids can't learn unless they're sitting next to a white kid.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by madanthonywayne
    From another thread:



    The article posted and Gengi's comments afterwards illustrate what an utter disaster desegregation has been. It's not that I think that blacks should not be allowed at white schools. It's the judicial tyranny that attempted to force white kids to go to majority black schools that were not in their neighboorhood.

    The original lawsuit {Brown v/s Board of Education} complained that a black kid had to pass a couple white schools to get to the black school, so why couldn't she just go to the white school. How did the brilliant judges fix this problem? By bussing white kids all over the place to achieve some ideal racial mixture.

    Judges forgot that humans have free will and will not be treated as pawns for some jackass judge to achieve his perfect rainbow of colors at a given school. When faced with their children being bused to all black schools, whites either moved completely out of the district beyond the reach of judicial tyranny, or sent their kids to private schools. Meanwhile, the inner cities became more and more black, poorer and poorer.

    I have personally been affected by this. For about six years I lived in a mostly white town surrounded by mostly black towns. It had one of the best school systems in the state of Illinois. Then there were some lawsuits, and the next thing you know our school system is integrated with the surrounding mostly black and far inferior school systems.

    Suddenly test scores fell precipitously. There were fights, drug problems, racial tension. My son's school went from about ninety five percent white to seventy percent black.

    Soon all of our friends were moving out of the town. Indeed, out of the county beyond the reach of lawsuits. After a couple of years, we followed. Moving to Indiana, to what is arguably the best school district in the state.

    My son, who was one of the top ten students at his school in Illinois, tested into remedial English at his new school. He's finally back into normal English and stayed in advanced math.

    Meanwhile, our old town {Crete, IL} now has one of the worst school districts in the state of Illinois.

    The moral? All this concern with racial balance at schools serves only to drive all the whites completely out of the county and leaves no tax base to fund the black students that remain. Furthermore, it is a distraction from the real issues.

    Students should go to school where they live.
    If that means defacto segregation, so be it. Let the whites know their kids can safely go to their neighboorhood school without fear of being bussed into the ghetto, and some whites might just stay around. Then you can focus on education, not racial balance.

    Also, this story puts paid to the notion that money has anything to do with education.
    Segregation may end up being a good thing, if people are segregated by profession and criminal record.

    However most of the time, people are segregated on appearance, and in this case it's as stupid as segregation by hair color and shoe size. To be accurate and rational with racial segregation, all tall blondes should have a state, all blonde midgets should have a state, all blonde criminals should have a state, all blonde artists should have a state. and then you can move on to the next hair color, and have all dark haired aryans in another state, seperating the talls from the short, the fat from the skinny, the smart from the dumb, the criminals from the non criminals, and then do the same with redheads, and once people are divided by hair color you can further divide people, so that all the people with clear skin and dark hair are seperate from all the people with dark skin and dark hair, and once again put everyone into their own little box, and finally divide people up by religion and culture.

    The end result is, you'll only be around your kinda person, they will look as much like you as possible, they will think as much like you as possible, they will have emotions as much like yours as possible, and be about as intelligent as you are, they'll even have the same profession as you do.

    So if you are a tall, thin, blonde haired blue eyed artist, who happens to be Christian, you'll have your own state and it will be for tall thin blonde Christian artists only, anyone else will require a special invitation to enter.
    Last edited by TimeTraveler; 09-24-06 at 02:17 AM.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by madanthonywayne
    I guess that makes as much sence as the theory that black kids can't learn unless they're sitting next to a white kid.
    Segregation will not be racial forever. When blacks and non-whites go extinct, segregation will be based on how thin you are, how tall you are, how blonde your hair is, and how blue your eyes are, among other things such as intelligence level, culture, and religion.

    Genetic discrimination is genetic discrimination, you can call it race, you can call it old terms like black and white, but if there are no black people there will still be segregation, and maybe that's a good thing because obviously the majority of the world wants to put everyone into boxes, thats why race was invented in the first place.

    So, if we look at the current society defined definition of beauty, tall blonde women who are thin, like say Paris Hilton, this is the master race. Segregation will work in her favor, if you look different from this, segregation will only work in your favor if you have someone lower on the ladder, like minorities, gays and others to live in the worlds ghettos and do all the difficult jobs. Race, like class, acts as a buffer, as long as there is someone a shade darker than you, or shorter than you, or with darker hair, or fatter, or in general just uglier than you by what society defines as ugly, then you gain all the advantages of society based on societies definition of beauty.

    So, if you are blonde, with blue eyes, tall, thin, with a nice smile, then perhaps it actually is in your advantage to want segregation. If you don't look like this, segregation will not work in your advantage long term, because all it will do is create a ghetto for all but those who are most beautiful according to whatever society says is beautiful at the time.

    Simply look at history, people who look "ugly" according to society, also happen to live in an ugly ghettofied environment. So now people associate beauty with wealth, self worth, and all of these other things. And of course it's the physical kind of beauty, so when you grow old it's all gone.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by madanthonywayne
    Who cares whether of not it is natural, it's not the language the rest of society speaks. By speaking a different language, whether it follows Chompsky's rules or not, blacks are segregating themselves.
    Everything is white and black, black and white, up and down, left and right, one extreme or the other, 1 or 0, good or evil, right or wrong, I see right through your false binary logic here.

    No one in this country speaks proper english. Arnold speaks just as bad as Kobe, who speaks just as bad as Pedro, who speaks just as bad as you do. You go to Europe, England, and you are the one who can't speak straight.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •