Your a broken record saying the same thing 10 different ways expecting a different response. While still not providing a solution..

Ps blacks live in Republican run cities and their situations are no better ..

i never said that if a failing city elects a republican mayor, that the city will thrive. what i said, is that liberalism makes it worse.

we have spent trillions and trillions in the war on poverty. it’s nit about money. lack of money isn’t the cause of poverty, it’s a symptom.

the cause is usually making bad decisions. liberalism encourages the exact decisions that guarantee poverty.

you can tell me i’m a broken record. that doesn’t mean i’m wrong.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

THE EDUCATION OF MINORITY CHILDREN©
by Thomas Sowell

http://www.tsowell.com/speducat.html

As we all know, 1954 was the year of the famous racial desegregation case of Brown v. Board of Education. In order to comply with the law, without having a massive shift of students, the District's school officials decided to turn all public schools in Washington into neighborhood schools.
By this time, the neighborhood around Dunbar High School was rundown. This had not affected the school's academic standards, however, because black students from all over the city went to Dunbar, though very few of those who lived in its immediate vicinity did.
When Dunbar became a neighborhood school, the whole character of its student body changed radically-- and the character of its teaching staff changed very soon afterward. In the past, many Dunbar teachers had continued to teach for years after they were eligible for retirement because it was such a fulfilling experience. Now, as inadequately educated, inadequately motivated, and disruptive students flooded into the school, teachers began retiring, some as early as 55 years of age. Inside of a very few years, Dunbar became just another failing ghetto school, with all the problems that such schools have, all across the country. Eighty-five years of achievement simply vanished into thin air.

Where did the inadequately educated, inadequately motivated, and disruptive students suddenly appear from? Were they being educated prior to 1954?

Point is, integration was not necessary for success. Being an all black school was not a detriment. What mattered was the rigor and discipline of the students, the solid curricula taught by teachers dedicated to the success of their students, and the high standards set by the principals.

Nor was being from the "middle class" necessary. Most of the students came from below the middle class.

No, that's Sowell's claim of why Dunbar was a success in spite of being all black.
But then he specifically points to the entrance of inadequately educated, inadequately motivated, and disruptive students from the surrounding all black neighborhood as the reason for the change at Dunbar.

Where did the inadequately educated, inadequately motivated, and disruptive students suddenly appear from? Were they being educated prior to 1954?

Now its liberalism makes things worse..

You really need to decide what your implying .. your tight rope act is failing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The Sowell article was a response to your "This re-segregation trend often concentrates minorities in schools with fewer resources that face challenges attracting and retaining quality teachers. A mounting body of evidence indicates that school segregation has negative impacts on short-term academic achievement of minority students and their success in later life. Integrated schools have a positive impact on all students through promoting awareness and mutual understanding and ensuring that they have the necessary tools to function in an increasingly multicultural society. Not taking intentional steps to ensure that all students have the opportunity to attend quality, integrated schools perpetuates injustice, allowing the mistakes of the past to haunt the future."

The Sowell article, though not specifically meant as a counterpoint to yours, points out that it is not necessary to integrate schools in order to provide quality education. Nor are the money or the so-called necessary tools which are supposedly more abundant in integrated schools necessary factors for education that leads to success.

Nor is he arguing against integrated schools.

His article, in effect, points out the necessary key ingredients for quality education. And he is proposing that it is those ingredients, regardless if a school is integrated or not, which are necessary for quality education.

I think he laments that the approaches taken by the successful all black schools have been cast aside for the implementation of various theoretical social and pedagogical notions which are obviously failing not only minorities but even most whites.

The approach taken by those historic black schools were successful not because they were "black." They were actually very white, Western civilization, pedagogy. They were classically rigorous. They demanded discipline. They molded good, industrious, citizens who were far better prepared to face a world in which the ability to think, with discipline and motivation, is required, than are the public schools in the urban black neighborhoods of today. And the leftist political resistance to charter schools, or school choice, or vouchers, or religious schools (all alternatives in their way similar to old Dunbar High), which give minorities a chance at a better education, keeps many black children stuck in failure.

Integration is perfectly fine. Certainly a desirable goal. But it is not the answer for quality education. Growing up in Detroit, I went to integrated schools. What was required of students in order to get the most out of what was being taught, were the very things that were required of students attending the old Dunbar high school and the other successful all black schools of the past. And that rigor and discipline was required of all students, black or white. Those who slacked, did poorly or not as well. Black or white. Those who were serious and disciplined, were prepared for a better life. Black or white.

There is a classical notion that personal responsibility is the key to success. There is the Progressive notion of collective responsibility directed by experts and enforced by government being the only truly viable and equitable path to success.

The classical path admired by Sowell is old school. The Progressive new school shuns the classical as elitist, repressive, unfair, even racist. There is a competition between the ideas, even in how and what to teach.

Yeah, the classical may work, but it is mean spirited and inconsiderate of the basic needs of the less advantaged. It breeds contempt and animosity. Conflict and rebellion. The Progressive is still in its experimental stage, but will lead us to a better world.

So they say. In the meantime, we have an educational wilderness.

I said go talk to your friends who are diverse.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nice name calling... that devolved quickly.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

To put a finer point together in response to this... comment...

You said the following:

“ notice that liberals oppose all the things that would help blacks
get ahead - in tact nuclear families, having dads, school choice, jobs over welfare.”

Based on the above quote, it seems that the preconceived notions you have are that you believe that “blacks” would “get ahead” if they only focused on intact nuclear families, having dads, exercising their right to the school choice they are demanding and choosing to work over claiming welfare.

That comment insinuates you believe people of color don’t care about nuclear families, father figures in their lives and working. I’m not 100% sure I even need to include the school choice thing here to move forward with my point.

The above is troubling, at least to me. Not to you maybe, but I think if the people you associate with are truly as diverse as you claim them to be when you asked me where I “get off” assuming you hang out with only people like you (after I clearly hadn’t done so), then I encourage you to debate the quoted line with them in the context you chose to apply it on this forum.

If your quoted post was not what you intended, maybe you just need to revise your point, but as stated, it’s a head scratcher that you’re calling me the jackass...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

he's probably tired of the dripping sanctimony from the leftists here and elsewhere...it does wear on you:kewl:

Where did the disrupters suddenly appear from to destroy the Utopian experience that existed at Dunbar is a simple question that points out the fault in Sowell’s hypothesis that integration ruined Dunbar.

There easily could have been many other factors that changed to make the school and all of it’s members less successful. Aging leadership that doesn’t provide for continuity in mission along with an aging staff and then compounded by a significant mission change would disrupt any organization.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sowell stated very clearly that, contrary to aging leadership, it was the early retirements of once dedicated teachers and principals caused by the destruction of the ability to impose a work and discipline ethic and, presumably, the influx of current anti-disciplinary pedagogical theories that destroyed what Dunbar was and turned it into just another ghetto neighborhood school. A typical type of school that provides jobs for those with education degrees but doesn't provide the necessary disciplined and demanding learning environment required to produce quality education.

Various alternative school systems (with Dunbar-like aspirations), charter, choice, vouchers, etc. try to bypass the current education industry lock on the neighborhood school notion. But the industry and its union members with their paid for political lackeys, resist.

Oddly enough children with involved parents will usually excel in any school they attend and most with parents who are not, will not.
What concerns me more is mainstreaming the least educable and removing funding for programs for the top tier. That has been going on for the last 25 years and as a board member 20+ years ago I saw the effects of it. Dunbar would fall within that group.
In large part I believe that is what has driven the push for Charter, etc. schools.
It also has caused some very intelligent kids without involved parents to be lost in the educational system.
And I do agree with you on our self perpetuating education system, where those who excel at "school" become educators, love meetings about "school" and don't necessarily become skilled at teaching.
Luckily it is not true in all cases.

the marxist new york times cancel culture...I thought these people were supposed to be open-minded, more highly educated, tolerant, all about peace the party of "Love" and stuff:hihi:

https://www.bariweiss.com/resignation-letter

Pot meet Kettle

Tweety is the original cancel culture proponent, from Apple to the Wall Street Journal, he has wanted them all fired, boycotted and cancelled.

Then look at "conservative" publications and search for critics of Tweety. There are very few. National Review got rid of David French and Jonah Goldberg. WSJ lost Bret Stephens and Bari Weiss. Fox News has lots of Tweety propagandists, but sent George Will down the road.

So if you are a centrist, you will get cancelled, by one side or the other.

She didn’t have the lock step down.