I have answered the last question in my posts on more than one post.
And yet, you have continued to endorse exactly the opposite supposition, when it comes from the OP. Hence the requests for clarification.
You could, again, just answer the question and be done with it. Why spend 20 posts trying to blow smoke up my ass, unless you don't like the implications of your answer?
You claim that I have agreed with the OP by saying white culture is under-represented in school, something he didn't even say.
He explicitly says exactly that. That is the entire basis of his argument against representation of non-white culture in school cirricula. Just look at the thread title, fer chrissakes.
If you think that white culture is amply represented in school cirricula, then "equal time for white people" would require the dramatic
expansion of non-white representation in the cirricula. And you'd recognize how problematic the OPs premises and conclusions are (supposing, again, that you're actually stupid enough not to be tipped off by the red-text material in the OP to begin with).
Now I am asking you to link to the post where you assert I have said such a thing.
And I am refusing. You - and anyone else reading this - know very well what the issue is, and what relevant statements have been made.
Also, you didn't even define what "such a thing" was supposed to have been asserted: I've been
asking you, directly, to define your own position for yourself, and you've been avoiding doing so.