For a few years now the Left has pushed in the media and in the schools various anti-bullying programs. The point was to expose and then stop bullying. It was a commendable policy. However, now the Obama/Holder Administration is attempting to prevent schools from suspending, expelling, or arresting the real bullies and criminals in the schools. What the new guidelines are trying to do is to insure that if a school is composed of 20% Blacks, then only 20% of the suspensions should be of the Blacks students. Sounds good, but it is totally divorced from reality. It is like saying Blacks should not be convicted of murder more than their percentage of the population. But Blacks as a group commit murder far more than whites or Asians. Should you not convict them even if they are guilty of murder? Or should you convict an innocent white just to make the percentages more equal and reduce the percentage gap?
The theory behind Attorney General Holder's new guidelines, disparage impact, is based on the view that there are no differences between the races. Blacks, whites, Asians, Amerindians, Aboriginals, are all equally alike in all abilities. If the percentage of engineers is higher in one group than others, then it is the result of poverty and discrimination. If more Blacks are expelled from school, it is due to discrimination against Blacks. Therefore, the need to stress the new guidelines. Obama/Holder are simply attempting to end discrimination.
Of course the Left not only stresses that all races are equal, but that gender, like race is a social construct. Just as all races are equal, by definition, so men and women are equal, by definition. If Blacks or women are less likely to be engineers than white or Asian males, it is not because they are unqualified, it is due to discrimination. Well, because Blacks are more likely to be expelled from school, it is not because they are more disruptive, only because of racist discrimination against them. That is the ideological basis for Holder's new guidelines. Look again. Male students are far more likely to be expelled than female students. Far more likely. Since males and females are essentially the same, according to the Left, does this not prove discrimination in the schools against males? The percentage expelled, male and female, should be the same, just as the racial percentages ought to be the same under Holder's view. Look at the disparate impact, the percentage differences in expelling male and female students! Either stop expelling so many males, or start expelling more females. Why doesn't Holder include the sexual disparity of expulsions in his guidelines?
In the end, the Left ideology is based upon unreality. Gender may be a social construct, but it is based in each culture upon the essential, natural differences between males and females. It is not constructed from thin air, but from the basic hormonal, physical, and other differences between males and females. And though it is taboo to mention it, there are good reasons to think there are essential differences between and among the races. Medicines for one group may not work the same for the other. It may not be a coincidence that marathon winners often come from a small area in East Africa. And there may me essential reasons, natural reasons that females and Blacks compose fewer engineers than other groups. It may not be discrimination; it may be the result of nature.
And what about that student allegedly found with marijuana and with what may have been stolen jewelry in his rucksack? Had he been arrested, instead of merely suspended, Trayvon Martin might not have been roaming around another neighborhood, attacking a man wary of suspicious characters in the burglarized neighborhood. It is because the system is too easy, too light on troublemakers, that they are encouraged to get into more trouble.
[Nicholas Stix at vdare.com wrote this about Trayvon Martin: But, ironically, the most startling fruit of the Obama/Holder campaign is the death of Trayvon Martin—blown up into a hoaxperpetrated by the Main Stream Media/ Democrat complex to set the stage for Obama’s re-election.
[Miami-Dade School Police had caught the young thug and thief Martin vandalizing lockers. A search of his bag then turned up stolen jewelry and a screwdriver, which the officer described as a “burglary tool.”
[Proper police procedure would have been to arrest Martin on suspicion of burglary, and turn over the evidence to prosecutors. But instead, the officer, “Darryl Dunn, falsified police records and referred criminal behavior to school discipline.” That was in order to help achieve Miami police Chief Charles Hurley’s objective of “crime reduction.” [Trayvon and The Miami-Dade School Police Department – Redacted FOIA Newly Released – Former Police Chief Charles Hurley by Sundance, The Last Refuge, June 27, 2013. Note that a blog, not the MSM, uncovered this scandal].
[But had Trayvon Martin been prosecuted, he would likely not have been staying at his father’s girlfriend’s home the night he attempted to murder George Zimmerman. He might well still be alive today.
[This police corruption predates Obama/ Holder, going back at least to the early 1990s, creating the fictional national “crime reduction” that I have repeatedly exposed (here, here, and here).
[In contradiction to Obama/ Holder, as I showed in The State of White America-2007, black school violence against white students is in fact rampant, and has made many schools education-free zones.
[Moreover, historian Raymond Wolters showed in The Burden of Brown and other works that black school violence is as old as school integration. He reports that, back in the 1950s, the NAACP insisted that black students could and would assimilate to white norms whilesegregationists argued that, due to habit and temperament, blacks would never meet white standards. And sure enough, as soon as schools began to integrate, black students refused to follow the rules. They routinely cursed, disrupted classes, engaged in heretofore unseen violence and vandalism, and routinely sexually molested white girls. The NAACP’s response: to scream “Racism!”
As NAACP chief counsel Thurgood Marshall, by then a Supreme Court justice, would brag to his white colleague, William O. Douglas 20 years later: “Now it’s our turn.”]
Brown had never been about fairness. It had always been about theracial conquest.
Many Blacks who attend school perform poorly compared to others. They may be older than others in the class. They may well be more disruptive. But now schools are told to ignore that, do not suspend, do not expel. Result: more and more will become disruptive. It is a prescription for chaos and more and more bullying. It is a policy so detrimental to education, that it is one expected from the Obama Administration. The Obama Administration shows that it is the defender of the Bullies and the enemy of real education in America.
Hugh Murray
Obama Administration Guidelines Could Lead to Racial Quotas in School Discipline
Ben Wolfgang, Washington Times, January 8, 2014
How discipline is doled out in the classroom now will be under much closer scrutiny by the federal government, but some analysts say the Obama administration’s efforts ultimately may backfire and could lead to de facto racial quotas in American schools. [That is precisely what the Obama/Holder Administration wants.---HM]
The Education Department and the Justice Department on Wednesday issued new “guidance” to ensure minority students aren’t punished through suspension, expulsion or other means more than their white peers. The administration cited legal authority under Titles IV and VI in offering detailed rules for how school districts can administer discipline.
...But within its guidance, most of which is not controversial and merely reinforces existing nondiscrimination laws, the administration also declares that schools’ disciplinary policies cannot have a “disparate impact” on one particular group.
In plain terms, it means district rules, guidelines and enforcement cannot result in the punishment of more black students than white students for the same offense, for example.
With that in mind, school leaders surely will keep a close eye on whether the same number of children from given racial groups are disciplined in equal number and equal measure for the same behavior.
“You have to make certain that your school discipline cases match those percentages. If you don’t, you’ll have the feds on your doorstep,” said Joshua Dunn, a political science professor at the University of Colorado and director of the university’s Center for Legal Studies. “If they actually do enforce these guidelines, there will be unintended consequences. This creates some rather destructive incentives. I don’t think there’s any way around that.”
Chief among those negative incentives, Mr. Dunn said, will be that teachers, principals and other school personnel may hesitate to punish a minority student for a particular offense out of fear that they will appear prejudiced or that their actions will result in disproportionate effects on one racial group.
Taken to the extreme, such a scenario could lead to even bigger problems, some specialists say.
“Eventually, you’ll have disorder in schools. . . . They either suspend white students for relatively trivial things or they don’t punish black students for behavior that is really disruptive or even violent,” said Hans Bader, a senior attorney at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. “You’re effectively commanding them to have racial quotas” with respect to which students are disciplined and how often.
...While the guidance itself is non-binding and carries no additional legal weight, the federal government theoretically could cut funding to states or local school districts if they have violated Title VI, which specifically prohibits discrimination based on race, sex or national origin.
Ben Wolfgang, Washington Times, January 8, 2014
How discipline is doled out in the classroom now will be under much closer scrutiny by the federal government, but some analysts say the Obama administration’s efforts ultimately may backfire and could lead to de facto racial quotas in American schools. [That is precisely what the Obama/Holder Administration wants.---HM]
The Education Department and the Justice Department on Wednesday issued new “guidance” to ensure minority students aren’t punished through suspension, expulsion or other means more than their white peers. The administration cited legal authority under Titles IV and VI in offering detailed rules for how school districts can administer discipline.
...But within its guidance, most of which is not controversial and merely reinforces existing nondiscrimination laws, the administration also declares that schools’ disciplinary policies cannot have a “disparate impact” on one particular group.
In plain terms, it means district rules, guidelines and enforcement cannot result in the punishment of more black students than white students for the same offense, for example.
With that in mind, school leaders surely will keep a close eye on whether the same number of children from given racial groups are disciplined in equal number and equal measure for the same behavior.
“You have to make certain that your school discipline cases match those percentages. If you don’t, you’ll have the feds on your doorstep,” said Joshua Dunn, a political science professor at the University of Colorado and director of the university’s Center for Legal Studies. “If they actually do enforce these guidelines, there will be unintended consequences. This creates some rather destructive incentives. I don’t think there’s any way around that.”
Chief among those negative incentives, Mr. Dunn said, will be that teachers, principals and other school personnel may hesitate to punish a minority student for a particular offense out of fear that they will appear prejudiced or that their actions will result in disproportionate effects on one racial group.
Taken to the extreme, such a scenario could lead to even bigger problems, some specialists say.
“Eventually, you’ll have disorder in schools. . . . They either suspend white students for relatively trivial things or they don’t punish black students for behavior that is really disruptive or even violent,” said Hans Bader, a senior attorney at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. “You’re effectively commanding them to have racial quotas” with respect to which students are disciplined and how often.
...While the guidance itself is non-binding and carries no additional legal weight, the federal government theoretically could cut funding to states or local school districts if they have violated Title VI, which specifically prohibits discrimination based on race, sex or national origin.
No comments:
Post a Comment