view the rest of the comments
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
Right. Of course not. That's not the issue. The issue is that minority history months treat the minority history as something separate from 'normal' history. Instead minority histories should be taught as an indistinguishable part of the respective time period.
The fact that you didn't learn those new things in history when you were in school is the problem. That's where the solution and proper equity is to be found.
And this is an argument to fundamentally sacrifice the good on the altar of the perfect. Would it be better that minority positions, accomplishments, and experiences were taught as part of broader curriculums? Of course--but they're not. Doing away with Black History Month doesn't address that, because the alternative isn't a broader solution, but to simply do nothing. BHM is a bandaid, but if you rip off the bandaid, it's still a wound. With the bandaid there at least we're forced to acknowledge the wound.
Similarly, giving away cash in the form of loan forgiveness doesn't solve the problem of greed in upper education, but it does alleviate pain felt by an entire generation of working Americans. This is a perfect example of the problem: the fascists blocked the relief, and then what happened? Did we muscle down as a society and get to work on the difficult problems of moving higher education away from the current profit-motivated model? No, of course not. What happened instead? Right: Nothing happened. Tuition is still reprehensibly high. The only difference is that the last generation of borrowers continue to suffer, just like the next will.
The point is, BHM is not an alternative to systemic policy changes to address historic racism and other discrimination: it's a stopgap, and lobbying for its abandonment isn't lobbying for a societal pivot to more effective ways to address the problem. It's lobbying that black history not be taught at all.
That’s a similar argument as “but ALL lives matter”. Nobody is saying black/queer/women history is separate from history. The month is there to highlight parts of history that would be forgotten otherwise, or that people feel convenient to ignore. We need to celebrate our differences, and adding a day/week/month to the calendar does it.
Since that problem has not been fixed and is actively getting worse in recent years, I'm going to continue supporting Black History Month (and Pride Month, and and and...)
That's fine on it's own.
As long as it doesn't take away from fixing the actual problem. The way student loan forgiveness eclipsed trying to actually control higher education prices.
You come up with a solution to fixing the actual problem, I'm all ears.
Though if I'm completely candid, I find it a bit annoying that you've taken the time to wag your finger at me for this entire conversation over a problem that is arguably decades or even centuries old because I say I support and will continue to support black history month.
So you want schools... teaching.... "critical race theory"?
Yes? Probably? It depends a little on why you're using quotes. I assume you don't mean the literal academic theory. And instead mean some kind of more reasonable version, of what Republicans and conservatives seem to mean (and irrationally fear) when they use the term.