15 y.o. DBH student at ASU

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by chrisjm18, Aug 31, 2021.

  1. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Homeschooling is a personal choice. There is a diversity in homeschooling families. On the other hand, a homeschooling movement, represented by groups like HSLDA, is a largely politicized group posing as something else, and possessing a defined ideology bits of which you expressed here. Not unlike eg. the NRA, which purports to be about gun safety and not a lobbying outfit it actually is.

    See, that's why we need public education, along with other venues where people in the community get to interact regardless of their views. Otherwise, bubbles form, and people start to see the weirdest ideas repeated in their circles as self-evident and profound. For example, they may casually make a statement that implies that people are the property of other people. And expect everyone to just nod along, because at their compound everyone does.

    Parents WILL raise their children according to their values; that's just unavoidable. When it comes to education, though, they have an OBLIGATION to make sure their kids are educated in a way that allows them to live in society with other people. Including enough exposure to different worldviews, so a kid is not shocked when he finally hears other people saying that the earth is round. I mean, this used to be utterly non-controversial.

    See, Pride things do not bother me. I don't think they should be imposed on people who are uncomfortable with them, even in public space. For example, I did not agree with Canadian press trying to bully the late Rob Ford, a conservative, buffoonish and generally quite unpleasant mayor of Toronto into marching in a Pride parade. But that is it. If little Johnny is not forced to take part in Pride, I think it might do him good to learn to live with a few stickers for a month promoting a cause most people accept. Just like, coming from an opposite end, a Pacifist kid can survive sitting through a JROTC marching routine at Homecoming. They all will be fine.

    Here is an anecdote: my kids do Scouting, and get into contact with a few homeschooled kids. These are fairly normal children, not extreme cases from the John Oliver segment. Yet they have already met at least 3 homeschooled Scouts who really struggle with working with females on an equal footing. Most recently at a NYLT training (National Youth Leadership Training) where my daughter and the homeschooled boy were both staffers. Not all homeschooled children, mind you, and there are certainly jerks in public schools. But this is a specific type, and to me a real concern.

    (Also, some homeschool parents are insufferable arrogant tools. But that happens in many isolated communities. Like vegans. Or Libertarians. Or, yes, hardcore Bernie bros (also, Sen. Sanders himself is one of these). My high school was part of a Soviet system of selective STEM-heavy schools. My fellow "fiz-mat" grads also sometimes present as arrogant tools, ones who think them learning about Differential Equations in 10th grade makes them better than other people).

    Extraordinary claims like "school districts in Virginia engender an approach to education that is in absolute conflict with the values of parents" require extraordinary proof. Because for the rest of us, a politician in Virginia exploited a mix of real concerns and an artificial moral panic to get into office. Tale as old as time.
  2. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    I despise this thought-killing truism so much. "Democracy" and "republic" are two different attributes of a country. Canada, Belgium, and the UK are democracies but not republics. Russia, Iran and North Korea are republics, but not democracies. Saudi Arabia is neither. The United States, along with dozens of other countries, are BOTH. Enough with this charade already. BTW, many countries have some form of constitutional guarantees; these are not incompatible with democracy (and arguably necessary for an effective one). CO saves the day again.

    I'm not even convinced that "government education" as you describe it even exists, let alone is "demonstrably" evil. Which is not to say it is without problems. Just like the police.

    Dude, a video of a lawyer of a proven liar as a proof of anything? Really?
    Meanwhile, on Planet Earth, the "left" candidate in 2016 Presidential Election (who, let me remind you, won a popular vote) conceded in the morning of the Election Night, and "the Left" incumbent facilitated the transition. Also, the Miller Report details evidence of illicit Russia involvement in 2016 Election, and a number of people were indicted. But thanks for the reminder that 45 was impeached, twice, on very serious charges.
  3. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    This suggests that you believe that the people who make decisions at major homeschooling advocacy organizations have different views and priorities than the members who comprise and support those organizations, and I don't think that's the case.

    The frustrating thing about this comment is that you're 100% absolutely right about the need to be exposed to other views, but your choices of example show that you believe that it's only the other guys who fall prey to insular behavior.

    Can you really not see how your implication that those who disagree with you are flat earthers undermines what you're otherwise saying? Why would conservatives want to send their children to be educated by those who clearly dislike them and openly make fun of them? If you can't resist making jibe after jibe even when you're supposedly talking about mutual respect, why in the world would conservatives agree to have their children educated by you and people like you?

    I happen to agree with you about these particular social issues, and if anything, socially conservative parents who don't want their kids steeped in a culture of social progressivism probably have more to fear from the Internet than the local public school.

    I salute you: you deftly managed to denigrate just about everyone except yourself here.

    As someone who actually lives in Virginia, another way of describing that situation, without making an extraordinary claim, is that suburban parents in Virginia saw that policymakers in Loudoun County were so afraid of progressive activists that they swept sexual assault under the rug, so they voted for a Republican who at that time was campaigning as a moderate to send a clear message that that was unacceptable.

    I agree with you. I don't know how "we're a republic not a democracy!" became such a buzzphrase for conservatives, but it's not the insightful observation they seem to think it is.
  4. Michael Burgos

    Michael Burgos Active Member

    Republicanism is key to the American system. That many in the US see it as unimportant is fearful indeed. Perhaps you believe it's a "buzzphrase for conservatives" because they tend to be among those who take the founding documents seriously.
  5. Michael Burgos

    Michael Burgos Active Member

    Pleasantries aside, the only manner in which the US is democratic is through its republicanism, which necessarily requires an authoritative document(s) that limits representative power. You're prior characterization betrayed that reality in favor of mob rule. I'm terribly sorry that our system of government doesn't fit your narrative.

    Yes, I'm sure that is how you feel. Maybe you should read the other side before you relegate everyone you disagree with to conspiracy and insanity.

    So let's dress down those Trump supporters who questioned the election but not those many senators who actively sought to usurp electoral votes on the basis of a legal fiction? Clearly, partisanship is the air you breathe.
  6. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    You seem intent on minimizing the influence of the right, specifically religious right, in the homeschool and wider "parental choice" ecosystem. Name a hippie counterpart to A Beka Books and Bob Jones U. Press. BTW, I used to have a friend attending a conservative Evangelical church, and "public school is bad" was taught there as doctrine. FaithWay Baptist Church of Ajax, Ontario. They have their own church-basement school using BJU homeschool textbooks as curriculum, as well as their own church basement college. Leftie communities like this exist, but are far, far less successful or numerous at this moment. Granted, this is more of a standard cult practice than a political statement, but don't tell me these guys don't have weight in the movement.

    Also, not every HS school is part of the "advocacy" and belong to or even like these groups. Finally, yeah, I believe the organizational agenda of the HSLDA and the like is different than the aggregate of their members'. This is why their political support (and dare I guess, financial) is concentrated on the Right (your De Satans, of deVosii). After all, NRA members are split on gun control, while NRA the group is staunchly against. I was technically in the NRA for a year, after taking the Range Safety Officer course with other Scout volunteers - doesn't mean Wayne LaPierre agrees with me. (...well, to be perfectly sincere - I am pretty sure most or all of the other guys in that class voted Republican).

    Not a choice. Rev. Burgos posited a false dilemma, where both choices assumed a child must "belong" to someone. I was using that as an example.

    I am a member of the liberal academia, a foreigner and a Hillary supporter. Tell me about being clearly disliked and being openly made fun of feels like, I obviously have no idea. Besides, "Gallileo Gambit fallacy" posits that most out-of-mainstream views are not more widely accepted for a reason. Enter QAnon.

    Didn't know of my duty to denigrate myself in a debate, please tell me more. Nevertheless, I openly identify as an academic, a former tech bro, and a fizmat grad - groups that, while less known for obnoxiousness than vegans or homeschooling parents, still do produce a disproportionate number of obnoxious pricks. Oh, also a former taxation employee, and a member of a public Union. And Canadian (a group I personally dislike the most for their obnoxiousness).
    Jonathan Whatley likes this.
  7. Michael Burgos

    Michael Burgos Active Member

  8. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Yes, and? All democracies are this way through their respective systems of government, and those in turn fall under either constitutional monarchy or some sort of a republic. You have said nothing by stating this screaming obviousness.
    It betrayed nothing of the sort. On the other hand, draining 200-year-old government sectors of the resources to remain viable has nothing to do with upholding the founding documents. It is about diminishing the effects of representative power in society in favor of the M O N E Y E D interests. In fact, "starve the beast" movement doesn't stem from the Founders; it started taking form in late 70s-early 80s and used the backlash to the Civil Rights advances.

    If many, of any, senators "actively sought to usurp electoral votes on the basis of a legal fiction", that would deserve dressing down. Fortunately, things that deserve to be characterized this way is election denialism (say by Ted Cruz) and criminal fake elector fraud schemes coordinated by the Trump Campaign. Incidentally, characterizing those efforts as "Trump supporters questionin the election" is crime-covering doublespeak. Again, bubble discourse.
  9. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    I put that somewhat disdainfully, but I'll try to be nicer.

    No, that's not it. I'm okay with treating the Constitution as meaning what it says, even (and sometimes especially) when that would constrain the federal government far more than many people would prefer. Philosophically I'm a Spoonerist at heart, in that I don't believe that a contract is truly morally enforceable unless both parties have agreed to it, but if we're to take the notion of a social contract seriously, then at least the part of it that's actually written down should be strictly enforceable.

    My problem with your usage is more this. When I was in Social Studies class, unmentionably long ago, I was taught that the difference between a democracy and a republic was that a democracy involved all citizens voting on decisions, akin to a new England town meeting or a statewide ballot drive, while a republic is simple an indirect democracy, such as we have. The two may not be identical, but both are still majoritarian approaches.

    Ever since, the only time I have heard differently is from rightwing figures who are trying to shoehorn constitutionality and various limitations on majoritarianism into the term. That makes your definition, at the very least, unhelpful for communication with those who are not in the same ideological community. Sort of like "capitalism" or "socialism", which mean such different things to their respective proponents and detractors as to make them counterproductive in broader conversation.

Share This Page