122
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2023
122 points (97.7% liked)
politics
18909 readers
3546 users here now
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.
- 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.
- 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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
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.