Serfing

Pun and visual metaphor

by baldilocks

It’s really quite simple. California’s intent is to create a serf class and to enlarge it.

(…) California Teachers Association, emboldened by the huge Democratic gains in 2018, continues to push an aggressive and fundamentally reactionary approach to education, spending upwards of a million a month to curtail the surge of innovative charter schools in the state. This is particularly critical in lower-income communities, such as the East Bay, central Orange County and Los Angeles, where the state’s public schools have consistently failed and where some charters have made considerable strides through reforms and innovations.

But nothing has been more illustrative of the political agenda of our educational establishment than the recent draft curriculum for an “ethnic studies” course for the state’s schools. Although this curriculum has created a firestorm of opposition and is unlikely to be adopted as is, the fact is the curriculum reflected a far-left agenda that is deeply entrenched in the educational establishment.

The scariest thing about the ethnic studies curriculum may not be its ultimate content but how it reflects an ideology that advocates indoctrination of youngsters who often don’t even have the most basic understanding of sociology or history.

Often incapable of meeting basic grade-level English language and mathematics standards, these students would be forced to learn academic jargon like misogynoir, cisheteropatriarchy and hxrstory. (…)

California’s 8th graders, on average, have fallen well behind the rest of the country in science, mathematics and reading scores — including even demographically similar states such as Texas and New York. Almost three of five California high schoolers are not prepared for either college or a career; the percentages are far higher for Latinos, African American and the economically disadvantaged.

Serfs don’t need real education, of course.

Many want to know how formerly conservative California reached this abyss. There are several prongs and the descent in the quality of education is only one of the factors.

People have been trying to get me to document the other factors in the Third-World-ization of my home state. So, I’m going to take a shot at it. It will take a few days – perhaps a week – to gather the research and put it in coherent form.

Look for it at my home blog.

(Thanks to Glenn Reynolds, whose birthday is today.)

RELATED: Fighting For the Serf Turf

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

DaTimes and revisionist history

Having failed to take down Donald Trump with the Mueller investigation, the American media have turned to race as a way to discredit the president.

DaTimes launched the first assault with its project about slavery and race.

In case you missed it, DaTimes has determined that the nation started in 1619, the title of its nearly 100-page missive on race in DaMagazine, when slaves were shipped to Virginia.

It’s worth noting one significant error with this revisionist history: Slaves actually arrived on the continent 100 years earlier in Florida, which was controlled by Spain. But that fact undermines the narrative that DaTimes and others are pushing.

But I digress. DaTimes links slavery to rush hour traffic, mass incarceration, an “inequitable” healthcare system, and American overconsumption of sugar. “[N]early everything that has made America exceptional grew out of slavery,” DaTimes argues.

But there’s more. The Smithsonian will examine the slave trade, beginning in the 15th century. In partnership with the Pulitzer Center, DaTimes has offered lesson plans, guides, and activities to help teachers bring this material into their classrooms.

Others have decided to toe the line. DaPost offers an advice column from a college professor: “Dear fellow white people here’s what to do when you’re called racist,” on how to cope with such attacks.

USA Today chimed in about “America’s original sin.” AOC called the electoral college a “scam” because it gives too much power to white people in flyover country.

The creators of the 1619 project and its followers argued that they are interested in a dialogue about race, but it’s a diatribe. At a meeting with reporters and editors at DaTimes, executive editor Dean Baquet faced outrage from the staffers who wanted the organization to call Trump a racist.

According to a recording of the meeting obtained by Slate, the question of how to address presidential “racism” was something the paper would need to do. “How do we cover America, that’s become so divided by Donald Trump?” asked Baquet, who is black. “How do we grapple with all the stuff you all are talking about? How do we write about race in a thoughtful way, something we haven’t done in a large way in a long time?”

The emphasis on race comes at a time when Trump’s support from minority voters has never been better. A recent Zogby poll found that a quarter of blacks and half of all Latinos support the president.

Had DaTimes and others been serious about a dialogue about race, there have been many opportunities, particularly during the Obama years. Hanging such a discussion on events from 400 years ago seems rather dubious.

Why not just admit that race is the media’s current argument against Trump for the 2020 election? That would at least be honest.

The Left’s Ginsberg Argument is Fair, but Irrelevant

Vincent Gambini: I object to this witness being called at this time. We’ve been given no prior notice he’d testify. No discovery of any tests he’s conducted or reports he’s prepared. And as the court is aware, the defense is entitled to advance notice of any witness who will testify, particularly those who will give scientific evidence, so that we may properly prepare for cross-examination, as well as give the defense an opportunity to have the witness’s reports reviewed by a defense expert, who might then be in a position to contradict the veracity of his conclusions.
Judge Chamberlain Holler: Mr. Gambini?
Vincent Gambini: Yes sir?
Judge Chamberlain Holler: That is a lucid, intelligent, well-thought out objection.
Vincent Gambini: Thank you, your honor.
Judge Chamberlain Holler: Overruled.

My Cousin Vinny 1992

Our friends on the left are getting increasingly worried about Justice Ginsberg’s health and are terrified that Donald Trump will get a chance to replace her when she dies.

In this panic they are making an argument that because the GOP congress decided to use what they called at the time the Biden rule namely to, with an election pending, wait till the results of the election so the decision will have the sanction of the people and they point to the “fairness” argument that if Garland didn’t get a hearing during such a year then neither should a Trump nominee.

It doesn’t happen often but that final argument is actually not an unreasonable one, here is why we should ignore it:

1.  It’s not yet the election year

Justice Scalia died on Feb 13th 2016 and Judge Garland was nominated on March 16th 2016.  2016 was an election year 2019 is not.

If Justice Ginsberg hangs on till then then call me

2.  The election is not in full swing.

Debates not withstanding, by the time Justice Scalia died the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primaries had taken place meaning the election had offically begun.  As of today, debates not withstanding it has not.

If Justice Ginsberg hangs on till Iowa votes then call me

3.  Obama was a lame Duck Trump is not

In the 2016 election the person picking the nominee would regardless of the result be gone and unaffected by the people’s decision.  Donald Trump will not be a lame duck so his decision would have consequences for him

4.  It would be a valid voter metric for him and others

Not quite a separate point but because he Trump on the ballot his pick would be a valid metric for voters to decide on his re-election just as the Senate’s decision to not have a vote was a valid metric for their election or re-election

5.  Democrats crying fairness NOW?

Am I to understand that after 3 years of treating this president in ways unprecedented from the day of his election from trying to game the electoral college to the with help from the Obama administration trying to frame him as a Russian against they expect to have him answer the “fairness” argument.

6.  They would do it in a second. 

Does anyone seriously believe that if in the same position the Democrats would hesitate for a moment to use this power if they had it?

And the final and clinching argument….

7.  We CAN!

One of the things about elections is they give confer certain powers, those powers do not expire until the said people are officially replaced.  Donald Trump holds the power to appoint a person to fill a Supreme Court Vacancy.  The Senate holds the power to move forward a nomination or to hold it up that power is not dependent on Democrat outrage.

Tomorrow I will explain why democrats might be smart to go along with such an appointment.