Student's Expectations
David McDuffee
> Wasn't it *YOU*, David McDuffee, who continously said that Black
> students do not try hard enough?
Continuously? No. I did say that I thought it was the most likely
explanation of differences between black and non-black students in a
predominately middle-class school such as Shaker Heights.
> Wasn't that the point of you posting the time spent studying by
> different racial groups?
Yes. The data is a little dated now, and if you have more recent
figures we can take it from there, but the numbers which appeared in
the Chicago Defender August 21, 1986, as cited in Jawanza Kunjufu's
"To Be Popular or Smart: The Black Peer Group" were:
Asian-Americans: 12 hours per week
European-Americans: 8 hours per week
African-Americans: 6 hours per week
> But, in your quest promote the negative sterotype of Blacks,
> you didn't ask if the stats you provided, accounted for the
> academic rigor of the schools the students attended.
I'm trying to get at the truth, not promote negative stereotypes.
No one would be happier than me to see black students triple the
average number of hours spent studying, because I think it would
make a big difference. If you would prefer to advocate that the
students seek more academically rigorous schools instead, be my
guest. It's just common sense to me that if students who spend an
average of six hours a week studying began studying an average 12
hours instead, their schools would BECOME more academically
rigorous. And for most students, I think exchanging time spent
watching TV for time spent hitting the books would be easier than
exchanging a neighborhood school for a school across town.
TV viewing time was cited in the same book, from "Ebony Man",
October 1986, p. 62:
African-Americans: 75 hours
European-Americans: 53 hours
Asian-Americans: couldn't be measured
I suppose by your lights, the numbers are meaningless unless they
account for the academic rigor of the homes the students grow up in.
But perhaps, indirectly, they do.
> And wasn't it *YOU*, David McDuffee, who blamed Black kids for
> not getting into AP courses in high school? But, in your quest to
> promote the negative stereotype of Blacks, your over looked the
> fact that those courses are most likely *NOT* available in their
> school systems?
We had this discussion about the Shaker Heights system, where the AP
courses ARE available, but black students weren't taking advantage
of that availability. I believe the Washington Post article was a
bit of a wake-up call, because the last word I heard is that the
parents at Shaker Heights are becoming more involved in their kids'
educations there.
> Since you are in California, I'm sure you read about the lawsuits
> by the NAACP and the ACLU which highlights this fact. I'm sure you
> have also read the stats involved in what percentage of schools
> have AP courses.
I missed it; perhaps you could share the statistics with everyone?
> And wasn't it *YOU*, David McDuffee, who insists that the SAT is a
> predictor of success in college, even when the makers of the test
> claim that, at best, it predicts 1st year grades, only?
I prefer data to dogma, and the data is clearly not on your side.
My reference in this case is routinely cited as scripture by the
proponents of affirmative action in this newsgroup: "The Shape of
the River", by Bowen and Bok. On page 74 and 75, the combined SAT
scores of students is shown to be directly correlated with class
rank, not only for the first year, but over the entire 4-year
undergraduate term. For black students, SAT scores of less than
1000 yielded a mean percentile rank of 18%, while scores over 1300
placed the mean at 36%, with a monotonic rising function linking
the two values. For white students, a similar relationship can be
seen. If you prefer something other than "class rank" to measure
success in college, what is it?
BTW, since you're so big on controls, the figures here are valid,
according to the authors, even after controlling for "gender, high
school grades, socioeconomic status, school selectivity, and major,
as well as for race".
> Of course, a better predictor of college success seems to be
> economic level. And of course, you pointed out the "did not
> finish" rate of Black students, but you never consider the
> economic situation of those Black students.
You must be using some other measure than class rank to measure
"success". On page 76 of "The Shape of the River", Bowen and Bok
blow holes in your assertion that this is a "better predictor" than
SAT scores:
"Differences in socioeconomic status (SES) also affect rank in class,
even after controlling for SAT scores and high school grades. The
measure of SES included in the analysis is based on parental
education and income [...]. Crude as it is, this measure "works" in
that students from high SES families had a higher rank in class (on
an "other things equal" basis) than did students from middle- and
low-SES backgrounds. These differences in predicted class rank are
statistically significant, but they too are modest in size: the
adjusted percentile rank in class is 51 for high-SES students, 49 for
middle-SES students, and 47 for low-SES students."
This is a range of 4 percentile points from high to low for SES.
In contrast, a change of only 100 SAT points results in a difference
of 5 percentile points all by itself...
And just for the record, I DO consider the economic factor in the
"did not finish" scores. I have consistently said that economic aid
should go to students based on economic need, but that's a separate
issue. I also support considering socioeconomic status when making
admissions decisions, but I don't support considering "race" a
reasonable substitute for socioeconomic status in admissions.
> And wasn't it *YOU*, David McDuffee, who wants to insist that Black
> culture is to blame, and that the Black culture does not value
> education strongly enough? Yet, when I pointed out that indicators
> that Black parents do strongly value education, you ignored those
> *CULTURAL INDICATORS*! For example, Black parents favor vouchers
> more than white parents. This is polling data that is *CONSISTANT*
> no matter who does the polls. In fact, voucher opponets don't even
> deny the support.
I don't dispute the polling data either, but I question its
relevance in this context. It seems to me that an equally valid
interpretation is that more black families are still expecting some
solution to arrive from the outside: "If only little Johnny could
go to that private school across the way, the problem would be
solved." As the parents of the Shaker Heights students learned,
the quality of the school is only part of the solution. The other
part, and the part that can be implemented with or without vouchers,
is higher standards in the home.
> Another example is the education polls done by USA Today at the
> start of the school year, in 1998, that showed Black parents and
> white parents had the same attitudes concerning education.
Were they asked how many hours they expected their children to study,
and how many hours of TV viewing they were willing to tolerate?
> Or what about my pointing out that people like Marva Collins has
> *CONSISTANTLY* turned around under performing Black students, while
> there is no change in the Black culture of the students?
Marva Collins succeeds precisely because she DOES change the cultural
attitudes of the students and their parents. Check out the story in
the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, at
http://www.jsonline.com/news/edu/marva/
Just a couple of excerpts from that article:
"Striving to get the children to think of themselves as a caring team,
Bell encourages them to applaud classmates who answer questions
correctly. But she never hesitates to make a moral lesson of children
who laugh or do not pay attention. "When Mrs. Bell drives past you in
her Mercedes and you are begging for food because you didn't take
time to learn, see how funny this is," Bell says once to some
giggling children."
Doesn't sound like answering questions correctly is likely to draw
the old "acting white" label in a Marva Collins classroom.
"All children in the school are required to write mission statements
reflecting their lifetime goals and how they intend to attain them.
(All families and staff members must prepare similar mission
statements and submit them to the school.)"
So, students and family, in addition to staff, are focused on
long-range goals which are presumably to be achieved through education.
"As part of their contract with the school, all parents are required
to attend individual conferences. If they fail to show up, their
child is not admitted back into the classroom until another
conference is scheduled."
Looks like they take parental involvement seriously. Even so...
"The same kids who were doing fine before are doing fine now," Bell
says in early January. "It's the ones that don't have great parental
support that are the same ones we're agonizing over. If I could work
with them all one on one they would all soar. But I can't do that."
Well, what do you know. The school can't do it alone. Even Marva
Collins.
"To inspire [the children] to believe in themselves, all kids are
required to memorize one poem a week with titles like "Never Quit."
On Fridays, they stand in front of their class and recite it from
memory. They are graded on articulation, poise and the emotional
oomph they put into the reading."
More reinforcement for orienting the culture toward success rather
than excuse making.
"It's not magic, fourth-graders, you have to study. Every single
night. Your parents or whoever is at home is not forcing you to
study, so I am going to force you. You can't walk into the bathroom
here and see the proverb, "Excellence is not an act, but a habit,"
and fail all your tests."
There you have it, in a nutshell. The parents are not requiring
study every night, so the teacher must inculcate that cultural habit.
And now a few quotes from the Marva Collins creed, which students
are required to memorize and recite in unison each morning:
"I will continue to let society predict, but only I can determine
what I will, can, or cannot do."
"While I have the opportunity, I shall not sit on the sideline bitter
with despair and wish later that I had become a literate lifter of
this world instead of a failing leaner."
"No one will give it to me on a proverbial platter, and on one will
care as much about me as I must care about myself."
"I must be willing to accept the consequences for [...] failure and
I must never think that those who have chosen to work while I played,
rested, and slept, will share their bounties with me."
"God is not some cosmic bellboy who comes at out beckon and call.
If I want to achieve that first step must be of my own undertaking."
"Likewise, if I want to fail, that too is my choice. Time and chance
comes to us all. Whether I decide to take that time and chance is
indeed my own choice."
All of which is basically what I've been saying, while you and Kaiju
and Art and the rest of the victimization brigade insist that it's
the racist system rather than the students' own initiative which is
most responsible for defining the outcomes. I suspect you and Art
have no children anyway, so it's rather academic, and at least Kaiju
is doing what needs to be done at home, and if she's decided her kids
need a private school, that's her choice. Unfortunately, that choice
is not an option for everyone, but every parent CAN encourage good
study habits in lieu of idling a mind in front of the television.
If advocating that more parents do so earns me a spot on your shit
list, I can live with that.
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
Kaiju
David McDuffee wrote:
> All of which is basically what I've been saying, while you and Kaiju
> and Art and the rest of the victimization brigade insist that it's
> the racist system rather than the students' own initiative which is
> most responsible for defining the outcomes.
And this is the same sort of gratuitous bullshit comment you always make, that
leaves you with no credibility. If you are going to use my name in yet
another of your asinine posts, at least accurately represent what I've said.
I have never used racism as an excuse for failure nor failure to perform. I
don't accept it from myself, and I certainly don't accept it from others.
That "acceptance" is key to anyone claiming "victim" status.
Racism exists. One would have to be very stupid not to realize that is a
factor and not prepare or take steps to mitigate its effects. In fact, my own
life defies any label of victimization. I have always made my own way without
handouts from the Great White Man.
I have always said here and elsewhere that Blacks should recognize the
existence of racism...and then work to prevent it from holding Blacks back,
and succeed despite systemic racism. I have described how racism manifests
itself. I have given examples of HOW to succeed despite systemic racism. You
just stop processing when I describe how racism affects its victims, without
considering the entire message. How that is interpreted as "victimization" is
beyond me, unless you are assuming some sort of white guilt. (In which case
that is your personal problem.) Anything else you have to say here is still a
goddamned lie, David.
You just can't help yourself from being consistently dishonest, can you? Who
are you trying to impress? The AFN contingent? You certainly are not
impressing me.
Kaiju
--
Before you think, think.
Gary Glaenzer
Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote in message
news:37C9A686...@NOSPAM.ecn.com...
>
>
> David McDuffee wrote:
>
>
>
> > All of which is basically what I've been saying, while you and Kaiju
> > and Art and the rest of the victimization brigade insist that it's
> > the racist system rather than the students' own initiative which is
> > most responsible for defining the outcomes.
(Typical whining 'racism' bullshit snipped)
>
> You just can't help yourself from being consistently dishonest, can you?
Who
> are you trying to impress? The AFN contingent? You certainly are not
> impressing me.
>
>
> Kaiju
>
Golly, David, I'd go out and slit my wrists if I were you!
Kaiju is 'not impressed' by you.
Isn't that just the saddest, most disheartening, most truly devastating
thing to ever happen to you?
You 'haven't impressed' Kaiju.
Oh, the humanity.
DarkStar
put forth:
>Darkstar wrote:
>> Wasn't it *YOU*, David McDuffee, who continously said that Black
>> students do not try hard enough?
>
>Continuously? No. I did say that I thought it was the most likely
>explanation of differences between black and non-black students in a
>predominately middle-class school such as Shaker Heights.
When you get caught in your own words, you attemp to shift what you
did write, to claim you wrote something else.
*** START QUOTE ***
Subject: Re: Washington Post article...
Date: 1998/11/08
Author: David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com>
...
In article <3644c1c1...@mail.flash.net>,
DarkStar <dark...@flash.net> wrote:
>[Y]ou blame Black culture
Yes...
**** END QUOTE ****
Busted.
>> Wasn't that the point of you posting the time spent studying by
>> different racial groups?
>
>Yes. The data is a little dated now, and if you have more recent
>figures we can take it from there, but the numbers which appeared in
>the Chicago Defender August 21, 1986, as cited in Jawanza Kunjufu's
>"To Be Popular or Smart: The Black Peer Group" were:
>
>Asian-Americans: 12 hours per week
>European-Americans: 8 hours per week
>African-Americans: 6 hours per week
Now, where are your stats for the amount of homework given? Or, for
that matter, where are your stats concerning the rigor of the
educational systems Blacks, whites, and Asian-Americans are more
likely to be a part of?
>> But, in your quest promote the negative sterotype of Blacks,
>> you didn't ask if the stats you provided, accounted for the
>> academic rigor of the schools the students attended.
>
>I'm trying to get at the truth, not promote negative stereotypes.
That's a damned lie.
Point of fact: I've provided multiples of evidence that Black students
want to achieve and do achieve. I've provided multiples of evidence
showing that Black parents want their children to achieve. Multiples
of what? Multiples of evidence that you have provided *POSITIVE*
information about Black kids and/or their parents. Not only that, but
at least 90% of it has been *WITH* citations.
...
>TV viewing time was cited in the same book, from "Ebony Man",
>October 1986, p. 62:
>
>African-Americans: 75 hours
>European-Americans: 53 hours
>Asian-Americans: couldn't be measured
>
>I suppose by your lights, the numbers are meaningless unless they
>account for the academic rigor of the homes the students grow up in.
>But perhaps, indirectly, they do.
Not academic rigor of the homes, but academic rigor of the schools
they attend. Your blatant lying is shining through very clearly. Or
shall I provide the post where you conceded my point? Although you
conceded it to someone else.
>
>> And wasn't it *YOU*, David McDuffee, who blamed Black kids for
>> not getting into AP courses in high school? But, in your quest to
>> promote the negative stereotype of Blacks, your over looked the
>> fact that those courses are most likely *NOT* available in their
>> school systems?
>
>We had this discussion about the Shaker Heights system, where the AP
>courses ARE available, but black students weren't taking advantage
>of that availability. I believe the Washington Post article was a
>bit of a wake-up call, because the last word I heard is that the
>parents at Shaker Heights are becoming more involved in their kids'
>educations there.
That's a nice dodge. We had a discussion concerning AP courses and the
lack of availabilty in schools where Blacks are most likely to attend.
http://www.aclu.org/news/1999/n072799a.html
And, the point of fact is, you have no idea whether the parents were
being more involved at Shaker Heights, than before.
>> Since you are in California, I'm sure you read about the lawsuits
>> by the NAACP and the ACLU which highlights this fact. I'm sure you
>> have also read the stats involved in what percentage of schools
>> have AP courses.
>
>I missed it; perhaps you could share the statistics with everyone?
David, you took the time to attempt to define what the advertisers
meant when they said they wanted "suspects not prospects." Take the
time to find out what is happening in your own back yard. Or, at least
you claim you live in California.
>> And wasn't it *YOU*, David McDuffee, who insists that the SAT is a
>> predictor of success in college, even when the makers of the test
>> claim that, at best, it predicts 1st year grades, only?
>
>I prefer data to dogma, and the data is clearly not on your side.
>My reference in this case is routinely cited as scripture by the
>proponents of affirmative action in this newsgroup: "The Shape of
>the River", by Bowen and Bok. On page 74 and 75, the combined SAT
>scores of students is shown to be directly correlated with class
>rank, not only for the first year, but over the entire 4-year
>undergraduate term. For black students, SAT scores of less than
>1000 yielded a mean percentile rank of 18%, while scores over 1300
>placed the mean at 36%, with a monotonic rising function linking
>the two values. For white students, a similar relationship can be
>seen. If you prefer something other than "class rank" to measure
>success in college, what is it?
Try again.
1. When I mention class, it's socio-economic class.
2. When I mention the prediction, the *MAKERS* of the SAT claim the
SAT is to be used as a prediction for _1st year grades_.
That's not dogma, those are statements of fact.
I like how you tried to twist my words.
Busted!
...
>> Of course, a better predictor of college success seems to be
>> economic level. And of course, you pointed out the "did not
>> finish" rate of Black students, but you never consider the
>> economic situation of those Black students.
>
>You must be using some other measure than class rank to measure
>"success". On page 76 of "The Shape of the River", Bowen and Bok
>blow holes in your assertion that this is a "better predictor" than
>SAT scores:
>
>"Differences in socioeconomic status (SES) also affect rank in class,
>even after controlling for SAT scores and high school grades. The
>measure of SES included in the analysis is based on parental
>education and income [...]. Crude as it is, this measure "works" in
>that students from high SES families had a higher rank in class (on
>an "other things equal" basis) than did students from middle- and
>low-SES backgrounds. These differences in predicted class rank are
>statistically significant, but they too are modest in size: the
>adjusted percentile rank in class is 51 for high-SES students, 49 for
>middle-SES students, and 47 for low-SES students."
>
>This is a range of 4 percentile points from high to low for SES.
>In contrast, a change of only 100 SAT points results in a difference
>of 5 percentile points all by itself...
That doesn't contradict what I've been writing. In fact, it confirms
it. Try again.
>And just for the record, I DO consider the economic factor in the
>"did not finish" scores.
How do you consider the economic factor in the "did not finish"
scores, when no other research has?
Point of fact: There are corelations of SAT vs "did not finish" and
coreleations of economic status vs "did not finish," but there is no
research that has tried to make a model of SAT scores, economic
status, and "did not finish".
...
>> And wasn't it *YOU*, David McDuffee, who wants to insist that Black
>> culture is to blame, and that the Black culture does not value
>> education strongly enough? Yet, when I pointed out that indicators
>> that Black parents do strongly value education, you ignored those
>> *CULTURAL INDICATORS*! For example, Black parents favor vouchers
>> more than white parents. This is polling data that is *CONSISTANT*
>> no matter who does the polls. In fact, voucher opponets don't even
>> deny the support.
>
>I don't dispute the polling data either, but I question its
>relevance in this context. It seems to me that an equally valid
>interpretation is that more black families are still expecting some
>solution to arrive from the outside:
Oh, this is a new one! How long did it take for you to come up with
that bullshit?
Point of fact: I also have previously stated that a poll done by USA
Today showed that Black parents views of education and education
standards are the same as white parents.
...
>> Another example is the education polls done by USA Today at the
>> start of the school year, in 1998, that showed Black parents and
>> white parents had the same attitudes concerning education.
>
>Were they asked how many hours they expected their children to study,
>and how many hours of TV viewing they were willing to tolerate?
Dodge.
You still have yet to provide any information concerning the rigors of
the school systems. Of course, the information is out there, but for
you to admit that you have seen it, and that it does serious damage to
your arguments, would be too much for you to handle.
>> Or what about my pointing out that people like Marva Collins has
>> *CONSISTANTLY* turned around under performing Black students, while
>> there is no change in the Black culture of the students?
>
>Marva Collins succeeds precisely because she DOES change the cultural
>attitudes of the students and their parents. Check out the story in
>the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, at
>http://www.jsonline.com/news/edu/marva/
>
>Just a couple of excerpts from that article:
>
>"Striving to get the children to think of themselves as a caring team,
> Bell encourages them to applaud classmates who answer questions
> correctly. But she never hesitates to make a moral lesson of children
> who laugh or do not pay attention. "When Mrs. Bell drives past you in
> her Mercedes and you are begging for food because you didn't take
> time to learn, see how funny this is," Bell says once to some
> giggling children."
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>Doesn't sound like answering questions correctly is likely to draw
>the old "acting white" label in a Marva Collins classroom.
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>
>"All children in the school are required to write mission statements
> reflecting their lifetime goals and how they intend to attain them.
> (All families and staff members must prepare similar mission
> statements and submit them to the school.)"
>
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>So, students and family, in addition to staff, are focused on
>long-range goals which are presumably to be achieved through education.
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>
>"As part of their contract with the school, all parents are required
> to attend individual conferences. If they fail to show up, their
> child is not admitted back into the classroom until another
> conference is scheduled."
>
>Looks like they take parental involvement seriously. Even so...
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>
>"The same kids who were doing fine before are doing fine now," Bell
> says in early January. "It's the ones that don't have great parental
> support that are the same ones we're agonizing over. If I could work
> with them all one on one they would all soar. But I can't do that."
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>
>Well, what do you know. The school can't do it alone. Even Marva
>Collins.
Show one post where I have ever written otherwise.
>"To inspire [the children] to believe in themselves, all kids are
> required to memorize one poem a week with titles like "Never Quit."
> On Fridays, they stand in front of their class and recite it from
> memory. They are graded on articulation, poise and the emotional
> oomph they put into the reading."
>
>More reinforcement for orienting the culture toward success rather
>than excuse making.
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>
>"It's not magic, fourth-graders, you have to study. Every single
> night. Your parents or whoever is at home is not forcing you to
> study, so I am going to force you. You can't walk into the bathroom
> here and see the proverb, "Excellence is not an act, but a habit,"
> and fail all your tests."
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>
>There you have it, in a nutshell. The parents are not requiring
>study every night, so the teacher must inculcate that cultural habit.
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>
>And now a few quotes from the Marva Collins creed, which students
>are required to memorize and recite in unison each morning:
>
>"I will continue to let society predict, but only I can determine
> what I will, can, or cannot do."
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>
>"While I have the opportunity, I shall not sit on the sideline bitter
> with despair and wish later that I had become a literate lifter of
> this world instead of a failing leaner."
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>
>"No one will give it to me on a proverbial platter, and on one will
> care as much about me as I must care about myself."
>
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>"I must be willing to accept the consequences for [...] failure and
> I must never think that those who have chosen to work while I played,
> rested, and slept, will share their bounties with me."
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>
>"God is not some cosmic bellboy who comes at out beckon and call.
> If I want to achieve that first step must be of my own undertaking."
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>
>"Likewise, if I want to fail, that too is my choice. Time and chance
> comes to us all. Whether I decide to take that time and chance is
> indeed my own choice."
So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
canard you have been throwing around.
>
>All of which is basically what I've been saying, while you and Kaiju
>and Art and the rest of the victimization brigade insist that it's
>the racist system rather than the students' own initiative which is
>most responsible for defining the outcomes.
Show one post by me that makes that claim. You have yet to do if for
Art or Kaiju, so just show one post by me that makes that claim.
In fact, numerous times, I've written exactly how I overcame racists
that I faced in the school system.
>I suspect you and Art
>have no children anyway, so it's rather academic,
I *KNOW* more about educating Black children, and getting them to
achieve than you can ever imagine.
It's time for you to put up.
Show one post where I claim that Black children cannot succeed.
In fact, here is *YOUR* own words on what you think about Black
children in Shaker Heights:
*** START QUOTE ***
Subject: Re: Washington Post article...
Date: 1998/12/10
Author: David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com>
....
In a system where black middle class students have been
underperforming for decades, one would almost have to be in denial not
to have low expectations.
*** END QUOTE ***
Busted again!
---
"Corporatized or idealized, hip-hop is the American Dream and the African
American Nightmare rolled into one fat-ass blunt."
Charles Aaron Spin (Nov.1998)
Ed Brown - dark...@flash.net
http://www.charm.net/~darkstar
David McDuffee
> Point of fact: I've provided multiples of evidence that Black
> students want to achieve and do achieve.
That was never in doubt.
> I've provided multiples of evidence showing that Black parents want
> their children to achieve.
Also not in doubt.
> We had a discussion concerning AP courses and the lack of availabilty
> in schools where Blacks are most likely to attend.
>
> http://www.aclu.org/news/1999/n072799a.html
While I'm generally not a big fan of ACLU lawsuits these days, I
support this one 100%. As I've said ever since the passage of
Proposition 209, the focus needs to be on raising the standards in
K-12, rather than pretending that a racially-skewed admissions policy
can compensate for 12 years of substandard education. If there
are more students in Inglewood clamoring for AP classes than there
are AP classes available, I'm with you -- the school system needs to
provide more.
> And, the point of fact is, you have no idea whether the parents were
> being more involved at Shaker Heights, than before.
Speak for yourself, Ed. If you missed the PBS special, you can read
about it at
http://www.pbs.org/independents/now/nov98_2.html
I was mistaken about one thing, however. It wasn't the Washington Post
article that was the wake-up call. In fact, the Post's article was
already old news by the time it appeared; the real alarm sounded in
1997, in a Shaker Heights student newspaper.
> McDuffee wrote:
> >My reference in this case is routinely cited as scripture by the
> >proponents of affirmative action in this newsgroup: "The Shape of
> >the River", by Bowen and Bok. On page 74 and 75, the combined SAT
> >scores of students is shown to be directly correlated with class
> >rank, not only for the first year, but over the entire 4-year
> >undergraduate term. For black students, SAT scores of less than
> >1000 yielded a mean percentile rank of 18%, while scores over 1300
> >placed the mean at 36%, with a monotonic rising function linking
> >the two values. For white students, a similar relationship can be
> >seen. If you prefer something other than "class rank" to measure
> >success in college, what is it?
> Try again.
>
> 1. When I mention class, it's socio-economic class.
> 2. When I mention the prediction, the *MAKERS* of the SAT claim the
> SAT is to be used as a prediction for _1st year grades_.
>
> That's not dogma, those are statements of fact.
The "class rank" used by Bowen and Bok in this context refers to
grade point average (GPA), not socio-economic class.
The data demonstrates that SAT scores are more predictive of college
success than socio-economic class. The numbers are clear. The more
conservative claims made by the creators of the SAT would seem to
fall into the "better to be on the safe side" school of advertising,
but the numbers show that the predictive power of SAT scores exceeds
what is claimed.
> >"Differences in socioeconomic status (SES) also affect rank in class,
> >even after controlling for SAT scores and high school grades. The
> >measure of SES included in the analysis is based on parental
> >education and income [...]. Crude as it is, this measure "works" in
> >that students from high SES families had a higher rank in class (on
> >an "other things equal" basis) than did students from middle- and
> >low-SES backgrounds. These differences in predicted class rank are
> >statistically significant, but they too are modest in size: the
> >adjusted percentile rank in class is 51 for high-SES students, 49 for
> >middle-SES students, and 47 for low-SES students."
> >
> >This is a range of 4 percentile points from high to low for SES.
> >In contrast, a change of only 100 SAT points results in a difference
> >of 5 percentile points all by itself...
> That doesn't contradict what I've been writing. In fact, it confirms
> it. Try again.
No. You wrote that SES was more predictive than SAT, when in fact the
data demonstrate that the opposite is true. The range for SES was
4 percentile points, while the range for SAT was 18 points.
> >And just for the record, I DO consider the economic factor in the
> >"did not finish" scores.
>
> How do you consider the economic factor in the "did not finish"
> scores, when no other research has?
Not true. Bowen and Bok quantify it somewhat, though they go on to
say that "more research is needed".
But my statement was not intended to imply that the numbers I
presented had controlled for economic factors, but rather that I
accept that economic factors undoubtedly contribute to the
"did not finish" totals.
> You still have yet to provide any information concerning the rigors
> of the school systems. Of course, the information is out there, but
> for you to admit that you have seen it, and that it does serious
> damage to your arguments, would be too much for you to handle.
I'm sure the only thing that's preventing you from posting whatever
you have here is a touching concern for my well being.
I don't pretend that the average majority-black school and the average
majority-non-black school are equivalent in terms of academic rigor.
I do claim that advocating race-based affirmative action admissions for
college students is squandering energy which would be better spent in
MAKING the average majority-black school equivalent to its non-black
counterpart.
I think more black parents insisting that more black students spend
more time studying and less time watching TV would be a step in the
right direction, and it's a step that can be taken no matter how many
fools infest the local school board.
> >Marva Collins succeeds precisely because she DOES change the cultural
> >attitudes of the students and their parents. Check out the story in
> >the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, at
> >http://www.jsonline.com/news/edu/marva/
> >
> >Just a couple of excerpts from that article:
> >
> >"Striving to get the children to think of themselves as a caring team,
> > Bell encourages them to applaud classmates who answer questions
> > correctly. But she never hesitates to make a moral lesson of children
> > who laugh or do not pay attention. "When Mrs. Bell drives past you in
> > her Mercedes and you are begging for food because you didn't take
> > time to learn, see how funny this is," Bell says once to some
> > giggling children."
>
> So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
> canard you have been throwing around.
Black culture is the environment that black folk create for other black
folk. Plain and simple. Just as the amount and selection of food that
a black mother puts on the table for her black children is "black
culture", so too is the qualitative and quantitative nourishment that
black peers provide for their black classmates in black classes and
black neighborhoods.
> >Doesn't sound like answering questions correctly is likely to draw
> >the old "acting white" label in a Marva Collins classroom.
> So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
> canard you have been throwing around.
When black academic achievement is supported by black students in a
Marva Collins classroom, that's black culture. When black academic
achievement is attacked by black students at Frank W. Ballou High in
Washington D.C., that too is black culture.
Unfortunately, there is still too little of the former, and far too
much of the latter.
> >"The same kids who were doing fine before are doing fine now," Bell
> > says in early January. "It's the ones that don't have great parental
> > support that are the same ones we're agonizing over. If I could work
> > with them all one on one they would all soar. But I can't do that."
> So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
> canard you have been throwing around.
When black fathers remain married to black mothers so that, together,
they can help black children approach their full potential, that's
black culture. When black fathers flee the stage the moment they
learn a child is in the wings, leaving single mothers to raise a
child alone, that too is black culture. And again, there is far
too much of the latter.
> >Well, what do you know. The school can't do it alone. Even Marva
> >Collins.
> Show one post where I have ever written otherwise.
We all know it's a partnership between the schools (teachers,
administrators), the parents, the students, and the larger
society. In cases such as the ACLU lawsuit you noted previously,
where the school is clearly shirking its responsibility, I favor
riding the school.
In cases where the parents or the students need to improve, however,
I'm going to be on the parents' or the students' case. If you were
more concerned with honestly identifying and correcting problems,
and less concerned with circling the wagons, you would be too.
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
olan
David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com> wrote:
> We all know it's a partnership between the schools (teachers,
> administrators), the parents, the students, and the larger
> society. In cases such as the ACLU lawsuit you noted previously,
> where the school is clearly shirking its responsibility, I favor
> riding the school.
>
> In cases where the parents or the students need to improve, however,
> I'm going to be on the parents' or the students' case. If you were
> more concerned with honestly identifying and correcting problems,
> and less concerned with circling the wagons, you would be too.
Well said. Interesting how Darkstar refrains from so much chest-beating
and name calling with you as he does with others.
--
olan
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Kaiju
olan wrote:
>
> In article <37CCB731...@best.com>,
> David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com> wrote:
> > We all know it's a partnership between the schools (teachers,
> > administrators), the parents, the students, and the larger
> > society. In cases such as the ACLU lawsuit you noted previously,
> > where the school is clearly shirking its responsibility, I favor
> > riding the school.
> >
> > In cases where the parents or the students need to improve, however,
> > I'm going to be on the parents' or the students' case. If you were
> > more concerned with honestly identifying and correcting problems,
> > and less concerned with circling the wagons, you would be too.
>
> Well said. Interesting how Darkstar refrains from so much chest-beating
> and name calling with you as he does with others.
Ed and others challenge David because he is not honest. David posts
self-serving, gratuitous claims like this when Ed has never made any assertion
that even comes close to what David has associated with Ed. Then people like
you come along and think, "Wow! David really gave it to those guys."
Well, guess what. David didn't. David didn't well-say anything. He trotted
out typical conservative dogma and nothing more, plus it contradicts what he
has said previously. And you believe the lie. It seems you both are in great
need to find a demon. David has been on a campaign to create a demon by using
one dimensioned straw man claims. And you lap it up.
And you wonder why you both receive so much scorn from us.
olan
Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
>
>
> olan wrote:
> >
> > Well said. Interesting how Darkstar refrains from so much chest-
beating
> > and name calling with you as he does with others.
>
> Ed and others challenge David because he is not honest. David posts
> self-serving, gratuitous claims like this when Ed has never made any
assertion
> that even comes close to what David has associated with Ed. Then
people like
> you come along and think, "Wow! David really gave it to those
guys."
>
> Well, guess what. David didn't. David didn't well-say anything. He
trotted
> out typical conservative dogma and nothing more, plus it contradicts
what he
> has said previously. And you believe the lie. It seems you both are
in great
> need to find a demon. David has been on a campaign to create a demon
by using
> one dimensioned straw man claims. And you lap it up.
>
> And you wonder why you both receive so much scorn from us.
>
> Kaiju
I know how this goes. David's a liar and not to be trusted, etc.
Darkstar is brilliant and fair and open minded, etc. Blah...Blah
I have read enough of David McDuffee to know that he is articulate,
seems fair, is well written, presents his arguments logically, makes
a lot of sense, and has more than enough of what it takes to fend
off the attacks made against him. I am particularly impressed with
the patience he shows by never failing to point out misrepresentations
of his words and philosophies.
You say he is not honest, but I have
seen no evidence of dishonesty in McDuffee's posts.
Art Clemons
writes:
>Point of fact: I've provided multiples of evidence that Black students
>want to achieve and do achieve. I've provided multiples of evidence
>showing that Black parents want their children to achieve. Multiples
>of what? Multiples of evidence that you have provided *POSITIVE*
>information about Black kids and/or their parents. Not only that, but
>at least 90% of it has been *WITH* citations.
Let me note from personal experience in Shaker Hts, that parents have to
actively seek to live there, and pay a premium for the privilege of living in
the community, plus put up with DWB nonsense from the Shaker Hts police at
night. Let me also note that homework is a part of all of the school system
structure whether or not the student is taking advanced placement courses, and
that students can't just opt into AP courses in the system as I recall.
I also previously noted that all of the students I know of, whose parents
enrolled them in other schools had the students performance improve in the next
set of schools. Let's see, parents who pay more money to live someplace, a
requirement that homework be done, or the student is suspended or otherwise
disciplined, and yet folks are talking about laziness and lack of homework as
an explanation. Please note that the school district was receiving complaints
about poor teaching of African heritage students in the early 80's, and is only
now beginning to pay attention. What the Shaker Hts school board seems to have
been doing is setting up a two tier system with the African heritage parents
subsidizing the white parents whose children get AP courses and better
teachers. I also note that in middle schools, the expectations expressed by
teachers were lower for African heritage parents apparently (I still have
friends living in Shaker Hts) continuously. This is a major joke. If you know
something is wrong, and do nothing to correct the problem despite complaints,
there is racism no matter how expressed.
-art clemons-
Kaiju
Then read what he writes of HIS philosophies. Virtually everything he has
been writing recently claiming it is the position of Ed, Art, Wayne and I have
been flat out lies. The proof is in the DejaNews archives. I don't care what
how you believe he presents himself. He is presenting well-constructed lies.
He knows it, we know it. He is doing it quite deliberately.
> You say he is not honest, but I have
> seen no evidence of dishonesty in McDuffee's posts.
You have no reason to see dishonesty in McDuffee's posts. You are already
predisposed to believe what he writes because it sounds right to you and you
find comfort in it.
Kaiju
David McDuffee wrote:
>
> DarkStar wrote:
> > >Marva Collins succeeds precisely because she DOES change the cultural
> > >attitudes of the students and their parents. Check out the story in
> > >the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, at
> > >http://www.jsonline.com/news/edu/marva/
> > >
> > >Just a couple of excerpts from that article:
> > >
> > >"Striving to get the children to think of themselves as a caring team,
> > > Bell encourages them to applaud classmates who answer questions
> > > correctly. But she never hesitates to make a moral lesson of children
> > > who laugh or do not pay attention. "When Mrs. Bell drives past you in
> > > her Mercedes and you are begging for food because you didn't take
> > > time to learn, see how funny this is," Bell says once to some
> > > giggling children."
> >
> > So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
> > canard you have been throwing around.
>
> Black culture is the environment that black folk create for other black
> folk. Plain and simple. Just as the amount and selection of food that
> a black mother puts on the table for her black children is "black
> culture", so too is the qualitative and quantitative nourishment that
> black peers provide for their black classmates in black classes and
> black neighborhoods.
So you're saying this is "all blacks behave like this because they are
black?" Oy.
> > >Doesn't sound like answering questions correctly is likely to draw
> > >the old "acting white" label in a Marva Collins classroom.
>
> > So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
> > canard you have been throwing around.
>
> When black academic achievement is supported by black students in a
> Marva Collins classroom, that's black culture. When black academic
> achievement is attacked by black students at Frank W. Ballou High in
> Washington D.C., that too is black culture.
No. You do not exhibit the vaunted logic that olan seems to believe you
possess. The culture that predominates in Marva Collin's classroom is the
culture of THAT classroom. The behavior of students at Frank W. Ballou High
reflects the culture of THAT high school. The behavior of students at my
son's predominately Black private high school, where high academic achievement
is an absolute prerequisite for popularity, is the culture of HIS school.
(Yes, this predominately Black private high school earns consistent high
academic achievement scores, including most students attending AP classes. Go
figure...eh, David?)
None of these discrete, individual factors are a part of "Black culture".
What happens at Inglewood High school has no bearing on what happens at my
son's school or our lives since we are not a part of that school. What happens
in the schools, period, have anything to do with Black culture as a whole.
You are doing nothing more than stereotyping and placing a convenient term to
your stereotypes. Except your stereotypes are bizarre in terms of logic.
The basis of your argument is bogus, David.
> > So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
> > canard you have been throwing around.
>
> When black fathers remain married to black mothers so that, together,
> they can help black children approach their full potential, that's
> black culture. When black fathers flee the stage the moment they
> learn a child is in the wings, leaving single mothers to raise a
> child alone, that too is black culture. And again, there is far
> too much of the latter.
This is absurd, David. This is not even close to the definition of a culture.
> > >Well, what do you know. The school can't do it alone. Even Marva
> > >Collins.
>
> > Show one post where I have ever written otherwise.
>
> We all know it's a partnership between the schools (teachers,
> administrators), the parents, the students, and the larger
> society. In cases such as the ACLU lawsuit you noted previously,
> where the school is clearly shirking its responsibility, I favor
> riding the school.
>
> In cases where the parents or the students need to improve, however,
> I'm going to be on the parents' or the students' case. If you were
> more concerned with honestly identifying and correcting problems,
> and less concerned with circling the wagons, you would be too.
You are so busy mis-defining "culture", you wouldn't know when it is time to
circle the wagons. Clearly the parents must take responsibility for their
children. If one, or even many parents fail, then there is cause to look at
ALL of the reasons why...and then take steps to remedy the situation. To
claim it is a manifestation of culture that these parents fail, is idiotic.
To excuse the schools for such failure to perform is myopic. It is apparently
taking some parents in Inglewood a lawsuit to seek redress. Given that sort
of situation, in a school district where some of the families are among the
higher socioeconomic levels, what chance do parents with few resources and
weak academic background have? You have to take the whole to find a solution,
David. Your conservative dogma isn't going to get anyone anywhere.
By the way, this thread would be more accurately titled, "Educators'
Expectations of Students", since that is usually the root of the problems
Black and Latino students' educational problems. The attitudes of the
educators are more likely to determine the parents' expectations since the
educators use the color of authority to determine if the student is educable.
Naive and inexperienced parents are likely to believe what they are told...and
give in.
Situations like that explain the case of one of my daughter's classmates, who
was misdiagnosed as marginally retarded and relegated to special education
classes when she was 10. That same young woman graduated class valedictorian
when she graduated high school in June. She's headed for Princeton. She
escaped the system because her parents placed her in private school away from
educators who had given up on her.
The young woman, in her valedictorian speech, noted that her grammar school
teacher and school principal had an obvious bias against Black students. She
had reacted to that bias, although she had been too young to articulate her
discomfort with them. She had shut down, the only way she knew to react. If
her parents hadn't been diligent, she would have been lost. Just as so many
Black children are.
When I look at studies across the country, that girl's experience (aside from
her class valedictorian status) is not isolated. You can't deal with that
reality, can you, David?
Kaiju <can't wait for David to rationalize this away...as he generally
does...>
David McDuffee
>
> olan wrote:
> >
> >You say he is not honest, but I have
> >seen no evidence of dishonesty in McDuffee's posts.
> McDuffee claims he only has high expectations for Black kids!
I do have high expectations for black kids.
> Then he wrote the following:
>
> "In a system where black middle class students have been
> underperforming for decades, one would almost have to be in
> denial not to have low expectations."
>
> So, there is one!
As usual, the only dishonesty here is what Ed projects.
For anyone who is curious, the complete article is available at
http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=420811057
but simply adding the sentence I wrote immediately following provides
enough context to make my true meaning clear:
"In a system where black middle class students have been underperforming
for decades, one would almost have to be in denial not to have low
expectations. I believe that students' own expectations for themselves
is more important than the expectations of any counselor, or teacher."
In other words, I understand how low expectations can arise on the
part of counselors and teachers. That's not the same as saying that I
myself have low expectations.
Interestingly, the quoted post from 12/10/98 also contains my original
response to another of Ed's favorite "creative editing" endeavors, one
which he has attempted a couple of times since then (most recently a
couple of days ago in this very thread):
"[Y]ou blame black culture"/"Yes..."
It's not necessary to repeat my reply again here; the complete post is
still at the address noted above. I will repeat the conclusion of that
post, because it's once again so apropos:
"As I've said before, I always find it heartening when someone thinks
it's necessary to distort my position in order to argue with it. It
leads me to believe that they consider my undistorted position too
difficult to grapple with."
> Fuck off!
Another masterpiece of articulate rebuttal. It would be the height of
hubris for me even to aspire to be capable of such eloquence.
I do have high expectations for black kids, Ed.
I don't expect much of you, though I keep hoping that one day you'll
surprise me.
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
Kaiju
olan wrote:
>
> In article <37CD66D0...@NOSPAM.ecn.com>,
> Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
> > You have no reason to see dishonesty in McDuffee's posts. You are
> already
> > predisposed to believe what he writes because it sounds right to you
> and you
> > find comfort in it.
>
> And I'm predisposed to believe what he writes because...why??
What part of "because it sounds right to you and you find comfort in it" do
you not understand?
Kaiju <noting olan's response to Art...yarite>
olan
artcl...@aol.com (Art Clemons) wrote:
> In article <37c9cc66...@news.flash.net>, dark...@flash.net
(DarkStar)
> writes:
>
students
> >want to achieve and do achieve. I've provided multiples of evidence
> >showing that Black parents want their children to achieve. Multiples
> >of what? Multiples of evidence that you have provided *POSITIVE*
> >information about Black kids and/or their parents. Not only that, but
> >at least 90% of it has been *WITH* citations.
>
to say, then let your friend make your posts for you????
--
olan
Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
> You have no reason to see dishonesty in McDuffee's posts. You are
already
> predisposed to believe what he writes because it sounds right to you
and you
> find comfort in it.
And I'm predisposed to believe what he writes because...why??
--
DarkStar
forth:
>You say he is not honest, but I have
>seen no evidence of dishonesty in McDuffee's posts.
>
Hey bitch!
McDuffee claims he only has high expectations for Black kids! Then he
wrote the following:
*** START QUOTE ***
Subject: Re: Washington Post article...
Date: 1998/12/10
Author: David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com>
....
In a system where black middle class students have been
underperforming for decades, one would almost have to be in denial not
to have low expectations.
*** END QUOTE ***
So, there is one!
Fuck off!
>olan
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
---
DarkStar
> David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com> wrote:
>
> >DarkStar wrote:
> >
> >> Point of fact: I've provided multiples of evidence that Black
> >> students want to achieve and do achieve.
> >
> >That was never in doubt.
> >> I've provided multiples of evidence showing that Black parents want
> >> their children to achieve.
> >
> >Also not in doubt.
You have said that was not the case. So, now why the change?
> >> We had a discussion concerning AP courses and the lack of availabilty
> >> in schools where Blacks are most likely to attend.
> >>
> >> http://www.aclu.org/news/1999/n072799a.html
> >
> >While I'm generally not a big fan of ACLU lawsuits these days, I
> >support this one 100%. As I've said ever since the passage of
> >Proposition 209, the focus needs to be on raising the standards in
> >K-12, rather than pretending that a racially-skewed admissions policy
> >can compensate for 12 years of substandard education. If there
> >are more students in Inglewood clamoring for AP classes than there
> >are AP classes available, I'm with you -- the school system needs to
> >provide more.
Of course, when the issue of AP courses not being available were
first raised, your attitude was more of "too damn bad".
....
> >> Try again.
> >>
> >> 1. When I mention class, it's socio-economic class.
> >> 2. When I mention the prediction, the *MAKERS* of the SAT claim the
> >> SAT is to be used as a prediction for _1st year grades_.
> >>
> >> That's not dogma, those are statements of fact.
> >
> >The "class rank" used by Bowen and Bok in this context refers to
> >grade point average (GPA), not socio-economic class.
> >
> >The data demonstrates that SAT scores are more predictive of college
> >success than socio-economic class. The numbers are clear.
Actually, the numbers say exactly what I stated: socio-economic class
is a better predictor of graduation than are SAT scores.
....
> >> That doesn't contradict what I've been writing. In fact, it confirms
> >> it. Try again.
> >
> >No. You wrote that SES was more predictive than SAT, when in fact the
> >data demonstrate that the opposite is true. The range for SES was
> >4 percentile points, while the range for SAT was 18 points.
Try again.
...
> >> You still have yet to provide any information concerning the rigors
> >> of the school systems. Of course, the information is out there, but
> >> for you to admit that you have seen it, and that it does serious
> >> damage to your arguments, would be too much for you to handle.
> >
> >I'm sure the only thing that's preventing you from posting whatever
> >you have here is a touching concern for my well being.
Why don't you try to find it?
> >I don't pretend that the average majority-black school and the average
> >majority-non-black school are equivalent in terms of academic rigor.
Yet, you have *NEVER* attempted to take this into consideration. In
fact, you have done *EVERYTHING* possible to ignore it!
All anyone has to do is look at the *DAYS* you spent denying that the
amount of homework given has any relationship to the amount of
studying done.
I quoted Glenn Lourey's article that cited work that showed that the
"acting white" charge against Black school kids who do well in
school,
may be overstated. You denied that the data presented measured what
it attempted to measure.
...
> >> So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
> >> canard you have been throwing around.
> >
> >Black culture is the environment that black folk create for other black
> >folk. Plain and simple. Just as the amount and selection of food that
> >a black mother puts on the table for her black children is "black
> >culture", so too is the qualitative and quantitative nourishment that
> >black peers provide for their black classmates in black classes and
> >black neighborhoods.
Okay, I'm Black and I'm on the net. Therefore, the Black culture
embraces the internet.
Now, according to newsreports, what I just stated isn't true. If you
are capable of finding the flaw in what I said, apply it towards what
you have misrepresented.
....
> >> So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
> >> canard you have been throwing around.
> >
> >When black fathers remain married to black mothers so that, together,
> >they can help black children approach their full potential, that's
> >black culture.
Look at white culture and tell us about the divorce rate, tne number
of white kids in single parent/divorced homes, etc.
Then, look at white culture and you explain why the makers of the
SAT, are complaining about grade inflation. "How can grades rise, yet
SAT scores fall?"
Then look at Johns Hopkins University and what happened Spring '99.
The undergrad students held a demonstration against the grading
policy of the school. They *DEMANDED* that their grades be raised
because other schools are doing grade inflation.
http://www.sunspot.net is the Baltimore Sun website. Do a search and
see if you can find out all about it.
Where was the national news proclaiming white culture is at fault?
....
> >> >Well, what do you know. The school can't do it alone. Even Marva
> >> >Collins.
> >
> >> Show one post where I have ever written otherwise.
> >
> >We all know it's a partnership between the schools (teachers,
> >administrators), the parents, the students, and the larger
> >society. In cases such as the ACLU lawsuit you noted previously,
> >where the school is clearly shirking its responsibility, I favor
> >riding the school.
Again, show one post where I have ever written otherwise.
> >In cases where the parents or the students need to improve, however,
> >I'm going to be on the parents' or the students' case. If you were
**************
> >more concerned with honestly identifying and correcting problems,
******************************************************************************
In fact, I've done exactly that, numerous times. In fact, you deny
when I *HAVE* identified problems.
Funny, you haven't been able to provide posts of me saying the things
you have written I've said.
You are busted again!
DarkStar
> David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >> Point of fact: I've provided multiples of evidence that Black
> >> students want to achieve and do achieve.
> >
> >That was never in doubt.
> >> I've provided multiples of evidence showing that Black parents want
> >> their children to achieve.
> >
> >Also not in doubt.
You have said that was not the case. So, now why the change?
> >> We had a discussion concerning AP courses and the lack of availabilty
> >> in schools where Blacks are most likely to attend.
> >>
> >> http://www.aclu.org/news/1999/n072799a.html
> >
> >While I'm generally not a big fan of ACLU lawsuits these days, I
> >support this one 100%. As I've said ever since the passage of
> >Proposition 209, the focus needs to be on raising the standards in
> >K-12, rather than pretending that a racially-skewed admissions policy
> >can compensate for 12 years of substandard education. If there
> >are more students in Inglewood clamoring for AP classes than there
> >are AP classes available, I'm with you -- the school system needs to
> >provide more.
Of course, when the issue of AP courses not being available were
first raised, your attitude was more of "too damn bad".
....
> >> Try again.
> >>
> >> 1. When I mention class, it's socio-economic class.
> >> 2. When I mention the prediction, the *MAKERS* of the SAT claim the
> >> SAT is to be used as a prediction for _1st year grades_.
> >>
> >> That's not dogma, those are statements of fact.
> >
> >The "class rank" used by Bowen and Bok in this context refers to
> >grade point average (GPA), not socio-economic class.
> >
> >The data demonstrates that SAT scores are more predictive of college
> >success than socio-economic class. The numbers are clear.
Actually, the numbers say exactly what I stated: socio-economic class
is a better predictor of graduation than are SAT scores.
....
> >> That doesn't contradict what I've been writing. In fact, it confirms
> >> it. Try again.
> >
> >No. You wrote that SES was more predictive than SAT, when in fact the
> >data demonstrate that the opposite is true. The range for SES was
> >4 percentile points, while the range for SAT was 18 points.
Try again.
...
> >> You still have yet to provide any information concerning the rigors
> >> of the school systems. Of course, the information is out there, but
> >> for you to admit that you have seen it, and that it does serious
> >> damage to your arguments, would be too much for you to handle.
> >
> >I'm sure the only thing that's preventing you from posting whatever
> >you have here is a touching concern for my well being.
Why don't you try to find it?
> >I don't pretend that the average majority-black school and the average
> >majority-non-black school are equivalent in terms of academic rigor.
Yet, you have *NEVER* attempted to take this into consideration. In
fact, you have done *EVERYTHING* possible to ignore it!
All anyone has to do is look at the *DAYS* you spent denying that the
amount of homework given has any relationship to the amount of
studying done.
I quoted Glenn Lourey's article that cited work that showed that the
"acting white" charge against Black school kids who do well in
school,
may be overstated. You denied that the data presented measured what
it attempted to measure.
...
> >> So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
> >> canard you have been throwing around.
> >
> >Black culture is the environment that black folk create for other black
> >folk. Plain and simple. Just as the amount and selection of food that
> >a black mother puts on the table for her black children is "black
> >culture", so too is the qualitative and quantitative nourishment that
> >black peers provide for their black classmates in black classes and
> >black neighborhoods.
Okay, I'm Black and I'm on the net. Therefore, the Black culture
embraces the internet.
Now, according to newsreports, what I just stated isn't true. If you
are capable of finding the flaw in what I said, apply it towards what
you have misrepresented.
....
> >> So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
> >> canard you have been throwing around.
> >
> >When black fathers remain married to black mothers so that, together,
> >they can help black children approach their full potential, that's
> >black culture.
Look at white culture and tell us about the divorce rate, tne number
of white kids in single parent/divorced homes, etc.
Then, look at white culture and you explain why the makers of the
SAT, are complaining about grade inflation. "How can grades rise, yet
SAT scores fall?"
Then look at Johns Hopkins University and what happened Spring '99.
The undergrad students held a demonstration against the grading
policy of the school. They *DEMANDED* that their grades be raised
because other schools are doing grade inflation.
http://www.sunspot.net is the Baltimore Sun website. Do a search and
see if you can find out all about it.
Where was the national news proclaiming white culture is at fault?
....
> >> >Well, what do you know. The school can't do it alone. Even Marva
> >> >Collins.
> >
> >> Show one post where I have ever written otherwise.
> >
> >We all know it's a partnership between the schools (teachers,
> >administrators), the parents, the students, and the larger
> >society. In cases such as the ACLU lawsuit you noted previously,
> >where the school is clearly shirking its responsibility, I favor
> >riding the school.
Again, show one post where I have ever written otherwise.
> >In cases where the parents or the students need to improve, however,
> >I'm going to be on the parents' or the students' case. If you were
**************
> >more concerned with honestly identifying and correcting problems,
******************************************************************************
In fact, I've done exactly that, numerous times. In fact, you deny
when I *HAVE* identified problems.
Funny, you haven't been able to provide posts of me saying the things
you have written I've said.
You are busted again!
olan
> > Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
> > > You have no reason to see dishonesty in McDuffee's posts. You are
> > already
> > > predisposed to believe what he writes because it sounds right to
you
> > and you
> > > find comfort in it.
> >
> > And I'm predisposed to believe what he writes because...why??
>
it" do
> you not understand?
Couldn't the same be said of you concerning your predisposition to
agree with Darkstar?
--
olan
dark...@flash.net wrote:
> Hey bitch!
> McDuffee claims he only has high expectations for Black kids! Then he
> wrote the following:
>
>
> Subject: Re: Washington Post article...
> Date: 1998/12/10
> Author: David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com>
>
> ....
>
> In a system where black middle class students have been
> underperforming for decades, one would almost have to be in denial not
> to have low expectations.
>
> *** END QUOTE ***
>
> Fuck off!
>
But then again, he doesn't need any help at all from me.
I would like to say that once again you show a unceasing ability to
misrepresent statements made by others. Your head must be made of
cement. The way you put your own "spin" upon other's comments is
simply unrivaled.
> >olan
> >
> >
> >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> >Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>
> ---
> "Corporatized or idealized, hip-hop is the American Dream and the
African
> American Nightmare rolled into one fat-ass blunt."
> Charles Aaron Spin (Nov.1998)
> Ed Brown - dark...@flash.net
> http://www.charm.net/~darkstar
>
--
Art Clemons
>And I'm predisposed to believe what he writes because...why??
Because you are a troll. Perhaps I am not clear enough for you. This act has
been seen before, and you don't do the innocent interested poster well enough.
-art clemons-
Art Clemons
>Art. Why don't you try telling a friend of yours what it is you want
>to say, then let your friend make your posts for you????
Why don't you wipe your ass so you can see?
-art clemons-
ClockWFT
>>And I'm predisposed to believe what he writes
>>because...why??
>
>Because you are a troll.
Jeez....Olan is nowhere near to being a "troll".
So many terms are misapplied and their true meaning trivialized because of
that: "genocide", "oppressed", "racist/racism", "holocaust", "harassment",
"sexist/sexism"....
ClockWFT
>Why don't you wipe your ass so you can see?
"troll"?
Kaiju
olan wrote:
>
> In article <37CDEC9A...@NOSPAM.ecn.com>,
> Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > olan wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <37CD66D0...@NOSPAM.ecn.com>,
> > > Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
> > > > You have no reason to see dishonesty in McDuffee's posts. You are
> > > already
> > > > predisposed to believe what he writes because it sounds right to
> you
> > > and you
> > > > find comfort in it.
> > >
> > > And I'm predisposed to believe what he writes because...why??
> >
> > What part of "because it sounds right to you and you find comfort in
> it" do
> > you not understand?
>
> Couldn't the same be said of you concerning your predisposition to
> agree with Darkstar?
No. The one thing that Ed and I agree do upon is that David has lied about
and misrepresented what we have written here on SCAA and SCAAM over the
years. Anything else we write has been the result of independent research.
Ed does his research, I do mine. We both share similar experiences and
objectives, but approach the solutions from different directions. We also
have been known to freely and vigorously disagree with each other. I don't
expect you to notice the difference because you pursue the simplistic
conclusion. I.e., you look at stereotypes.
You, on the other hand, are predisposed to believe anything that absolves you
of white guilt. David hands that over to you by the shovelful and you eagerly
lap it up.
Kaiju
olan
artcl...@aol.com (Art Clemons) wrote:
> In article <7qkgjn$fl1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, olan <olan...@my-deja.com>
writes:
>
> >Art. Why don't you try telling a friend of yours what it is you want
> >to say, then let your friend make your posts for you????
>
>
O.K...O.K..I should have simply said that I sometimes
have a little difficulty understanding your posts as
written, and should have asked for some further clarification.
But you did get me to laugh!
DarkStar
Oh Happy Happy!!!
Joy!!! Joy!!!
On Wed, 01 Sep 1999 22:26:06 -0700, David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com>
put forth:
>DarkStar wrote:
>>
>> olan wrote:
>> >
>> >You say he is not honest, but I have
>> >seen no evidence of dishonesty in McDuffee's posts.
>
>> McDuffee claims he only has high expectations for Black kids!
>
>I do have high expectations for black kids.
Then how is it you wrote that it was reasonable to have low
expectations for Black kids?
>> Then he wrote the following:
>>
>> "In a system where black middle class students have been
>> underperforming for decades, one would almost have to be in
>> denial not to have low expectations."
>>
>> So, there is one!
>
>As usual, the only dishonesty here is what Ed projects.
Here is where I rip your ass another new one.
>For anyone who is curious, the complete article is available at
>
>http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=420811057
>
>but simply adding the sentence I wrote immediately following provides
>enough context to make my true meaning clear:
>
>"In a system where black middle class students have been underperforming
> for decades, one would almost have to be in denial not to have low
> expectations. I believe that students' own expectations for themselves
> is more important than the expectations of any counselor, or teacher."
>
>In other words, I understand how low expectations can arise on the
>part of counselors and teachers. That's not the same as saying that I
>myself have low expectations.
Oh, what a very good lie, David! Bravo!!!!
Uhh... David?
No matter how poorly students were doing, before they enter Marva
Collins' school, she expects them to excell.
In other words, David, even "in context," she would still rip your
statement apart for accepting the low expectations of students!
*BUSTED* your ass, *AGAIN*!
>Interestingly, the quoted post from 12/10/98 also contains my original
>response to another of Ed's favorite "creative editing" endeavors, one
>which he has attempted a couple of times since then (most recently a
>couple of days ago in this very thread):
>
>"[Y]ou blame black culture"/"Yes..."
>
>It's not necessary to repeat my reply again here; the complete post is
>still at the address noted above. I will repeat the conclusion of that
>post, because it's once again so apropos:
>
>"As I've said before, I always find it heartening when someone thinks
> it's necessary to distort my position in order to argue with it. It
> leads me to believe that they consider my undistorted position too
> difficult to grapple with."
All one has to do is review your evolving definition of culture, to
see I was and am, *RIGHT* on point!
>> Fuck off!
>
>Another masterpiece of articulate rebuttal. It would be the height of
>hubris for me even to aspire to be capable of such eloquence.
>
>I do have high expectations for black kids, Ed.
>I don't expect much of you, though I keep hoping that one day you'll
>surprise me.
It's such a joy to tear your ass apart so easily, especially when you
have such low expectations of me.
DarkStar
forth:
>In article <37ced7c3...@news.flash.net>,
> dark...@flash.net wrote:
>> Hey bitch!
>> McDuffee claims he only has high expectations for Black kids! Then he
>> wrote the following:
>>
>> *** START QUOTE ***
>>
>> Subject: Re: Washington Post article...
>> Date: 1998/12/10
>> Author: David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com>
>>
>> ....
>>
>> In a system where black middle class students have been
>> underperforming for decades, one would almost have to be in denial not
>> to have low expectations.
>>
>> *** END QUOTE ***
>>
>> So, there is one!
>> Fuck off!
>>
>David set you straight on this one before I had a chance to respond.
No, as always, David lied.
Marva Collins *NEVER* has low expectations for her students. Neither
did the math teacher in Texas to turned low performing Hispanic and
Black students, into high math performers.
What David did, and what you accept because you think lowly of Black
people anyway, was to *ACCEPT* that fact that teachers *SHOULD* have
low expectations of Black students!
>But then again, he doesn't need any help at all from me.
>
>I would like to say that once again you show a unceasing ability to
>misrepresent statements made by others. Your head must be made of
>cement. The way you put your own "spin" upon other's comments is
>simply unrivaled.
Damn! You must keep a constant taste of shit in your mouth! You are
always up the ass of racists and those who lie about the Black
community.
DarkStar
forth:
>
>
>David McDuffee wrote:
>>
>> DarkStar wrote:
....
>> > So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
>> > canard you have been throwing around.
>>
>> Black culture is the environment that black folk create for other black
>> folk. Plain and simple. Just as the amount and selection of food that
>> a black mother puts on the table for her black children is "black
>> culture", so too is the qualitative and quantitative nourishment that
>> black peers provide for their black classmates in black classes and
>> black neighborhoods.
>
>So you're saying this is "all blacks behave like this because they are
>black?" Oy.
Olan, your say is what?
Or can you see with your mouth in Duffee's ass?
>> > >Doesn't sound like answering questions correctly is likely to draw
>> > >the old "acting white" label in a Marva Collins classroom.
>>
>> > So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
>> > canard you have been throwing around.
>>
>> When black academic achievement is supported by black students in a
>> Marva Collins classroom, that's black culture. When black academic
>> achievement is attacked by black students at Frank W. Ballou High in
>> Washington D.C., that too is black culture.
>
>No. You do not exhibit the vaunted logic that olan seems to believe you
>possess. The culture that predominates in Marva Collin's classroom is the
>culture of THAT classroom. The behavior of students at Frank W. Ballou High
>reflects the culture of THAT high school. The behavior of students at my
>son's predominately Black private high school, where high academic achievement
>is an absolute prerequisite for popularity, is the culture of HIS school.
>(Yes, this predominately Black private high school earns consistent high
>academic achievement scores, including most students attending AP classes. Go
>figure...eh, David?)
>
>None of these discrete, individual factors are a part of "Black culture".
>What happens at Inglewood High school has no bearing on what happens at my
>son's school or our lives since we are not a part of that school. What happens
>in the schools, period, have anything to do with Black culture as a whole.
>You are doing nothing more than stereotyping and placing a convenient term to
>your stereotypes. Except your stereotypes are bizarre in terms of logic.
>
>The basis of your argument is bogus, David.
Olan, your say is what?
Or can you see with your mouth in Duffee's ass?
Olan, what is the definition of culture?
>
>
>
>> > So, exactly where is the *BLACK CULTURE* pointed out? That is the
>> > canard you have been throwing around.
>>
>> When black fathers remain married to black mothers so that, together,
>> they can help black children approach their full potential, that's
>> black culture. When black fathers flee the stage the moment they
>> learn a child is in the wings, leaving single mothers to raise a
>> child alone, that too is black culture. And again, there is far
>> too much of the latter.
>
>This is absurd, David. This is not even close to the definition of a culture.
Olan, if your mouth is out of David's ass, what is the definition of
culture?
>> > >Well, what do you know. The school can't do it alone. Even Marva
>> > >Collins.
>>
>> > Show one post where I have ever written otherwise.
>>
>> We all know it's a partnership between the schools (teachers,
>> administrators), the parents, the students, and the larger
>> society. In cases such as the ACLU lawsuit you noted previously,
>> where the school is clearly shirking its responsibility, I favor
>> riding the school.
>>
>> In cases where the parents or the students need to improve, however,
>> I'm going to be on the parents' or the students' case. If you were
>> more concerned with honestly identifying and correcting problems,
>> and less concerned with circling the wagons, you would be too.
>
>You are so busy mis-defining "culture", you wouldn't know when it is time to
>circle the wagons. Clearly the parents must take responsibility for their
>children.
Can anyone show a post by me where I have stated otherwise? No?
>If one, or even many parents fail, then there is cause to look at
>ALL of the reasons why...and then take steps to remedy the situation. To
>claim it is a manifestation of culture that these parents fail, is idiotic.
Hmmmm.....
*COLUMBINE* is the definition of white culture!!!!!!
:-)
...
>Situations like that explain the case of one of my daughter's classmates, who
>was misdiagnosed as marginally retarded and relegated to special education
>classes when she was 10. That same young woman graduated class valedictorian
>when she graduated high school in June. She's headed for Princeton. She
>escaped the system because her parents placed her in private school away from
>educators who had given up on her.
Please remember that David believes it's reasonable for teachers to
have low expectations of Black kids.
...
>When I look at studies across the country, that girl's experience (aside from
>her class valedictorian status) is not isolated. You can't deal with that
>reality, can you, David?
>
>
>Kaiju <can't wait for David to rationalize this away...as he generally
>does...>
---
Kaiju
olan wrote:
>
> In article <37CEB4DA...@NOSPAM.ecn.com
> > > Couldn't the same be said of you concerning your predisposition to
> > > agree with Darkstar?
> >
> > No. The one thing that Ed and I agree do upon is that David has lied
> about
> > and misrepresented what we have written here on SCAA and SCAAM over
> the
> > years.
>
> Whether you two agree about his having lied or misrepresented what you
> you two have written isn't proof that he has done so. It is proof that
> you two believe he has. I don't doubt your feelings, but I am simply
> saying that what I have read of the discussions between/among you,
> David, and Darkstar show me know no evidence of such lying and
> misrepresentations. Maybe future readings will provide me with
> conclusive proof of your acusations.
If you are waiting for either of us to provide this so-called proof, you'll
die waiting. The "proof" is on DejaNews. Get off your butt and go find it
yourself. Furthermore, David has yet to provide proof of his allegations that
what he claims to be our positions. He can't provide posts or quotes. He
never will because they do not exist. Frankly, I'm not in the business of
proving a negative, either. Otherwise, your persistent belief that David is
truthful, when the people he is talking about say he is incorrect, is both
amazing and appalling.
> Anything else we write has been the result of independent research.
> > Ed does his research, I do mine. We both share similar experiences
> and
> > objectives, but approach the solutions from different directions. We
> also
> > have been known to freely and vigorously disagree with each other. I
> don't
> > expect you to notice the difference because you pursue the simplistic
> > conclusion. I.e., you look at stereotypes.
>
> The perpetual "my opinions are valid" and "yours are not" argument.
> It's as if white people can't have any valid opinions on the race issues
> in America because we're not black. You see yourself dealing in fact and
> us dealing in stereotypes.
Some white people do have valid opinions on race issues. You don't happen to
be one of those. When it comes to Blacks and Black culture, you are
clueless. You can only approach any racial issue from your own perspective,
which bears little or no relation to the reality that Blacks experience in the
United States. Yes, you deal in stereotypes, and you seek to tell Ed, Art, me
and others that you have superior knowledge. You know bubkis.
> Could you not possibly be dealing as much in stereotyping as you
> consider whites to be?
Typical demonstration of your cluelessness. Incidentally, I cannot deal with
stereotypes within my culture. I've lived it for four decades.
> > You, on the other hand, are predisposed to believe anything that
> absolves you
> > of white guilt. David hands that over to you by the shovelful and
> you eagerly
> > lap it up.
>
> "White guilt" AGAIN! Darkstar and I had a recent discussion concerning
> white guilt.
>
> Do you feel I have a need to be absolved of my "white guilt"? Would you
> mind defining this white guilt from which you feel I seek absolution?
You apparently feel a need to be absolved of your white guilt. Frankly, I
don't care if you bear it around like a cross. I don't even know why whites
feel guilt about how this country has dealt with minority ethnicities. You
spend most of your effort trying to prove you are not racist, there is no
racism, and racism is a figment of the victims of racism imaginations. You do
it so you won't feel that guilt any longer so you shove the blame off onto
those just trying to live their lives, or claim *you* are the victim of some
bizarre concept of reverse discrimination. I'd rather you just get out of the
way. We'd do much better without your constant interference and
micro-managing of our existence.
Blacks don't need guilt-bearing whites' help or input, to tell the truth.
Blacks just need those whites to get out of the way. White America's
treatment of minorities has been nothing more than subjecting minorities to
social experiment laboratory exercises. Enough is enough. Just move along.
Deal with your own problems and stop telling us what you believe to be ours.
Otherwise, in 500 years we all will be right where we are now.
Kaiju <heaven knows there is enough for you to work on within your own little
world...>
James Ewing
>
> On Fri, 03 Sep 1999 03:12:04 GMT, dark...@flash.net (DarkStar) put
> forth:
>
> >
> >OH SNAP!!!!!
> >
> >What is this?
> >
> >More *STRONG EXPECTATIONS* by the teachers and administrators?
Wow. You and Kaiju must have blood pressure higher than a kite with all
of your creative efforts to try and justify poor black performance. No
oppressed culture ever made it to the top with the kind of strategy you
two employ. Get it through your thick noggin that giving
rationalizations to blacks is not the same as helping them improve their
lot in life. If you two are smarter than McDuffee--a laugh and a half
to any impartial observer--how is it that the culture you come from sits
at the bottom of every societal measure and the culture he comes from is
at the top?
What works shows up on the bottom-line. The real world gives not one
fig for your empty and useless rationalizations for lousy performance.
Scoreboard, baby, scoreboard...when blacks start topping the charts on
SATS instead of fatherless families, come back and start bragging at the
top of your lungs. Until then, take your barking dog Kaiju with you and
shut the fuck up...
David McDuffee
> impartial observer--how is it that the culture you come from sits
> at the bottom of every societal measure and the culture he comes from
> is at the top?
You don't know what culture I came from, so (how shall I say this) ...
> shut the fuck up...
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
David McDuffee
>
> What David did, and what you accept because you think lowly of Black
> low expectations of Black students!
No, Ed, I didn't say that teachers *SHOULD* have low expectations,
I said that I understood why they might. The distinction may be too
subtle to comprehend by someone who apparently thinks the object of
debate is to be scatological rather than logical, but I expect most
folks get it.
Your question about the "amount of homework given" doesn't imply that
you think black students *SHOULD* be watching TV rather than reading
something enlightening, only that you understand why they might be.
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
James Ewing
>
> > If you two are smarter than McDuffee--a laugh and a half to any
> > impartial observer--how is it that the culture you come from sits
> > at the bottom of every societal measure and the culture he comes from
> > is at the top?
>
> You don't know what culture I came from,
Fair enough. You're the culture expert. Now take a minute from your
usual gig of lecturing Black folks on how the world works and describe
the culture you come from. (BTW, you do a tip-top job of lecturing
Black folks on how the world works; I didn't mean that sarcastically.)
> so (how shall I say this) ...
>
> > shut the fuck up...
Sorry, but no can do. My cultural traits won't allow for it.
>
> --
> David McDuffee
> mcdu...@best.com
David McDuffee
> Yet, here is McDuffee, who is claiming to have high expectations of
> Black kids, yet, accepting the fact that teachers don't!
Yet, here is Ed, who is claiming to have high expectations of black
kids, yet, excusing the fact that they spend less time doing homework
and more time watching TV than those who are getting into competitive
colleges and universities at a higher rate.
> Maybe because he has been sayin gtht expectations of teachers
> shouldn't matter?
What I've been saying is that the expectations of the students
themselves matter more. This, by the way, is precisely the attitude
that Marva Collins attempts to instill in her students:
"I will ignore the tags and names given me by society
since only I know what I have the ability to become."
"I will continue to let society predict, but only I can determine
what I will, can, or cannot do."
"No one will give it to me on a proverbial platter, and no one will
care as much about me as I must care about myself."
I have no quarrel with the Marva Collins philosophy.
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
David McDuffee
>
> David McDuffee wrote:
> >
> > Black culture is the environment that black folk create for other
> > black folk. Plain and simple. Just as the amount and selection
> > of food that a black mother puts on the table for her black
> > children is "black culture", so too is the qualitative and
> > quantitative nourishment that black peers provide for their black
> > classmates in black classes and black neighborhoods.
> So you're saying this is "all blacks behave like this because they are
> black?" Oy.
It's been apparent to me for some time that those who were the most
emotional in their disagreement with me on this topic were understanding
"culture" differently than the sense in which I was using it.
In retrospect, it was a poorly chosen word, because it tended to
sidetrack rather than clarify the discussion. My intention has never
been to imply universality, but I can see by your question that that's
the impression you derive. I don't really understand why you think
"black culture" implies "all blacks": I would classify jazz as "black
culture", though it's far from being a universal preference among
black folk, and may even be a more common preference among white folk.
I'm not sure if "black environments" will be any better, but I'm going
to try using that term instead, unless you have a better suggestion.
> > When black academic achievement is supported by black students in a
> > Marva Collins classroom, that's black culture. When black academic
> > achievement is attacked by black students at Frank W. Ballou High in
> > Washington D.C., that too is black culture.
If I substitute "a black environment" for "black culture" in this
paragraph, would you still disagree with the statement?
> [...] [O}ne of my daughter's classmates [...] was misdiagnosed as
> marginally retarded and relegated to special education classes when
> she was 10. That same young woman graduated class valedictorian
> when she graduated high school in June. She's headed for Princeton.
> She escaped the system because her parents placed her in private
> school away from educators who had given up on her.
>
> The young woman, in her valedictorian speech, noted that her grammar
> school teacher and school principal had an obvious bias against Black
> students. She had reacted to that bias, although she had been too
> young to articulate her discomfort with them. She had shut down, the
> only way she knew to react. If her parents hadn't been diligent, she
> would have been lost. Just as so many Black children are.
>
> When I look at studies across the country, that girl's experience
> (aside from her class valedictorian status) is not isolated.
> You can't deal with that reality, can you, David?
Not only is that girl's experience not isolated, it's near universal.
In other words, it's not limited to black students. Referring to
the treatment he had received at school, another person who had gone
on to achieve great things said that it "destroys the healthy feelings,
the integrity, and self-confidence of the pupils". He wasn't rescued
by diligent parents, but he wasn't lost either. Sometimes, children
are just more resilient than you might expect.
Of course, if Einstein had been black, he might have attributed his
treatment to "bias" too. And he might have been right.
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
olan
> > Couldn't the same be said of you concerning your predisposition to
> > agree with Darkstar?
>
> No. The one thing that Ed and I agree do upon is that David has lied
about
> and misrepresented what we have written here on SCAA and SCAAM over
the
> years.
Whether you two agree about his having lied or misrepresented what you
you two have written isn't proof that he has done so. It is proof that
you two believe he has. I don't doubt your feelings, but I am simply
saying that what I have read of the discussions between/among you,
David, and Darkstar show me know no evidence of such lying and
misrepresentations. Maybe future readings will provide me with
conclusive proof of your acusations.
Anything else we write has been the result of independent research.
> Ed does his research, I do mine. We both share similar experiences
and
> objectives, but approach the solutions from different directions. We
also
> have been known to freely and vigorously disagree with each other. I
don't
> expect you to notice the difference because you pursue the simplistic
> conclusion. I.e., you look at stereotypes.
The perpetual "my opinions are valid" and "yours are not" argument.
It's as if white people can't have any valid opinions on the race issues
in America because we're not black. You see yourself dealing in fact and
us dealing in stereotypes.
Could you not possibly be dealing as much in stereotyping as you
consider whites to be?
> You, on the other hand, are predisposed to believe anything that
absolves you
> of white guilt. David hands that over to you by the shovelful and
you eagerly
> lap it up.
"White guilt" AGAIN! Darkstar and I had a recent discussion concerning
white guilt.
Do you feel I have a need to be absolved of my "white guilt"? Would you
mind defining this white guilt from which you feel I seek absolution?
DarkStar
put forth:
>DarkStar wrote:
>>
>> olan wrote:
>> >
>> >You say he is not honest, but I have
>> >seen no evidence of dishonesty in McDuffee's posts.
>
>> McDuffee claims he only has high expectations for Black kids!
>
>I do have high expectations for black kids.
>
>> Then he wrote the following:
>>
>> "In a system where black middle class students have been
>> underperforming for decades, one would almost have to be in
>> denial not to have low expectations."
>>
>> So, there is one!
>
>As usual, the only dishonesty here is what Ed projects.
>For anyone who is curious, the complete article is available at
>
>http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=420811057
>
>but simply adding the sentence I wrote immediately following provides
>enough context to make my true meaning clear:
>
>"In a system where black middle class students have been underperforming
> for decades, one would almost have to be in denial not to have low
> expectations. I believe that students' own expectations for themselves
> is more important than the expectations of any counselor, or teacher."
>
>In other words, I understand how low expectations can arise on the
>part of counselors and teachers. That's not the same as saying that I
>myself have low expectations.
How, what a tangled web you weave, when you practice to deceive!
BTW, here is another person who expected nothing but the best from
Black students: Joe Clark of Philadelphia.
In fact, he *FIRED* teachers who did not expect the best from the
students!
Yet, here is McDuffee, who is claiming to have high expectations of
Black kids, yet, accepting the fact that teachers don't!
And, when I posted a link to an article that suggested that Black kids
seem to be more sensitive to the expectations of teachers, McDuffee
went silent. Now why would he do that?
Maybe because he has been sayin gtht expectations of teachers
shouldn't matter?
But, there is Marva Collins and Joe Clark saying the expecation of
teachers do matter, and they *MUST* have high expectations!
*DOH*
DarkStar
OH SNAP!!!!!
What is this?
More *STRONG EXPECTATIONS* by the teachers and administrators?
http://www.edweek.org/sreports/qc98/solutions/so-n3.htm
This is Ms. Hedgemon's eighth year at Scott. Before coming to Houston,
the 50-year-old administrator was an instructor at the University of
Pittsburgh and the University of the District of Columbia and a public
school teacher in the nation's capital. She came to Texas after her
husband, an aerospace engineer, landed a job here. She taught in an
outdoor-education program in the district before landing a principal's
job.
"She never lowers her standards," says Eleanor Jackson,
a 3rd grade teacher here, "but she applies the same standards to
everyone."
And Ms. Hedgemon's primary standard is that all students
are expected to succeed. Teachers are not to make excuses for them
because they are disadvantaged--a policy that researchers say is the
core philosophy of every successful high-poverty school.
-----
Now, what *WAS* it that David wrote?
*** START QUOTE ***
Subject: Re: Washington Post article...
Date: 1998/12/10
Author: David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com>
....
In a system where black middle class students have been
underperforming for decades, one would almost have to be in denial not
to have low expectations.
*** END QUOTE ***
DarkStar
forth:
...
>"White guilt" AGAIN! Darkstar and I had a recent discussion concerning
>white guilt.
Misrepresentation of what I posted.
Well, let's just say that Olan is now playing the David game of
distortion.
DarkStar
forth:
>
Oh, why the hell not!!!!!
http://www.edweek.org/sreports/qc98/solutions/so-n32.htm
Continued
"We have high expectations for all our children," says
Maudie Jordan, who teaches 5th and 6th grade science. "We don't look
at this area and say, 'You're going to have problems because of where
you are.'"
Teachers who have been here throughout Ms. Hedgemon's
tenure say that staff members who didn't like her approach eventually
left, a pattern researchers have found in many successful schools.
bev.
olan <olan...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <19990902073554...@ngol08.aol.com>,
> artcl...@aol.com (Art Clemons) wrote:
deja.com>
> writes:
> >
> > >Art. Why don't you try telling a friend of yours what it is you
want
> > >to say, then let your friend make your posts for you????
> >
> > Why don't you wipe your ass so you can see?
> > -art clemons-
> >
> O.K...O.K..I should have simply said that I sometimes
> have a little difficulty understanding your posts as
> written, and should have asked for some further clarification.
>
> But you did get me to laugh!
> --
> olan
Snicker, Mr. Clemons had me cracking over that one also.
I agree that overall, it is better to ask for clarifications.
I don't think people of high intelligence should have to write
down to the level of those who have a hard time comprehending
what they write. It should be the other way around, those
who have difficulty, should stretch their mental muscles
to understand, or as you mentioned, ask for clarification.
--
-bev-
Alternate email address
morp...@my-deja.com
olan
dark...@flash.net wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Sep 1999 02:24:47 GMT, olan <olan...@my-deja.com> put
> forth:
>
> ...
>
> >"White guilt" AGAIN! Darkstar and I had a recent discussion
concerning
> >white guilt.
>
> Misrepresentation of what I posted.
Was I dreaming, or did we not discuss, or at least attempt to discuss
the subject of white guilt as it relates to the term sellout?
I honestly am at a loss as to how what I have written above is a
misrepresentation of something you posted...ALL I said was that we
discussed the subject. I did not even mention anything YOU said.
> Well, let's just say that Olan is now playing the David game of
> distortion.
For about the um-teenth time, I do not, have not, will not purposely
distort, or misrepresent anything you post! I might misinterpret your
meaning, or misunderstand your meaning, but if that is ever the case,
I welcome your clarification.
--
olan
olan
Hey! I think I've been insulted?!!@#
My point with Art is not that I want him to write "down" to my level
of comprehension, but rather that his wandering writing style makes
it difficult for me to grasp his concepts and meanings, therby leading
to possible misinterpretations.
Kaiju
David McDuffee wrote:
>
> Kaiju wrote:
> >
> > David McDuffee wrote:
> > >
> > > Black culture is the environment that black folk create for other
> > > black folk. Plain and simple. Just as the amount and selection
> > > of food that a black mother puts on the table for her black
> > > children is "black culture", so too is the qualitative and
> > > quantitative nourishment that black peers provide for their black
> > > classmates in black classes and black neighborhoods.
>
> > So you're saying this is "all blacks behave like this because they are
> > black?" Oy.
>
> It's been apparent to me for some time that those who were the most
> emotional
Emotional? This is absurd, David. You made an illogical assertion. I
challenged your illogical statement using logic...not emotion. Your attempt
to belittle other posters by using such terms is detestable.
> in their disagreement with me on this topic were understanding
> "culture" differently than the sense in which I was using it.
I use and understand "culture" according to the strict standard definition.
You, apparently, chose to define it according to personal whim.
> In retrospect, it was a poorly chosen word, because it tended to
> sidetrack rather than clarify the discussion.
It is poorly chosen because it is inaccurate and imprecise. Not because it
serves to sidetrack or distract from the discussion.
> My intention has never
> been to imply universality, but I can see by your question that that's
> the impression you derive.
No kidding.
> I don't really understand why you think
> "black culture" implies "all blacks":
I would believe that in your usage it does imply "all blacks". Nice attempt
at wiggling your way out of an indefensible position, David.
> I would classify jazz as "black
> culture", though it's far from being a universal preference among
> black folk, and may even be a more common preference among white folk.
Jazz was derived from Black culture. You wouldn't recognize this if you don't
understand the meaning of the term "culture".
> I'm not sure if "black environments" will be any better, but I'm going
> to try using that term instead, unless you have a better suggestion.
My suggestion is that you drop this line of <non>reasoning, completely.
> > > When black academic achievement is supported by black students in a
> > > Marva Collins classroom, that's black culture. When black academic
> > > achievement is attacked by black students at Frank W. Ballou High in
> > > Washington D.C., that too is black culture.
>
> If I substitute "a black environment" for "black culture" in this
> paragraph, would you still disagree with the statement?
No, I wouldn't. I wouldn't for the same reasons stated previously. Your
observation is still based upon a stereotype.
> > [...] [O}ne of my daughter's classmates [...] was misdiagnosed as
> > marginally retarded and relegated to special education classes when
> > she was 10. That same young woman graduated class valedictorian
> > when she graduated high school in June. She's headed for Princeton.
> > She escaped the system because her parents placed her in private
> > school away from educators who had given up on her.
> >
> > The young woman, in her valedictorian speech, noted that her grammar
> > school teacher and school principal had an obvious bias against Black
> > students. She had reacted to that bias, although she had been too
> > young to articulate her discomfort with them. She had shut down, the
> > only way she knew to react. If her parents hadn't been diligent, she
> > would have been lost. Just as so many Black children are.
> >
> > When I look at studies across the country, that girl's experience
> > (aside from her class valedictorian status) is not isolated.
> > You can't deal with that reality, can you, David?
>
> Not only is that girl's experience not isolated, it's near universal.
Yarite. I provided evidence last year where the Trenton, N.J. school district
routinely places Black students in Special Education, although their
standardized test scores are the same as the majority of white students. The
white students, on the contrary, were not only placed in mainstream courses,
they were placed in AP classes so they would not be in classes with Black
students. It goes without saying very few of the Black students, no matter
their requisite level of achievement, were allowed access to the AP classes.
Further, I have personally mentored hundreds of young Black students over the
course of 25 years. I hear similar stories so frequently, it is alarming.
This is yet more of your rationalization, David. "Blacks complain about
nothing. We all are subject to the same injustice, abuse, maltreatment. This
really isn't a case of racism." Yarite. What do you need, David? Wide-scale
lynching to establish racism is affecting these students?
> In other words, it's not limited to black students.
It occurs with greater frequency among Black students, David. This is a
prevalent problem affecting Black students, necessarily affecting their later
progress. This persistent problem is one that Ed, Art and I address and for
which we seek solutions. You claim we dwell in "victimology". As such, you
are as much a source of the problem rather than a source for resolution. We
don't need you. Get lost. Following what you suggest, we'll have another two
or three generations of lost children. We don't need you. Period.
> Referring to
> the treatment he had received at school, another person who had gone
> on to achieve great things said that it "destroys the healthy feelings,
> the integrity, and self-confidence of the pupils".
Do tell.
> He wasn't rescued
> by diligent parents, but he wasn't lost either. Sometimes, children
> are just more resilient than you might expect.
>
> Of course, if Einstein had been black, he might have attributed his
> treatment to "bias" too. And he might have been right.
Einstein was a verifiable genius. Black geniuses manage to excel beyond
expectations despite the stupidity of mainstream educators, as well. This is
a sorry analogy that you provide. Most students are not exceptional
geniuses. They are normal human beings, more subject to negative stimuli.
Most students need to be told they can succeed so that they reach their
potential. White and Asian students receive that outside affirmation on a
routine basis. Black and Hispanic students do not. That is the issue.
For most students, they need someone to initially tell them they are
Somebody. Marva Collins' students may recite self-affirming statements to
keep them striving and moving forward, but those statements and the prevailing
attitude is provided first by Collins, herself. You, on the other hand,
"understand why teachers have low expectations of Black students". I, in
turn, have low expectations of such teachers. If a teacher has already
deigned a certain category of children to be essentially uneducable, they do
not belong in the profession. I expect my children's' teachers to have the
highest expectations of my children, and to accept nothing less than the best
from them. They are not doing anything for my children if they do otherwise.
I have the same expectations for ALL Black students. If the teachers can't
manage to live up to the task, they need to find another profession. If they
cannot be teachers to all children, equally and without bias, they are
liabilities rather than anything beneficial.
You'd better believe I place the blame first on the teachers rather than the
students or parents. After all, the studies previously cited by Ed
demonstrate that most Black parents, single or otherwise, place the highest
priority on education. Considering that up to this generation, most parents
have not learned how to provide the best educational opportunities for their
children, the onus is still on the teachers. (I participate in a series of
seminars designed to teach parents how to support their children through the
current educational system. That is how seriously the "Black Culture" takes
the problem.) The parents lose the battle when their pumped up children are
torn down by the teachers' failures despite being charged with the
responsibility of bringing the best out of all students.
You are a sorry specimen if you can't recognize this dynamic. You are even
sorrier considering you first place blame on both Black children and parents,
especially since children of other ethnicities are NOT subject to the same
systemic and proven bias.
Kaiju
bev.
LOL, no I was not insulting you. At least it was not
my intention. It never ceases to amaze me what people
take as an insult. It is my belief, you can only be
insulted, with your permission. I could not care less
what others think of me, it is my opinion of myself
that matters. Others opinions of me are just so much
blah blah blah.
Actually, what you state in regards to Mr. Clemons
writing style, is a matter of opinion. I don't think
his writing style wanders. I think it causes the
reader to stretch their thinking. I think it causes
the reader to "gasp" actually think.
--
-bev-
Alternate email address
morp...@my-deja.com
Meredith
<schoo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> DarkStar wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 03 Sep 1999 03:12:04 GMT, dark...@flash.net (DarkStar) put
> > forth:
> >
> > >
> > >OH SNAP!!!!!
> > >
> > >What is this?
> > >
> > >More *STRONG EXPECTATIONS* by the teachers and administrators?
>
> Wow.
[...]
*PLOINK*
I should've done this long ago.
~Meredith~
--
Remove dotNOSPAMdot when replying by email.
DarkStar
put forth:
>DarkStar wrote:
>
>> Yet, here is McDuffee, who is claiming to have high expectations of
>> Black kids, yet, accepting the fact that teachers don't!
>
>Yet, here is Ed, who is claiming to have high expectations of black
>kids, yet, excusing the fact that they spend less time doing homework
>and more time watching TV than those who are getting into competitive
>colleges and universities at a higher rate.
Show the post.
Hey, I've shown exactly what you have written.
>> Maybe because he has been sayin gtht expectations of teachers
>> shouldn't matter?
>
>What I've been saying is that the expectations of the students
>themselves matter more. This, by the way, is precisely the attitude
>that Marva Collins attempts to instill in her students:
Actually, before she does that, she makes sure that all teachers have
high expectations of the Black students. Of course, that is my POV as
well, and I have helped remove 2 teachers who did not have those
expectations.
...
>I have no quarrel with the Marva Collins philosophy.
Except for the fact that she demands that teachers have high
expectations of their students.
DarkStar
put forth:
>DarkStar wrote:
>>
>> What David did, and what you accept because you think lowly of Black
>> people anyway, was to *ACCEPT* that fact that teachers *SHOULD* have
>> low expectations of Black students!
>
>No, Ed, I didn't say that teachers *SHOULD* have low expectations,
>I said that I understood why they might.
No, what you wrote was:
*** START QUOTE ***
Subject: Re: Washington Post article...
Date: 1998/12/10
Author: David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com>
....
In a system where black middle class students have been
underperforming for decades, one would almost have to be in denial not
to have low expectations.
*** END QUOTE ***
....
>Your question about the "amount of homework given" doesn't imply that
>you think black students *SHOULD* be watching TV rather than reading
>something enlightening, only that you understand why they might be.
Actually, that's not the implication of the question.
DarkStar
put forth:
>Kaiju wrote:
>>
>> David McDuffee wrote:
>> >
>> > Black culture is the environment that black folk create for other
>> > black folk. Plain and simple. Just as the amount and selection
>> > of food that a black mother puts on the table for her black
>> > children is "black culture", so too is the qualitative and
>> > quantitative nourishment that black peers provide for their black
>> > classmates in black classes and black neighborhoods.
>
>> So you're saying this is "all blacks behave like this because they are
>> black?" Oy.
>
>It's been apparent to me for some time that those who were the most
>emotional in their disagreement with me on this topic were understanding
>"culture" differently than the sense in which I was using it.
There is a standard definition of the definition and use of the word
"culture." Kaiju and I use the word correctly. You, however, do not.
In fact, I challenged your *NON-STANDARD* use of the word "culture"
from the very start.
[ Hey Olan! If you can stop tossing McDuffee's salad for a minute or
two, and gargle as well, defend McDuffee's improper use of the word
"culture"! ]
>In retrospect, it was a poorly chosen word, because it tended to
>sidetrack rather than clarify the discussion. My intention has never
>been to imply universality, but I can see by your question that that's
>the impression you derive.
In fact, your statement is a lie. In fact, your attempted rebuttals to
my question asking where Black culture was mentioned, *PROVES* you
were stating universal application!
> I don't really understand why you think
>"black culture" implies "all blacks": I would classify jazz as "black
>culture", though it's far from being a universal preference among
>black folk, and may even be a more common preference among white folk.
>I'm not sure if "black environments" will be any better, but I'm going
>to try using that term instead, unless you have a better suggestion.
Same difference, and you know it.
DarkStar
forth:
>
>
>David McDuffee wrote:
>>
>> Kaiju wrote:
>> >
>> > David McDuffee wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Black culture is the environment that black folk create for other
>> > > black folk. Plain and simple. Just as the amount and selection
>> > > of food that a black mother puts on the table for her black
>> > > children is "black culture", so too is the qualitative and
>> > > quantitative nourishment that black peers provide for their black
>> > > classmates in black classes and black neighborhoods.
>>
>> > So you're saying this is "all blacks behave like this because they are
>> > black?" Oy.
>>
>> It's been apparent to me for some time that those who were the most
>> emotional
>
>Emotional? This is absurd, David. You made an illogical assertion. I
>challenged your illogical statement using logic...not emotion. Your attempt
>to belittle other posters by using such terms is detestable.
>
>> in their disagreement with me on this topic were understanding
>> "culture" differently than the sense in which I was using it.
>
>I use and understand "culture" according to the strict standard definition.
Me too!
>You, apparently, chose to define it according to personal whim.
>
>> In retrospect, it was a poorly chosen word, because it tended to
>> sidetrack rather than clarify the discussion.
>
>It is poorly chosen because it is inaccurate and imprecise. Not because it
>serves to sidetrack or distract from the discussion.
David chose it as he intended that it be used.
...
>> I don't really understand why you think
>> "black culture" implies "all blacks":
>
>I would believe that in your usage it does imply "all blacks". Nice attempt
>at wiggling your way out of an indefensible position, David.
And that wiggling is his S.O.P.
....
>It occurs with greater frequency among Black students, David. This is a
>prevalent problem affecting Black students, necessarily affecting their later
>progress. This persistent problem is one that Ed, Art and I address and for
>which we seek solutions. You claim we dwell in "victimology". As such, you
>are as much a source of the problem rather than a source for resolution. We
>don't need you. Get lost. Following what you suggest, we'll have another two
>or three generations of lost children. We don't need you. Period.
...
>For most students, they need someone to initially tell them they are
>Somebody. Marva Collins' students may recite self-affirming statements to
>keep them striving and moving forward, but those statements and the prevailing
>attitude is provided first by Collins, herself. You, on the other hand,
>"understand why teachers have low expectations of Black students". I, in
>turn, have low expectations of such teachers.
Me too. In fact, I've been part of a group that was able to get two
such teachers removed. No, I'm sorry, "Their contract with <insert
school> was not renewed."
> If a teacher has already
>deigned a certain category of children to be essentially uneducable, they do
>not belong in the profession. I expect my children's' teachers to have the
>highest expectations of my children, and to accept nothing less than the best
>from them. They are not doing anything for my children if they do otherwise.
>I have the same expectations for ALL Black students. If the teachers can't
>manage to live up to the task, they need to find another profession. If they
>cannot be teachers to all children, equally and without bias, they are
>liabilities rather than anything beneficial.
And, what David will never admit, is that I've posted that I don't
care what the race of the teacher is, if they are not up to standards,
toss them.
>You'd better believe I place the blame first on the teachers rather than the
>students or parents. After all, the studies previously cited by Ed
>demonstrate that most Black parents, single or otherwise, place the highest
>priority on education.
And, isn't it amazing how conserva-kooks, racists, and the anti-Black
antagonists seem to go silent on these studies?
DarkStar
forth:
>
>
>olan wrote:
>>
>> In article <37CEB4DA...@NOSPAM.ecn.com
>> > > Couldn't the same be said of you concerning your predisposition to
>> > > agree with Darkstar?
>> >
>> > No. The one thing that Ed and I agree do upon is that David has lied
>> about
>> > and misrepresented what we have written here on SCAA and SCAAM over
>> the
>> > years.
>>
>> Whether you two agree about his having lied or misrepresented what you
>> you two have written isn't proof that he has done so. It is proof that
>> you two believe he has. I don't doubt your feelings, but I am simply
>> saying that what I have read of the discussions between/among you,
>> David, and Darkstar show me know no evidence of such lying and
>> misrepresentations. Maybe future readings will provide me with
>> conclusive proof of your acusations.
>
>If you are waiting for either of us to provide this so-called proof, you'll
>die waiting. The "proof" is on DejaNews. Get off your butt and go find it
>yourself. Furthermore, David has yet to provide proof of his allegations that
>what he claims to be our positions. He can't provide posts or quotes. He
>never will because they do not exist. Frankly, I'm not in the business of
>proving a negative, either. Otherwise, your persistent belief that David is
>truthful, when the people he is talking about say he is incorrect, is both
>amazing and appalling.
Well, David's deceit becomes clear with David now admitting -- only
because of being shown the obvious foolishness of his use of culture
-- that he "misused" the word culture.
One, he knows he used it as he intended he used it.
Two, his excuse is lame.
James Ewing
> You are a sorry specimen if you can't recognize this dynamic. You are even
> sorrier considering you first place blame on both Black children and parents,
> especially since children of other ethnicities are NOT subject to the same
> systemic and proven bias.
>
> Kaiju
>
> --
>
> Before you think, think.
Before you and DarkStar promiscuously commit sociology, you might want
to examine the experience of oppressed minorities throughout world
history and give just a moment's consideration to the stratagems of
those who overcame. While those tried and true ideas are antithetical
to your postmodern gospel, it might allow some sunlight and hope to
invade your depressingly blinkered outlook.
But to your point, Hispanic youth (like Black youth) also fair poorly
academically, as a group. Since you assert in your comments above that
they are "NOT subject to the same systemic and proven bias" what do you
attribute their poor performance to? Genes? Culture? Would your
statement above make you a racist? Or was this just a misstatement on
your part in your defensive haste to get to the notion that Blacks are
singled out for maltreatment?
Further, explain to us how minorities such as Asians, less familiar with
American culture than Blacks, get off the boat and within a historically
short period routinely outperform nearly all ethnic groups. When White
supremacist Buford Furrows went on his killing spree, he shot Jews and
killed an Asian. But I haven't heard their families clamoring for
affirmative action, wringing their hands over "expectations", or
anguishing over the "stereotype threat". They're too busy hitting the
books to spend their time in pursuit of ever-creative rationalizations
for poor performance.
Here's a hint for you: Asian kids don't turn on other Asian kids and
accuse them of "acting white" when they perform well academically.
Here's another: Jewish culture doesn't look the other way at fatherless
families the way Black culture does.
Just for starters, when will Black culture begin to stigmatize through
the most powerful manifestation possible those Blacks that impregnate
and abandon women?
Might we see a post from you or DarkStar suggesting such
politically-incorrect heresy? Or would common sense and proven
empirical approaches be too much to ask?
James Ewing
>
> In article <37CF4B...@worldnet.att.net>, James Ewing
> <schoo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> > DarkStar wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 03 Sep 1999 03:12:04 GMT, dark...@flash.net (DarkStar) put
> > > forth:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >OH SNAP!!!!!
> > > >
> > > >What is this?
> > > >
> > > >More *STRONG EXPECTATIONS* by the teachers and administrators?
> >
> > Wow.
> [...]
>
> *PLOINK*
>
> I should've done this long ago.
Indeed. Think of the loss to mankind that your dereliction caused.
Let's not let it happen again. While I surmise that "Ploink" is the
high-water mark of your intellectual capacity, please be more diligent
in the future.
Kaiju
olan wrote:
>
> In article <37CF3E81...@NOSPAM.ecn.com>,
> You say David is a liar. Now you demand I 'get up off my butt and prove
> he is a liar'. No thanks. You made the accusation.
You claimed David is telling the truth without having read any of the posts Ed
and I have written. You get off your butt and see what you're talking about.
Between Ed, Art and I, we've written a million+ lines of text over the years
about these issues. I'm not reproducing anything for you when they are
readily available on DejaNews.
> > > Anything else we write has been the result of independent research.
> > > > Ed does his research, I do mine. We both share similar
> experiences
> > > and
> > > > objectives, but approach the solutions from different
> directions. We
> > > also
> > > > have been known to freely and vigorously disagree with each
> other. I
> > > don't
> > > > expect you to notice the difference because you pursue the
> simplistic
> > > > conclusion. I.e., you look at stereotypes.
>
> Can you supply examples of my stereotyping?
Sure. You include one in this very post.
> > > The perpetual "my opinions are valid" and "yours are not" argument.
> > > It's as if white people can't have any valid opinions on the race
> issues
> > > in America because we're not black. You see yourself dealing in
> fact and
> > > us dealing in stereotypes.
> >
> > Some white people do have valid opinions on race issues. You don't
> happen to
> > be one of those. When it comes to Blacks and Black culture, you are
> > clueless. You can only approach any racial issue from your own
> perspective,
> > which bears little or no relation to the reality that Blacks
> experience in the
> > United States. Yes, you deal in stereotypes, and you seek to tell
> Ed, Art, me
> > and others that you have superior knowledge. You know bubkis.
>
> So give me an example of a valid opinion by a white on racial issues.
> I would also like to see an example of my claiming that I have superior
> knowledge.
You can somehow divine my opinions without having ever read them. This isn't
an example of your superior knowledge? You insinuate I stereotype the Black
culture, but David does not. You have superior knowledge of Black culture
than I do? You state you fully agree with David, who clearly stereotypes.
You endorse stereotypes. And still you ask this question?
> > > Could you not possibly be dealing as much in stereotyping as you
> > > consider whites to be?
> >
> > Typical demonstration of your cluelessness. Incidentally, I cannot
> deal with
> > stereotypes within my culture. I've lived it for four decades.
> >
> > > > You, on the other hand, are predisposed to believe anything that
> > > absolves you
> > > > of white guilt. David hands that over to you by the shovelful and
> > > you eagerly
> > > > lap it up.
> > >
> > > "White guilt" AGAIN! Darkstar and I had a recent discussion
> concerning
> > > white guilt.
> > >
> > > Do you feel I have a need to be absolved of my "white guilt"? Would
> you
> > > mind defining this white guilt from which you feel I seek
> absolution?
> >
> I noticed you still haven't defined "white guilt".
You got all the definition I'm going to provide.
> And I'd be happy to get out of your way with regards to the problems
> facing black Americans. I'd love for you to begin to solve your own
> problems and quit blaming everyone and everything else.
And there is your example of superior knowledge, attempting to address racial
issues from your specific point of view, your cluelessness, and stereotyping.
All in two sentences. Now go away. You are essentially useless here.
olan
> > Anything else we write has been the result of independent research.
> > > Ed does his research, I do mine. We both share similar
experiences
> > and
> > > objectives, but approach the solutions from different
directions. We
> > also
> > > have been known to freely and vigorously disagree with each
other. I
> > don't
> > > expect you to notice the difference because you pursue the
simplistic
> > > conclusion. I.e., you look at stereotypes.
Can you supply examples of my stereotyping?
> > The perpetual "my opinions are valid" and "yours are not" argument.
> > It's as if white people can't have any valid opinions on the race
issues
> > in America because we're not black. You see yourself dealing in
fact and
> > us dealing in stereotypes.
>
> Some white people do have valid opinions on race issues. You don't
happen to
> be one of those. When it comes to Blacks and Black culture, you are
> clueless. You can only approach any racial issue from your own
perspective,
> which bears little or no relation to the reality that Blacks
experience in the
> United States. Yes, you deal in stereotypes, and you seek to tell
Ed, Art, me
> and others that you have superior knowledge. You know bubkis.
So give me an example of a valid opinion by a white on racial issues.
I would also like to see an example of my claiming that I have superior
knowledge.
> > Could you not possibly be dealing as much in stereotyping as you
And I'd be happy to get out of your way with regards to the problems
facing black Americans. I'd love for you to begin to solve your own
problems and quit blaming everyone and everything else.
olan
olan
dark...@flash.net wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Sep 1999 23:22:36 -0700, David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com>
> put forth:
>
> >>
> >> David McDuffee wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Black culture is the environment that black folk create for
other
> >> > black folk. Plain and simple. Just as the amount and selection
> >> > of food that a black mother puts on the table for her black
> >> > children is "black culture", so too is the qualitative and
> >> > quantitative nourishment that black peers provide for their black
> >> > classmates in black classes and black neighborhoods.
> >
> >> So you're saying this is "all blacks behave like this because they
are
> >> black?" Oy.
> >
> >It's been apparent to me for some time that those who were the most
understanding
> >"culture" differently than the sense in which I was using it.
>
> "culture." Kaiju and I use the word correctly. You, however, do not.
>
> In fact, I challenged your *NON-STANDARD* use of the word "culture"
> from the very start.
>
> [ Hey Olan! If you can stop tossing McDuffee's salad for a minute or
> two, and gargle as well, defend McDuffee's improper use of the word
> "culture"! ]
Can you provide some examples of black behaviors that are culturally
black? You know, like being great at math, or excelling at the retail
trades...things like that.
> >In retrospect, it was a poorly chosen word, because it tended to
> >sidetrack rather than clarify the discussion. My intention has never
> >been to imply universality, but I can see by your question that
that's
> >the impression you derive.
>
> In fact, your statement is a lie. In fact, your attempted rebuttals to
> my question asking where Black culture was mentioned, *PROVES* you
> were stating universal application!
>
> > I don't really understand why you think
> >"black culture" implies "all blacks": I would classify jazz as
"black
> >culture", though it's far from being a universal preference among
> >black folk, and may even be a more common preference among white
folk.
> >I'm not sure if "black environments" will be any better, but I'm
going
> >to try using that term instead, unless you have a better suggestion.
>
> Same difference, and you know it.
>
> ---
> "Corporatized or idealized, hip-hop is the American Dream and the
African
> American Nightmare rolled into one fat-ass blunt."
> Charles Aaron Spin (Nov.1998)
> Ed Brown - dark...@flash.net
> http://www.charm.net/~darkstar
>
--
olan
Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
> >
> > You say David is a liar. Now you demand I 'get up off my butt and
prove
> > he is a liar'. No thanks. You made the accusation.
>
> You claimed David is telling the truth without having read any of the
posts Ed
> and I have written. You get off your butt and see what you're
talking about.
> Between Ed, Art and I, we've written a million+ lines of text over
the years
> about these issues. I'm not reproducing anything for you when they
are
> readily available on DejaNews.
I've read plenty of your discussions with David. I've seen no evidence
of him lying. You say he's a liar...YOU prove it.
> > > > Anything else we write has been the result of independent
research.
> > > > > Ed does his research, I do mine. We both share similar
> > experiences
> > > > and
> > > > > objectives, but approach the solutions from different
> > directions. We
> > > > also
> > > > > have been known to freely and vigorously disagree with each
> > other. I
> > > > don't
> > > > > expect you to notice the difference because you pursue the
> > simplistic
> > > > > conclusion. I.e., you look at stereotypes.
> >
> > Can you supply examples of my stereotyping?
>
> Sure. You include one in this very post.
WHERE?
How does a white bring up a problem within the black community without
you seeing him as stereotyping? If I say, for example, that there's a
problem with a lack of academic achievement among blacks in the deep
south and large urban settings, is that stereotyping?
David's a liar, but you won't prove it.
I'm guilty of stereotyping blacks, but you won't show me where.
And I'm guilty of touting my superior knowledge because I address
racial issues from my own point of view. From who's point of view
do you suggest I address racial issues? And from who's point of view
do you address racial issues?
--
Meredith
> And I'd be happy to get out of your way with regards to the problems
> facing black Americans. I'd love for you to begin to solve your own
> problems and quit blaming everyone and everything else.
>
> olan
*PLOINK*
I should've done this long ago.
~Meredith~
Kaiju
olan wrote:
>
> In article <37D09822...@NOSPAM.ecn.com>,
> Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > You say David is a liar. Now you demand I 'get up off my butt and
> prove
> > > he is a liar'. No thanks. You made the accusation.
> >
> > You claimed David is telling the truth without having read any of the
> posts Ed
> > and I have written. You get off your butt and see what you're
> talking about.
> > Between Ed, Art and I, we've written a million+ lines of text over
> the years
> > about these issues. I'm not reproducing anything for you when they
> are
> > readily available on DejaNews.
>
> I've read plenty of your discussions with David. I've seen no evidence
> of him lying. You say he's a liar...YOU prove it.
I gave you the proof. It's on DejaNews. You, on the other hand have
essentially said I am lying without knowing what I have written. You prove
it.
> How does a white bring up a problem within the black community without
> you seeing him as stereotyping? If I say, for example, that there's a
> problem with a lack of academic achievement among blacks in the deep
> south and large urban settings, is that stereotyping?
There are whites who approach the issues without a preconceived answer. You
are not one who can. You start off believing the stereotype is the the
default condition. You will never move from there. Look, every post you've
written on SCAA comes from that perspective. It is useless discussing issues
with you, which is why the regulars here won't.
> > > And I'd be happy to get out of your way with regards to the problems
> > > facing black Americans. I'd love for you to begin to solve your own
> > > problems and quit blaming everyone and everything else.
> >
> > And there is your example of superior knowledge, attempting to
> address racial
> > issues from your specific point of view, your cluelessness, and
> stereotyping.
> > All in two sentences. Now go away. You are essentially useless here.
>
> David's a liar, but you won't prove it.
> I'm guilty of stereotyping blacks, but you won't show me where.
I showed you where. That you are incapable of seeing it is your problem.
> And I'm guilty of touting my superior knowledge because I address
> racial issues from my own point of view. From who's point of view
> do you suggest I address racial issues? And from who's point of view
> do you address racial issues?
When it comes to addressing what happens within the Black community I approach
the issues with specific understanding of the subtexts you will never
comprehend. Some whites can, but you are definitely not one of them. Thus,
you are useless. In this exchange you have only demonstrated the propensity
to believe what is of comfort to you, such as "I don't see any evidence that
David is lying" without doing any investigation, and rejecting any other
input. You cannot process anything other than the most superficial concept,
and you are lost when subtleties are involved. You know nothing about Blacks
or Black culture, and you have no real interest in learning. On the other
hand, you don't hesitate to tell Blacks how Blacks behave and what Black
culture is. You are here to prove a point, to pursue your own agenda. You
reject anything that contradicts your preconceived notions. In fact, you
become agitated when you are confronted with a different perspective,
particularly if it comes from Blacks.
Meredith is correct. You are ignorable.
olan
Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > I've read plenty of your discussions with David. I've seen no
evidence
> > of him lying. You say he's a liar...YOU prove it.
>
> essentially said I am lying without knowing what I have written. You
prove
> it.
Enough. You made an accusation. Get off your butt and prove it or shut
up with the lying claims.
> > How does a white bring up a problem within the black community
without
> > you seeing him as stereotyping? If I say, for example, that there's
a
> > problem with a lack of academic achievement among blacks in the deep
> > south and large urban settings, is that stereotyping?
>
> There are whites who approach the issues without a preconceived
answer. You
> are not one who can.
Am I to understand that you do believe blacks are having a problem with
regards to academic achievement when compared to whites and asian and
hispanics, but it is stereotyping blacks for someone who IYO brings
preconceived notions about such problems up for discussion?
You start off believing the stereotype is the the
> default condition. You will never move from there. Look, every post
you've
> written on SCAA comes from that perspective. It is useless
discussing issues
> with you, which is why the regulars here won't.
And what is the preconceived notion I bring to the issue?
> > > > And I'd be happy to get out of your way with regards to the
problems
> > > > facing black Americans. I'd love for you to begin to solve your
own
> > > > problems and quit blaming everyone and everything else.
> > >
> > > And there is your example of superior knowledge, attempting to
> > address racial
> > > issues from your specific point of view, your cluelessness, and
> > stereotyping.
> > > All in two sentences. Now go away. You are essentially useless
here.
> >
> > David's a liar, but you won't prove it.
> > I'm guilty of stereotyping blacks, but you won't show me where.
>
> I showed you where. That you are incapable of seeing it is your
problem.
>
> > And I'm guilty of touting my superior knowledge because I address
> > racial issues from my own point of view. From who's point of view
> > do you suggest I address racial issues? And from who's point of view
> > do you address racial issues?
>
God, you are incredible. What a bunch of crap. And to think you are held
in such high regard within SCAA. I feel sorry for you. You are about as
closed minded a person as I've ever come across.
olan
Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
> When it comes to addressing what happens within the Black community I
approach
> the issues with specific understanding of the subtexts you will never
> comprehend. Some whites can, but you are definitely not one of them.
You mean whites who agree with you, don't you? And how dare you dismiss
me as one who is incapable of comprehending these "subtexts" you speak
of. Sounds like a cop-out to me.
You believe I am a racist, therefore you end any discussion based on
that belief.
Thus,
> you are useless. In this exchange you have only demonstrated the
propensity
> to believe what is of comfort to you, such as "I don't see any
evidence that
> David is lying" without doing any investigation, and rejecting any
other
> input. You cannot process anything other than the most superficial
concept,
> and you are lost when subtleties are involved.
You a mired in a confusing pot of "subtleties". Your mind is clogged.
You know nothing about Blacks
> or Black culture, and you have no real interest in learning.
Half my hometown is black! And I wouldn't be posting within SCAA if I
didn't have an interest in race relations in America.
On the other
> hand, you don't hesitate to tell Blacks how Blacks behave and what
Black
> culture is. You are here to prove a point, to pursue your own
agenda. You
> reject anything that contradicts your preconceived notions. In fact,
you
> become agitated when you are confronted with a different perspective,
> particularly if it comes from Blacks.
>
You are the one who calls people names and insults them to no end. You
are the one who thinks she has all the answers. You are the one who is
arrogant. You are the one who blames everyone and everything in America
for the problems within certain parts of the black community except the
individuals bringing the problems upon themselves. You are the one who
end conversations by claiming mysterious "subtexts" make your positions
somehow noncomprehensible by others.
> Meredith is correct. You are ignorable.
Hell...you aren't my favorite person either.
James Ewing
>
> In article <37D14049...@NOSPAM.ecn.com>,
> Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
> You know nothing about Blacks
> > or Black culture, and you have no real interest in learning.
>
> Half my hometown is black! And I wouldn't be posting within SCAA if I
> didn't have an interest in race relations in America.
>
> On the other
> > hand, you don't hesitate to tell Blacks how Blacks behave and what
> Black
> > culture is. You are here to prove a point, to pursue your own
> agenda. You
> > reject anything that contradicts your preconceived notions. In fact,
> you
> > become agitated when you are confronted with a different perspective,
> > particularly if it comes from Blacks.
> >
> You are the one who calls people names and insults them to no end. You
> are the one who thinks she has all the answers. You are the one who is
> arrogant. You are the one who blames everyone and everything in America
> for the problems within certain parts of the black community except the
> individuals bringing the problems upon themselves. You are the one who
> end conversations by claiming mysterious "subtexts" make your positions
> somehow noncomprehensible by others.
>
> > Meredith is correct. You are ignorable.
>
> Hell...you aren't my favorite person either.
>
> --
> olan
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Thanks for the entertainment, olan. Your spot-on analysis--Kaiju
calling people liars and then demanding that others prove the point,
blaming others but putting on the brave libertarian face, diving for
cover under mysterious but unknown "subtleties" and "complexities", when
all else fails just claim it's all there on Dejanews, etc.--it's
incredibly funny to read but also sad, when you think about it. She
doesn't even attempt to be consistently logical but just huffs and puffs
and then tells you, David, me, everybody to get lost.
Kaiju, DarkStar, Meredith--we get the typical liberal mindset. And then
just a couple of days ago I pick up the newspaper to the blaring
headline "Ethnic Gap in SAT scores widens". You'd think these clowns
would wake up and smell the coffee. The Black community has been
absorbing their alleged wisdom for several decades now, and look at the
results.
My favorite Kaiju riff, which you so deliciously exposed, is the Tough
Mama routine. The "Get out of our way" show. Yet, she never places any
responsibility on the "our" segment of the equation. It's always the
external that bears the blame. She favors affirmative action and then
has the gall to rhetorically claim she just wants everyone but Blacks to
get lost. When she shifts into her "stop making Blacks a social
laboratory experiment, and get out of the way" you'd swear she's a
libertarian. She's the world's only libertarian social engineer. Go
figure...
James Ewing
>
> Olan (again) showed his true colors when he wrote...
>
> > facing black Americans. I'd love for you to begin to solve your own
> > problems and quit blaming everyone and everything else.
> >
> > olan
>
>
> I should've done this long ago.
>
> ~Meredith~
I must say, your mystical faith that these infantile bird-droppings you
favor us with would somehow take on some sort of resonance if only they
had been delivered previously is nearly as entertaining as Kaiju's
insecure bravado. But not quite...
Kaiju
olan wrote:
>
> In article <37D14049...@NOSPAM.ecn.com>,
> Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I've read plenty of your discussions with David. I've seen no
> evidence
> > > of him lying. You say he's a liar...YOU prove it.
> >
> > I gave you the proof. It's on DejaNews. You, on the other hand have
> > essentially said I am lying without knowing what I have written. You
> prove
> > it.
>
> Enough. You made an accusation. Get off your butt and prove it or shut
> up with the lying claims.
Then it should be a simple process for you to come up with some post where I
have ever written the things he claims I have, right? Look. Nobody can
produce any post written by me that contains assertions he associates with
me. David can't produce them, you can't produce them, and I certainly cannot
produce them. Those ideas and assertions do not exist, which is the point.
David made them up out of whole cloth. I cannot disprove a negative...a null
set. How stupid are you?
> > > How does a white bring up a problem within the black community
> without
> > > you seeing him as stereotyping? If I say, for example, that there's
> a
> > > problem with a lack of academic achievement among blacks in the deep
> > > south and large urban settings, is that stereotyping?
> >
> > There are whites who approach the issues without a preconceived
> answer. You
> > are not one who can.
>
> Am I to understand that you do believe blacks are having a problem with
> regards to academic achievement when compared to whites and asian and
> hispanics, but it is stereotyping blacks for someone who IYO brings
> preconceived notions about such problems up for discussion?
You stereotype when you assume the causes and reject anything else as "placing
the blame on others" as you so inanely put it. That is bringing preconceived
notions to the table.
> > > David's a liar, but you won't prove it.
> > > I'm guilty of stereotyping blacks, but you won't show me where.
> >
> > I showed you where. That you are incapable of seeing it is your
> problem.
> >
> > > And I'm guilty of touting my superior knowledge because I address
> > > racial issues from my own point of view. From who's point of view
> > > do you suggest I address racial issues? And from who's point of view
> > > do you address racial issues?
> >
> > When it comes to addressing what happens within the Black community I
> approach
> > the issues with specific understanding of the subtexts you will never
> > comprehend. Some whites can, but you are definitely not one of
> them. Thus,
> > you are useless. In this exchange you have only demonstrated the
> propensity
> > to believe what is of comfort to you, such as "I don't see any
> evidence that
> > David is lying" without doing any investigation, and rejecting any
> other
> > input. You cannot process anything other than the most superficial
> concept,
> > and you are lost when subtleties are involved. You know nothing
> about Blacks
> > or Black culture, and you have no real interest in learning. On the
> other
> > hand, you don't hesitate to tell Blacks how Blacks behave and what
> Black
> > culture is. You are here to prove a point, to pursue your own
> agenda. You
> > reject anything that contradicts your preconceived notions. In fact,
> you
> > become agitated when you are confronted with a different perspective,
> > particularly if it comes from Blacks.
> >
> > Meredith is correct. You are ignorable.
>
> God, you are incredible. What a bunch of crap.
Denial is an ugly thing.
> And to think you are held
> in such high regard within SCAA. I feel sorry for you.
What you think about me is immaterial. What I write on SCAA isn't for you,
anyway, and given the current condition of this newsgroup, I am unlikely to
expand upon any point David or anyone else introduces. I told you when you
first appeared on SCAA that I was not going to take you seriously, nor was I
going to answer your questions or explain anything to you. Why would you
believe that has changed now? What you think and feel is meaningless to me,
you are insignificant, so save your so-called pity.
> You are about as
> closed minded a person as I've ever come across.
When it comes to the likes of you, my mind isn't so open my brains fall out.
I saw you coming from 10 miles away, and you have been rejected. You have
nothing to offer here, and I really don't care anything about what you say.
You can't even grasp the most simple concept. What use are you? None to me.
Now I've wasted enough time on you. Get lost.
olan
anyone like her?!@#!! What a card!!
Do you you really think she thinks of herself as a libertarian? I,
myself, lean very much towards a libertarian philosophy, and I would
hate to think I have that in common with her. She's a good talker; I'll
give her that...but other than that.....well, let's just say I wouldn't
invite her to my house to meet the family.
I read a post of hers recently where she says she hates liberals almost
as much as she hate racists! And I'm sure she isn't a right wing
conservative. A middle of the road conservative, maybe? A socialist?
I don't know. What's your guess?
I'd ask her, but I don't think she would be very receptive to my
questions at the moment.
olan
Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Enough. You made an accusation. Get off your butt and prove it or
shut
> > up with the lying claims.
>
> Then it should be a simple process for you to come up with some post
where I
> have ever written the things he claims I have, right? Look. Nobody
can
> produce any post written by me that contains assertions he associates
with
> me. David can't produce them, you can't produce them, and I
certainly cannot
> produce them. Those ideas and assertions do not exist, which is the
point.
> David made them up out of whole cloth. I cannot disprove a
negative...a null
> set. How stupid are you?
>
end my participation with where I began it. I have seen no evidence of
David lying, but if I see any in the future I will try and be the first
to call it to your, and his, attention. Fair enough?
> > > > How does a white bring up a problem within the black community
> > without
> > > > you seeing him as stereotyping? If I say, for example, that
there's
> > a
> > > > problem with a lack of academic achievement among blacks in the
deep
> > > > south and large urban settings, is that stereotyping?
> > >
> > > There are whites who approach the issues without a preconceived
> > answer. You
> > > are not one who can.
> >
> > Am I to understand that you do believe blacks are having a problem
with
> > regards to academic achievement when compared to whites and asian
and
> > hispanics, but it is stereotyping blacks for someone who IYO brings
> > preconceived notions about such problems up for discussion?
>
> You stereotype when you assume the causes and reject anything else as
"placing
> the blame on others" as you so inanely put it. That is bringing
preconceived
> notions to the table.
At least your post resembles some sort of recognition that blacks in
the south and major urban areas are having difficuly with academics.
I'll save any discussion of possible causes for another time.
But I think it is reasonable of me to expect some semblance of a
response to my question concerning what preconceived notions you might
bring to our/any discussions.
> > > > David's a liar, but you won't prove it.
> > > > I'm guilty of stereotyping blacks, but you won't show me where.
> > >
> > > I showed you where. That you are incapable of seeing it is your
> > problem.
> > >
> > > > And I'm guilty of touting my superior knowledge because I
address
> > > > racial issues from my own point of view. From who's point of
view
> > > > do you suggest I address racial issues? And from who's point of
view
> > > > do you address racial issues?
> > >
Are you a board member of the NAACP? Maybe a policy advisor?
David McDuffee
>
> David McDuffee wrote:
> >
> > Kaiju wrote:
> > >
> > > David McDuffee wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Black culture is the environment that black folk create for
> > > > other black folk. Plain and simple.
> >
> > > they are black?" Oy.
> >
> > It's been apparent to me for some time that those who were the
> > most emotional
>
> Emotional? This is absurd, David. You made an illogical assertion.
> I challenged your illogical statement using logic...not emotion.
There is no logic whatsoever in your statement, Kaiju. You made a
statement which had no relation at all to what I had said, and implied
that you were simply rephrasing my words. And "Oy" is an expression
of emotion, not a synonym for Q.E.D.
> > in their disagreement with me on this topic were understanding
> > "culture" differently than the sense in which I was using it.
>
> I use and understand "culture" according to the strict standard
> definition. You, apparently, chose to define it according to
> personal whim.
I have consulted half a dozen dictionaries, and all of them provide
definitions which are completely consistent with my use of the term.
My Webster's Unabridged says:
culture - the sum total of ways of living built up by a group of human
beings and transmitted from one generation to another.
and various other references, both hardcopy and online, seem pretty
much in agreement with this definition. I don't see anything here
which supports your assertion that saying an attitude is cultural
implies that ALL members of the cultural group must subscribe to it,
or even to support Ed's milder assertion that the majority of members
must subscribe to it.
Logically, if you couple your "culture=universality" definition with
your oft-repeated "blacks are not a monolith" truism, the only possible
conclusion is that there is no such thing as black culture, since there
is no aspect of such a culture which "all blacks" would share.
> > In retrospect, it was a poorly chosen word, because it tended to
> > sidetrack rather than clarify the discussion.
> It is poorly chosen because it is inaccurate and imprecise. Not
> because it serves to sidetrack or distract from the discussion.
As far as I'm concerned, the inaccuracy and imprecision is all in your
mind. I used the word correctly, but whenever I said "black culture"
you instead heard "all blacks". Obviously, if "all blacks" is what I
had intended to say, I would have done so. I imagine it was helpful to
you to recast the ideas in this way because virtually any phrase which
begins "all blacks" can prima facie be presumed to be false, so no
thought needs to be expended on a rebuttal. Such dishonesty merely
sidesteps rather than confronting the issue. As I've said before, when
people need to distort my position before addressing it, I conclude that
they find it too difficult to grapple with as originally stated.
> > My intention has never been to imply universality, but I can see
> > by your question that that's the impression you derive.
>
> No kidding.
Perhaps you could furnish a reference which supports your claim that
"black culture" implies "all blacks", i.e., each and every black person.
Or perhaps you could just fall back on your (and Ed's) common tactic of
insisting that *I* should be responsible for finding some evidence which
would support your assertion. You know, something on the order of,
"My proof is in the Library of Congress; the only reason you don't look
it up yourself is because you're afraid you'll have to admit that I'm
right."
> > I don't really understand why you think "black culture" implies
> > "all blacks":
> I would believe that in your usage it does imply "all blacks".
> Nice attempt at wiggling your way out of an indefensible position,
> David.
Nice attempt to restate my true position, which is very defensible,
as some absurd strawman which I would never even attempt to defend.
I made "my usage" quite clear way back at the beginning of this
discussion, and it was obvious then that "all blacks" (or even "most
blacks") was not what I was saying:
Darkstar wrote:
> > Through out the discussion, you have claimed the problem lies with
> > Black culture, ie, the majority of Black culture.
McDuffee replied:
> There is always a range involved. Some students and their families
> value education a great deal; some hardly at all. For any sizeable
> group you'd care to define, you will find attitudes falling all along
> the range. Each group will have a center of gravity (the mean), and
> each group will have a variance. This is true for the value each
> group places on education, and the effort it expends pursuing
> education, as well as for GPA and scores on standardized tests.
Reference: http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=420811057
> > I would classify jazz as "black culture", though it's far from being
> > a universal preference among black folk, and may even be a more
> > common preference among white folk.
> Jazz was derived from Black culture. You wouldn't recognize this if
> you don't understand the meaning of the term "culture".
Now you place jazz outside of black culture, as something "derived" from
it rather than being a part of it. This strikes me as a bizarre,
idiosyncratic understanding of the term "culture", so I'd really be
interested in seeing what you're using as your working definition.
What you're saying seems to contradict the "sum total" wording found in
Websters, and more specifically contradicts the definition provided at
http://www.iversonsoftware.com/sociology/c.html#culture
culture - That complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art,
morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits
acquired by man as a member of society.
> > I'm not sure if "black environments" will be any better, but I'm
> > going to try using that term instead, unless you have a better
> > suggestion.
> My suggestion is that you drop this line of <non>reasoning,
> completely.
I'll drop it in a minute, the moment I'm convinced that it's untrue
as opposed to being merely misunderstood.
> > > > When black academic achievement is supported by black students
> > > > in a Marva Collins classroom, that's black culture. When black
> > > > academic achievement is attacked by black students at Frank W.
> > > > Ballou High in Washington D.C., that too is black culture.
> > If I substitute "a black environment" for "black culture" in this
> > paragraph, would you still disagree with the statement?
> No, I wouldn't. I wouldn't for the same reasons stated previously.
> Your observation is still based upon a stereotype.
Which is the stereotype? Support of academic achievement, or attacks
on academic achievement?
> I provided evidence last year where the Trenton, N.J. school district
> routinely places Black students in Special Education, although their
> standardized test scores are the same as the majority of white
> students. The white students, on the contrary, were not only placed
> in mainstream courses, they were placed in AP classes so they would
> not be in classes with Black students. It goes without saying very
> few of the Black students, no matter their requisite level of
> achievement, were allowed access to the AP classes.
Yeah, whatever happened with that? The way you described it back in
January, '98, it seemed like a slam dunk for a DOJ civil rights case.
All the white students were in college prep and AP, and "normal" classes
had been eliminated, leaving everyone who wasn't in college prep or AP
classes (mostly blacks, Hispanics, and Cambodians) stranded in Special
Education classes with emotionally disturbed classmates. It's been over
a year and a half now, but I've never heard anything more on the news,
I don't see anything on the DOJ website, and even this latest word from
you just says "there was a problem last year". Problem resolved?
Reference: http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=319287919
> This is yet more of your rationalization, David. "Blacks complain
> about nothing. We all are subject to the same injustice, abuse,
> maltreatment. This really isn't a case of racism." Yarite. What
> do you need, David? Wide-scale lynching to establish racism is
> affecting these students?
> > [I]t's not limited to black students.
>
> It occurs with greater frequency among Black students, David. This
> is a prevalent problem affecting Black students, necessarily
> affecting their later progress. This persistent problem is one that
> Ed, Art and I address and for which we seek solutions.
My position is this:
Racism is still a problem, and it affects black children more than
it affects other children. I don't believe racist attitudes are as
widely embraced as you seem to think; indeed, regardless of what their
private beliefs might be, most people are at least giving public lip
service to the idea of equal opportunity. And I believe that the system
offers ways of counteracting and eliminating racism-based injustice,
abuse, and maltreatment, which are not available for run-of-the-mill
injustice, abuse, and maltreatment. On balance, therefore, while I
acknowledge that the playing field remains tilted slightly to the
detriment of blacks, the remaining bias cannot fully (or even largely)
explain the remaining differences in performance. Finally, I believe
the primary responsibility for the next step lies within the black
community itself.
> You claim we dwell in "victimology".
I claim that your "racism is at the root of every problem faced by the
black community" philosophy counterproductively displaces responsibility
for many problems which racism is not at the root of.
> Most students need to be told they can succeed so that they reach
> their potential. White and Asian students receive that outside
> affirmation on a routine basis. Black and Hispanic students do not.
> That is the issue.
Shouldn't PARENTS be the primary source of that affirmation?
In the original Washington Post article which kicked off these
discussions (ref: http://www.shaker.org/news/washpost/washpost.htm ),
the following facts were noted:
"When asked who they are trying to please by working hard in school,
white students are more likely to say their parents, while blacks
tend to say their teachers."
"Likewise, when asked to name the lowest grade that they could bring
home without angering their parents, whites usually name a higher
grade than blacks."
Doesn't this suggest that there are differences in the home environments
which may have a bearing on achievement?
> For most students, they need someone to initially tell them they are
> Somebody.
Mom and Dad?
> Marva Collins' students may recite self-affirming statements to
> keep them striving and moving forward, but those statements and the
> prevailing attitude is provided first by Collins, herself.
Not Mom and Dad? What's wrong with this picture?
> You, on the other hand, "understand why teachers have low expectations
> of Black students".
Yes. I believe most teachers with low expectations are kindhearted
liberals who don't want to threaten what they see as the fragile self
esteem of black students by actually challenging them to perform tasks
which may be beyond their ability. Having observed lower achievement
for so long, they offer less challenging material in the hope that a
string of unbroken successes will support self esteem to the point
where more challenging material may be introduced. Such an approach
frequently fails, because the only success that raises self esteem is
success in the face of a true challenge.
The solution for such teachers is often just to educate them.
> If a teacher has already deigned a certain category of children to
> be essentially uneducable, they do not belong in the profession.
Well, yeah, but there's a pretty big gulf between "low expectations"
and considering a class of kids uneducable, wouldn't you say?
> You'd better believe I place the blame first on the teachers rather
> than the students or parents. After all, the studies previously cited
> by Ed demonstrate that most Black parents, single or otherwise, place
> the highest priority on education.
No. That's always the conclusion Ed reaches from the studies he cites,
but the evidence is usually too flimsy to support such a conclusion.
For example, he notes a study in which dropout rates and attendance
rates are equivalent for black and white students, and trumpets that
the inescapable conclusion is that both groups place equal priority on
education. While that might be true if an education could be obtained
just by showing up, it ignores the issues I raised regarding study time
versus time spent watching TV, for example.
Or Ed will point out that support for vouchers is higher in the black
community than elsewhere, and conclude that therefore education is a
higher priority. My own conclusion would be that paying for education
may be more of a concern, but that still doesn't quantify how important
education itself is.
> Considering that up to this generation, most parents have not learned
> how to provide the best educational opportunities for their children,
> the onus is still on the teachers.
I agree with the first part of your statement, but I would finish up
with "the onus is therefore on the parents to acquire the skills they
need, because their own children are depending on them."
> (I participate in a series of seminars designed to teach parents how
> to support their children through the current educational system.
> That is how seriously the "Black Culture" takes the problem.)
If I didn't know better, I could swear you're using "black culture"
the same way I've been using it all along.
I participate in similar seminars in my area. The problem is that the
parents who are willing, and able, to invest time in such activities,
are frequently not the parents who most need them.
> The parents lose the battle when their pumped up children are
> torn down by the teachers' failures despite being charged with the
> responsibility of bringing the best out of all students.
I don't favor keeping toxic teachers on the payroll. Given society's
willingness to compensate public school teachers, however, I don't
see any alternative to tolerating a lot of mediocre ones. Recognizing
this reality, wise parents and soon-to-be-wise students will take more
responsibility for their own educations -- just as Marva Collins
recommends.
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
David McDuffee
>
> David McDuffee wrote:
>
> > and Art and the rest of the victimization brigade insist that it's
> > the racist system rather than the students' own initiative which is
> > most responsible for defining the outcomes.
>
> And this is the same sort of gratuitous bullshit comment you always
> make, that leaves you with no credibility. If you are going to use
> my name in yet another of your asinine posts, at least accurately
> represent what I've said.
>
> I have never used racism as an excuse for failure nor failure to
> perform.
Yet elsewhere in this very thread, you say:
> "By the way, this thread would be more accurately titled, "Educators'
> Expectations of Students", since that is usually the root of the
> problems Black and Latino students' educational problems. The
> attitudes of the educators are more likely to determine the parents'
> expectations since the educators use the color of authority to
> determine if the student is educable. Naive and inexperienced parents
> are likely to believe what they are told...and give in."
You provide an example, which you characterize as typical, in which
the racist system rolls without resistance over the hapless student
and his naive and inexperienced parents.
And earlier ( http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=464319014 ) you stated:
> "The cavalier actions of those who made decisions because I didn't fit
> within their comfort zone had a very real impact on my life, my
> income, my feelings of self-determination and expectations based on
> my abilities, the self-esteem of my children, the plans of my
> parents the expectations of my creditors, the income of my
> employees... you name it."
If that's not a statement that racism had more effect on the outcome
than your own initiative, what is it?
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
David McDuffee
> And, what David will never admit, is that I've posted that I don't
> care what the race of the teacher is, if they are not up to
> standards, toss them.
Why on earth would you think I would be reluctant to admit that your
standards for a good teacher are independent of race? Whatever my
other quarrels with you, I don't think you're one of those racists
who thinks only black teachers can reach black kids, or that bad
teachers should get a pass if they're black.
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
olan
dark...@flash.net wrote:
> Olan, your say is what?
> Or can you see with your mouth in Duffee's ass?
>
> Olan, what is the definition of culture?
The customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a
racial, religious, or social group. Shared attitudes, values,
goals, and practices.
--
Kaiju
David McDuffee wrote:
>
> Kaiju wrote:
> >
> > David McDuffee wrote:
> >
> > > All of which is basically what I've been saying, while you and Kaiju
> > > and Art and the rest of the victimization brigade insist that it's
> > > the racist system rather than the students' own initiative which is
> > > most responsible for defining the outcomes.
> >
> > And this is the same sort of gratuitous bullshit comment you always
> > make, that leaves you with no credibility. If you are going to use
> > my name in yet another of your asinine posts, at least accurately
> > represent what I've said.
> >
> > I have never used racism as an excuse for failure nor failure to
> > perform.
>
> Yet elsewhere in this very thread, you say:
>
> > "By the way, this thread would be more accurately titled, "Educators'
> > Expectations of Students", since that is usually the root of the
> > problems Black and Latino students' educational problems. The
> > attitudes of the educators are more likely to determine the parents'
> > expectations since the educators use the color of authority to
> > determine if the student is educable. Naive and inexperienced parents
> > are likely to believe what they are told...and give in."
>
> You provide an example, which you characterize as typical, in which
> the racist system rolls without resistance over the hapless student
> and his naive and inexperienced parents.
No, David. I said the racist system can manipulate naive and inexperienced
parents, and this is a real issue or factor. Nowhere did I say these students
do not have the ability to succeed or perform. That is your spin. You really
do need to brush up on your definitions of "excuse" and "explanation".
> And earlier ( http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=464319014 ) you stated:
>
> > "The cavalier actions of those who made decisions because I didn't fit
> > within their comfort zone had a very real impact on my life, my
> > income, my feelings of self-determination and expectations based on
> > my abilities, the self-esteem of my children, the plans of my
> > parents the expectations of my creditors, the income of my
> > employees... you name it."
>
> If that's not a statement that racism had more effect on the outcome
> than your own initiative, what is it?
It says that racism had an impact, and yes, that impact *can* have more of an
effect than initiative. Do you expect me to pretend otherwise? I did not,
however, say that it prevented me from succeeding or performing or excelling.
It means I had to regroup and go to sometimes extraordinary lengths to
overcome or evade those effects. It means I have had to fight harder and
longer than most people, particularly white males. It does not mean I did not
eventually achieve my goals, but it took longer and has caused temporary
setbacks. It does NOT mean that I have allowed myself to succumb to the
effects of racism. That is your own construct.
For you to claim that either observation supports excuses for failure to
perform or succeed would require a significant leap of logic. In both
statements, particularly in context, I was describing the effect racism has on
its targets. How you derived your conclusion from those is astounding...or at
least it would be astounding if it came from anyone else but you.
David McDuffee
> I said the racist system can manipulate naive and inexperienced
> parents, and this is a real issue or factor. Nowhere did I say
> these students do not have the ability to succeed or perform.
And nowhere did I accuse you of saying that the students did not have
the ability to succeed or perform. The statement which you labeled
"gratuitous bullshit" said simply that you "insist that it's the racist
system rather than the students' own initiative which is most
responsible for defining the outcomes." Frankly, I was just going to
ignore it, because being called a liar by you has about as much impact
as being hit with a spitball, but then you just kept going round and
round with Olan about how I couldn't produce any post in which you'd
said anything resembling my characterization, so I finally decided to
go back and see just what it was you thought I couldn't support. There
is support for my characterization all over Deja News; these two posts
are just two recent examples.
> [Your second example] says that racism had an impact, and yes, that
> impact *can* have more of an effect than initiative. Do you expect
> me to pretend otherwise?
No, I don't. I also don't expect you to deny that you have made such
statements, and accuse me of not accurately representing your position.
Yet, this is what you said: "Nobody can produce any post written by me
that contains assertions he associates with me. David can't produce
them, you can't produce them, and I certainly cannot produce them.
Those ideas and assertions do not exist, which is the point.
David made them up out of whole cloth."
> It does not mean I did not eventually achieve my goals, but it took
> longer and has caused temporary setbacks. It does NOT mean that I
> have allowed myself to succumb to the effects of racism. That is
> your own construct.
No, that's your straw man. The statement which you characterized as
"gratuitous bullshit" said simply that you "insist that it's the racist
system rather than the students' own initiative which is most
responsible for defining the outcomes," with "outcomes" in this
case being lower academic achievement and corresponding lower admission
rates to competitive colleges and universities. Students who are not
admitted to UCLA can still eventually achieve their goals; a spot at
UC Riverside is not a one-way ticket to the homeless shelter. Yet,
elsewhere in this thread you prophesy "Following what you suggest,
we'll have another two or three generations of lost children." While
it is certainly possible that a "lost" child may find his way again,
this phrase suggests that, at least temporarily, you believe such
children have succumbed to the effects of racism.
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
David McDuffee
posts, but so far (7 hours later) it hasn't appeared on my server. It
HAS shown up in DejaNews, so it may be that it just went over some size
limit for non-binary posts on this server.
Since the problem may affect other servers, I thought I'd offer an
alternative way to read the followup:
http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=521289438
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
Kaiju
David McDuffee wrote:
>
> Kaiju wrote:
> > I said the racist system can manipulate naive and inexperienced
> > parents, and this is a real issue or factor. Nowhere did I say
> > these students do not have the ability to succeed or perform.
>
> And nowhere did I accuse you of saying that the students did not have
> the ability to succeed or perform.
You described this analysis as part of the "victimization brigade". The
implication being that I use the set of factors in play as an excuse for
failure to perform or succeed. That is patently false.
> The statement which you labeled
> "gratuitous bullshit" said simply that you "insist that it's the racist
> system rather than the students' own initiative which is most
> responsible for defining the outcomes."
That is gratuitous bullshit. The racist system is a significant factor in the
development of the students.
> Frankly, I was just going to
> ignore it, because being called a liar by you has about as much impact
> as being hit with a spitball, but then you just kept going round and
> round with Olan about how I couldn't produce any post in which you'd
> said anything resembling my characterization, so I finally decided to
> go back and see just what it was you thought I couldn't support.
You still haven't supported your gratuitous bullshit. You are still a liar.
> There
> is support for my characterization all over Deja News; these two posts
> are just two recent examples.
And you still haven't supported your characterization unless you believe
racism does not have a significant impact on the development of children. In
which case, you are still claiming racism is nothing more than a gnat bite on
the existence of Blacks.
> > [Your second example] says that racism had an impact, and yes, that
> > impact *can* have more of an effect than initiative. Do you expect
> > me to pretend otherwise?
>
> No, I don't. I also don't expect you to deny that you have made such
> statements, and accuse me of not accurately representing your position.
You have not accurately represented my position and I deny your interpretation
of my statements.
> Yet, this is what you said: "Nobody can produce any post written by me
> that contains assertions he associates with me. David can't produce
> them, you can't produce them, and I certainly cannot produce them.
> Those ideas and assertions do not exist, which is the point.
> David made them up out of whole cloth."
What you initially wrote was "All of which is basically what I've been saying,
while you and Kaiju and Art and the rest of the *victimization brigade* [my
emphasis] insist that it's the racist system rather than the students' own
initiative which is most responsible for defining the outcomes." That
dismissive statement infers that I have said racism is the excuse for
failure. THAT is a lie, and you still cannot produce anything that supports
that allegation unless you take discrete sentences out of context, along with
your obligatory commentary. Of course that is something you do on a routine
basis.
You want me to dismiss racism as the major factor. To do that I'd have to be
as selectively blind as you are.
> > It does not mean I did not eventually achieve my goals, but it took
> > longer and has caused temporary setbacks. It does NOT mean that I
> > have allowed myself to succumb to the effects of racism. That is
> > your own construct.
>
> No, that's your straw man.
Straw man???? Now my reality is a straw man? Amazing. Please do tell me
more of my life than I already know and live.
> The statement which you characterized as
> "gratuitous bullshit" said simply that you "insist that it's the racist
> system rather than the students' own initiative which is most
> responsible for defining the outcomes," with "outcomes" in this
> case being lower academic achievement and corresponding lower admission
> rates to competitive colleges and universities.
Well excuse me for not making the argument you wanted me to make. How silly
of me. David, if the racist system is not properly or adequately preparing
the students because of their race and lowered expectation of their ability to
learn, this is the primary, isolated fault of the students? You expect me to
believe this isn't gratuitous bullshit? I don't. I know of precious few
children who are able to fight adults under these types of conditions, and the
ones who are successful are exceptional by any measure. Children are
programmed from pre-school to do whatever the teachers tell them to do, to
feel what they are told to feel, to react as they are told to react. So why
are you placing the onus on the children as though teachers have no affect on
their subsequent behavior?
> Students who are not
> admitted to UCLA can still eventually achieve their goals; a spot at
> UC Riverside is not a one-way ticket to the homeless shelter. Yet,
> elsewhere in this thread you prophesy "Following what you suggest,
> we'll have another two or three generations of lost children."
Children who are not performing to their potential are still lost. Further,
people like you and the WPR around SCAA will be chortling about the loser
negroes because they are not attending Ivy League schools or a UCLA or UC
Berkeley in the same percentages as whites and Asians. You will also be
writing that the lowered expectation based on the inability to excel at the
highest levels is understandable and acceptable.
> While
> it is certainly possible that a "lost" child may find his way again,
> this phrase suggests that, at least temporarily, you believe such
> children have succumbed to the effects of racism.
Most of those lost children have succumbed to the effects of racism because
that is what they have been trained to do. Racism is a seemingly
insurmountable wall that they can't manage to deal with unless someone
intervenes on their behalf. Compound that condition with generations of
abuse, even the parents may not know the solutions so there is little chance
they can train their children. That is the crux of the matter whether or not
you like or accept it. So it leaves it to those of us who have prevailed to
identify and articulate the prevailing condition, to seek alternative
solutions, and to train and encourage others to pursue the path of most
resistance. You claim that is pursuing a cult of victimization. I say it is
developing a database and pattern to prevent these children and adults from
becoming victims, while fighting racism, itself. Racism exists, David. You
don't know what it is like to be on the receiving end, but that does not mean
it does not have the impact that Ed, Art and I have described.
You seem to expect me to excuse racists and racism, minimize, ignore and
overlook it. It won't happen, David. Racism is destructive, it wastes and
destroys potential and resources, it saps energy and initiative, and it
creates generation after generation of people who have not fulfilled their
potential. I don't like that. I really don't care if you seem to believe it
is some sort of character flaw to understand and articulate the effects racism
have on Blacks. It exists, it is there, and it doesn't seem to be abating.
On the contrary, it has just changed its form and continues on its destructive
way. It is my contention that no adequate, workable solution will be
established UNLESS the problem is first defined. You, on the other hand,
really don't want it discussed at all. Too bad.
David McDuffee
>
> David McDuffee wrote:
> > that you "insist that it's the racist system rather than the
> > students' own initiative which is most responsible for defining
> > the outcomes."
> That is gratuitous bullshit. The racist system is a significant
> factor in the development of the students.
Significant, yes, but is it more responsible for the end result than
the students' own initiative? Yes or no.
> What you initially wrote was "All of which is basically what I've
> been saying, while you and Kaiju and Art and the rest of the
> *victimization brigade* [my emphasis] insist that it's the racist
> system rather than the students' own initiative which is most
> responsible for defining the outcomes." That dismissive statement
> infers that I have said racism is the excuse for failure. THAT is
> a lie, and you still cannot produce anything that supports
> that allegation unless you take discrete sentences out of context,
> along with your obligatory commentary. Of course that is something
> you do on a routine basis.
I never said that you claimed racism was THE excuse for failure.
My allegation is that you regard racism as a bigger factor than
initiative in the ultimate success or failure of a student. If
that is inaccurate, then you must agree with me that the students'
own initiative plays a bigger role in the outcome than racism.
Both are obviously factors, so it simply comes down to: which factor
has the major impact. I say initiative. What do you say?
> You want me to dismiss racism as the major factor. To do that I'd
> have to be as selectively blind as you are.
Okay, so you DO regard racism as the MAJOR factor. Which is what I
said you believed. Which makes my "gratuitous bullshit" true, and
your backpedaling denials nothing more than attempted obfuscation.
[remainder of well-argued exploration of the real effects of racism,
much of which I actually agree with, deferred to a later time, as I
have appointments to keep this afternoon].
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
DarkStar
>
> Kaiju wrote:
> >
...
> > I use and understand "culture" according to the strict standard
> > definition. You, apparently, chose to define it according to
> > personal whim.
>
> I have consulted half a dozen dictionaries, and all of them provide
> definitions which are completely consistent with my use of the term.
>
> My Webster's Unabridged says:
>
> culture - the sum total of ways of living built up by a group of human
> beings and transmitted from one generation to another.
>
> and various other references, both hardcopy and online, seem pretty
> much in agreement with this definition. I don't see anything here
> which supports your assertion that saying an attitude is cultural
> implies that ALL members of the cultural group must subscribe to it,
> or even to support Ed's milder assertion that the majority of members
> must subscribe to it.
David, you are stone cold busted! Look at the use of group.
> Logically, if you couple your "culture=universality" definition with
> your oft-repeated "blacks are not a monolith" truism, the only possible
> conclusion is that there is no such thing as black culture, since there
> is no aspect of such a culture which "all blacks" would share.
Which, is something that you have stated. So how you can use "Black
culture," and then deny that many Blacks have shared the same
experiences, is telling.
...
> As far as I'm concerned, the inaccuracy and imprecision is all in your
> mind. I used the word correctly, but whenever I said "black culture"
> you instead heard "all blacks". Obviously, if "all blacks" is what I
> had intended to say, I would have done so.
As far as most literate English speaking people use the word "culture"
in the way Kaiju and I described, you are wrong.
...
> I made "my usage" quite clear way back at the beginning of this
> discussion, and it was obvious then that "all blacks" (or even "most
> blacks") was not what I was saying:
>
> Darkstar wrote:
> > > Through out the discussion, you have claimed the problem lies with
> > > Black culture, ie, the majority of Black culture.
>
> McDuffee replied:
> > There is always a range involved. Some students and their families
> > value education a great deal; some hardly at all. For any sizeable
> > group you'd care to define, you will find attitudes falling all along
> > the range. Each group will have a center of gravity (the mean), and
> > each group will have a variance. This is true for the value each
> > group places on education, and the effort it expends pursuing
> > education, as well as for GPA and scores on standardized tests.
>
> Reference: http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=420811057
Now, go back and search back how far I asked you to *DEFINE* your use of
"culture." In fact, you wrote this after being placed on the hotseat for
your improper use of the term "Black culture."
...
>
> > You claim we dwell in "victimology".
>
> I claim that your "racism is at the root of every problem faced by the
> black community" philosophy counterproductively displaces responsibility
> for many problems which racism is not at the root of.
Show the post where she makes the statement that "racism is at the root
of every problem..."
You made the same comment about me, and you have yet to providethe post
where I state it.
...
> In the original Washington Post article which kicked off these
> discussions (ref: http://www.shaker.org/news/washpost/washpost.htm ),
> the following facts were noted:
>
> "When asked who they are trying to please by working hard in school,
> white students are more likely to say their parents, while blacks
> tend to say their teachers."
Which was something that I pointed out earlier.
> "Likewise, when asked to name the lowest grade that they could bring
> home without angering their parents, whites usually name a higher
> grade than blacks."
>
> Doesn't this suggest that there are differences in the home environments
> which may have a bearing on achievement?
No. In fact I know of white parents who expect different things from
different children, based on what they believe each child is capable of
doing.
More later...
--
"Corporatized or idealized, hip-hop is the American Dream and the
African
American Nightmare rolled into one fat-ass blunt."
Charles Aaron Spin (Nov.1998)
James Ewing
She doesn't think of herself as a libertarian, she just likes to invoke
the rhetoric to try to impress people. She doesn't want to be seen as
portraying Blacks as victims in the classic modern liberal way, so she
gives us the Tough Gal talk. But her views on public policy give her
away in a New York minute. How can someone claim "Just get the hell out
of our way" and then turn around and insist that the government,
employers, and schools take race into account when reviewing
applications? Wouldn't you think someone who does not want Blacks to be
"treated as a social laboratory experiment" would fight like hell
against any notion of using race as a remedial tool?
> I,
> myself, lean very much towards a libertarian philosophy, and I would
> hate to think I have that in common with her. She's a good talker; I'll
> give her that...but other than that.....well, let's just say I wouldn't
> invite her to my house to meet the family.
>
> I read a post of hers recently where she says she hates liberals almost
> as much as she hate racists!
> And I'm sure she isn't a right wing
> conservative. A middle of the road conservative, maybe? A socialist?
> I don't know. What's your guess?
What she is, is, a complete fraud. She knows that liberals want the
nanny-state, and she's too embarrassed to admit she wants the same
thing. Yeah, she will tell you she hates liberals, but watch her
reaction to the liberals that post here. Art Clemons and Alice Holman
are state-of-the-art liberals, and Kaiju holds them in high regard. But
a person with conservative or libertarian leanings like you, me,
McDuffee--she hates them so much she can't help frothing at the mouth.
I do think she is important, though, as she is representative of so much
of the problem with the liberal intelligentsia. People like Kaiju are
teaching our kids and wreaking havoc with their futures. I absolutely
believe she is well-intentioned in terms of wanting the best for the
Black community; unfortunately, the pain of admitting to a failed
philosophy is simply not consonant with her egostistical and arrogant
personality. She prefers the cheap solace of pursuing creative
rationalizations for poor performance than admitting that the problems
will be solved only through internal self-development. Apparently she
knows nothing of history, of how other oppressed cultures such as Asians
or Jews succeeded. As McDuffee points out, even the worst of schools
doesn't prevent Black parents from staying together or Black youth
studying instead of watching TV.
Her problem is emblematic of the whole modern liberal mindset. They
know that history has discredited their agenda (just look at the way
out-of-wedlock rates, crime rates, and every other negative indicator
exploded in the Black community--and to a lesser degree, in the White
community--since The Great Society programs of the sixties). So what do
liberals do? They rename the package--they now like to be called
"progressives"--but the content remains the same. Their true position,
which honest liberals will admit to, is that The Great Society programs
didn't go far enough! Nice logic. Public policy turns out to be a
disastrous failure--let's do more of it. Kaiju's says she's a
"pragmatist"--a nice, empty phrase. Seems a pragmatist favors the same
kind of things--such as affirmative action--that liberals do.
>
> I'd ask her, but I don't think she would be very receptive to my
> questions at the moment.
>
> --
> olan
The sad part is, any Black kids reading her posts get the message that
it is society and not themselves that bears responsibility for their
destiny.
Kaiju
David McDuffee wrote:
>
> Kaiju wrote:
> >
> > David McDuffee wrote:
> > > The statement which you labeled "gratuitous bullshit" said simply
> > > that you "insist that it's the racist system rather than the
> > > students' own initiative which is most responsible for defining
> > > the outcomes."
>
> > That is gratuitous bullshit. The racist system is a significant
> > factor in the development of the students.
>
> Significant, yes, but is it more responsible for the end result than
> the students' own initiative? Yes or no.
It is not a "yes or no" situation, and a responsible, cognizant person would
not respond with either a yes or no. I just wrote 100 lines explaining what
effects racism has on the development of children, and you immediately go back
to ground zero.
> > What you initially wrote was "All of which is basically what I've
> > been saying, while you and Kaiju and Art and the rest of the
> > *victimization brigade* [my emphasis] insist that it's the racist
> > system rather than the students' own initiative which is most
> > responsible for defining the outcomes." That dismissive statement
> > infers that I have said racism is the excuse for failure. THAT is
> > a lie, and you still cannot produce anything that supports
> > that allegation unless you take discrete sentences out of context,
> > along with your obligatory commentary. Of course that is something
> > you do on a routine basis.
>
> I never said that you claimed racism was THE excuse for failure.
You insinuated that I claim it is any excuse for failure, when I have not
accepted failure at all. I have repeatedly stated that to address the
problems and find solutions, the root causes must be explored and
articulated. How you continuously miss that point is beyond me.
> My allegation is that you regard racism as a bigger factor than
> initiative in the ultimate success or failure of a student.
You don't see it. You use trigger words, words that engender certain
reactions in those who can't think beyond the simplistic.
> If
> that is inaccurate, then you must agree with me that the students'
> own initiative plays a bigger role in the outcome than racism.
No, it is inaccurate, and I do not agree with you. To agree with you I'd have
to isolate and minimize the causal effects of racism. I do not believe the
effects of racism can be isolated at all. No more than I can isolate the
lingering effects the Holocaust experience has had on subsequent generations
of Jews who were subjected to that horror. Or have you forgotten I made that
analogy?
> Both are obviously factors, so it simply comes down to: which factor
> has the major impact. I say initiative. What do you say?
Racism is a major factor. Anyone who succeeds at any level must have some
initiative. Even a C- student has initiative to some degree. Racism may
encourage or squash initiative, depending upon the individual. Would that C-
student, with the same degree of initiative, be a B+ student without years'
worth of barriers in the way? You want me to answer a "chicken or the egg"
question with a yes or no. You still want me to blame the student and ignore
the effects of racism. It doesn't work that way. Humans don't work that
way. The only way I could point to a lack of initiative as being the major
factor is if the student literally does not try at all, or you can provide a
situation where racism absolutely was never a factor. Granted there are
students who lack any initiative, but that doesn't explain the majority of low
achievers among Black students. My concern is with the majority, the ones who
go to school, turn in homework, study, stay out of trouble...and still don't
perform to potential. Your approach does not address the totality of
conditions and factors, therefore it is not particularly useful.
It would be rather laughable if you went to an urban kid who comes from a
family where nobody has graduated high school no less attended college, the
family has difficulty surviving, the parents and grandparents are
psychologically beat down...and you talk to them the way you suggest here.
You have not addressed their full situation, therefore they will not be able
to process your message about "All you need is initiative". It would have as
much impact as did Nancy Reagan's "Say No To Drugs" message. The kids need
more tools to work with than that.
> > You want me to dismiss racism as the major factor. To do that I'd
> > have to be as selectively blind as you are.
>
> Okay, so you DO regard racism as the MAJOR factor. Which is what I
> said you believed. Which makes my "gratuitous bullshit" true, and
> your backpedaling denials nothing more than attempted obfuscation.
First it was a straw man, and now backpedaling. David, I have said the same
thing consistently for years. I have not backpedaled on anything. I have
explained my position in various forms only in effort to provide you some
measure of comprehension....evidently a futile effort. I have, however,
established that you misrepresented me, and you continue to do so. You are
attempting to restate my position to support your theory, a theory I clearly
reject.
James Ewing
> I do not believe the
> effects of racism can be isolated at all. No more than I can isolate the
> lingering effects the Holocaust experience has had on subsequent generations
> of Jews who were subjected to that horror. Or have you forgotten I made that
> analogy?
I really, really don't think you want to make this analogy. Tell us,
what are the average SAT scores for Jews? What are the out-of-wedlock
rates in the Jewish community? What is the per-capita income for Jews?
Net Worth? Crime rates in the Jewish community?
Here is a lesson that should hit you over the head like the proverbial
ten-ton hammer. That even attempts at genocide just a few decades ago
cannot stop a culture that is determined to overcome and succeed. The
Holocaust certainly has impacted Jewish culture, but not in the ways you
would like it to. The history of Jews is just a wee bit inconvenient to
your worldview vis a vis Black culture.
You won't get it though, now will you?
DarkStar
>
> Kaiju wrote:
> > You'd better believe I place the blame first on the teachers rather
> > than the students or parents. After all, the studies previously cited
> > by Ed demonstrate that most Black parents, single or otherwise, place
> > the highest priority on education.
>
> No. That's always the conclusion Ed reaches from the studies he cites,
> but the evidence is usually too flimsy to support such a conclusion.
> For example, he notes a study in which dropout rates and attendance
> rates are equivalent for black and white students, and trumpets that
> the inescapable conclusion is that both groups place equal priority on
> education. While that might be true if an education could be obtained
> just by showing up, it ignores the issues I raised regarding study time
> versus time spent watching TV, for example.
You have already admitted that study time issue is flawed, in that it
doesn't take into account the rigor of academic program the students are
in. Or, shall I post what you wrote?
Next, that same statistic has been used since the early 70s, that I know
of, to say that Blacks don't value education. Now, it's not good enough.
Now, why might that be? Does it have anything to do with your wish to
always show the Black community in a negative light?
> Or Ed will point out that support for vouchers is higher in the black
> community than elsewhere, and conclude that therefore education is a
> higher priority. My own conclusion would be that paying for education
> may be more of a concern, but that still doesn't quantify how important
> education itself is.
That's funny. One of people who put up a million dollars to seed the
Children's Scholarship Fund, pointed out something interesting. The
voucher program only pays for part of the tuition. The *POOR* parents
have to come up with the rest of the money. According to his
information, that means millions of dollars. And when he extrapolated
the dollar amount over the expect life of the program for children
currently taking part, it accounts for *BILLIONS*.
Now, every conservative commentator who has attacked the Black
community, has stated this shows there is a desire for education in the
Black community.
In fact, one of the polls that I point out, one that you always ignore,
was the USA Today poll that showed Black parents have the same ideas and
desires for education as do white parents. In fact, there is a nugget in
there for you, but for you to accept that nugget, means that you have to
accept all of the poll. And of course, with your goal to place the Black
community in a constant negative light, you could never do it.
Also, you never address the fact that if education was not as important
to the Black community, the continued existance of HBCUs would not be
what it is.
DarkStar
...
>
> "When asked who they are trying to please by working hard in school,
> white students are more likely to say their parents, while blacks
> tend to say their teachers."
>
> "Likewise, when asked to name the lowest grade that they could bring
> home without angering their parents, whites usually name a higher
> grade than blacks."
>
> Doesn't this suggest that there are differences in the home environments
> which may have a bearing on achievement?
Now, back to this one.
In my line of work, I've found that all people are assumed to have
certain levels of capability. If they prove capable, they are given more
until they reach the bounds of their limits. If not capable, they are
given less until they reach their level of capability, or they are
fired.
The same seems to happen in families, concerning the capabilities of
children in the family. Unless a child has development problems, to me,
one bar must be set for all. However, that isn't the same for all
families. In fact, this differing level of expectations for children
within a family, is not race specific. So, the question is, are the
expectations low to begin with, or did they lower because of prior
underachievement?
Of course, that was asked of you before, and it was not addressed.
DarkStar
>
> In article <37CF3E81...@NOSPAM.ecn.com>,
> Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
...
> Can you supply examples of my stereotyping?
>
Okay...
...
> And I'd be happy to get out of your way with regards to the problems
> facing black Americans. I'd love for you to begin to solve your own
> problems and quit blaming everyone and everything else.
All in one post.
Ladies and gentlemen, Robert Chapman is outted.
DarkStar
>
> DarkStar wrote:
>
> > And, what David will never admit, is that I've posted that I don't
> > care what the race of the teacher is, if they are not up to
> > standards, toss them.
>
> Why on earth would you think I would be reluctant to admit that your
> standards for a good teacher are independent of race?
Because you deny everything I post that goes against your idea that
Blacks don't value education, Blacks have low expectations, Blacks don't
care about education, and every other negative variation of Blacks and
education.
> Whatever my
> other quarrels with you, I don't think you're one of those racists
> who thinks only black teachers can reach black kids, or that bad
> teachers should get a pass if they're black.
>
> --
> David McDuffee
> mcdu...@best.com
--
DarkStar
>
> In article <37d25ae5...@news.flash.net>,
> dark...@flash.net wrote:
> > On Thu, 02 Sep 1999 23:22:36 -0700, David McDuffee <mcdu...@best.com>
> > put forth:
> >
> > >Kaiju wrote:
> > >>
> > >> David McDuffee wrote:
> > >> >
> other
> > >> > of food that a black mother puts on the table for her black
> > >> > children is "black culture", so too is the qualitative and
> > >> > quantitative nourishment that black peers provide for their black
> > >> > classmates in black classes and black neighborhoods.
> > >
> > >> So you're saying this is "all blacks behave like this because they
> are
> > >> black?" Oy.
> > >
> > >It's been apparent to me for some time that those who were the most
> understanding
> > >"culture" differently than the sense in which I was using it.
> >
> > "culture." Kaiju and I use the word correctly. You, however, do not.
> >
> > In fact, I challenged your *NON-STANDARD* use of the word "culture"
> > from the very start.
> >
> > [ Hey Olan! If you can stop tossing McDuffee's salad for a minute or
> > two, and gargle as well, defend McDuffee's improper use of the word
> > "culture"! ]
>
> Can you provide some examples of black behaviors that are culturally
> black? You know, like being great at math, or excelling at the retail
> trades...things like that.
You know, the current "model minority" myth states that Asians are
culturally predisposed towards math. Now, that's interesting given the
literary history of "Asians," as a group.
It's interesting that whites aren't given some "behaviors" that are
culturally white, when whites have done some good things in the arts and
in sciences. And the same is true for Blacks.
Interesting...
You just can't stand being "shown up" by a Black person, can you?
olan
DarkStar <dark...@flash.net> wrote:
> olan wrote:
> >
> > In article <37CF3E81...@NOSPAM.ecn.com>,
> > Kaiju <ka...@NOSPAM.ecn.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> > Can you supply examples of my stereotyping?
> >
>
> Okay...
>
> ...
>
> > And I'd be happy to get out of your way with regards to the problems
> > facing black Americans. I'd love for you to begin to solve your own
> > problems and quit blaming everyone and everything else.
>
> All in one post.
>
> Ladies and gentlemen, Robert Chapman is outted.
Interesting that you choose to answer questions I ask of Kaiju,yet you
pick and choose which questions to anwswer I ask of you.
It seems to me that Kaiju feels the battle to eliminate white racism
takes precedence over the effort for self development for the underclass
of the black community. My statement above should not be taken at all
as an indictment of the entire black community as feeling the same as
I interpret Kaiju's feelings to be.
> --
> "Corporatized or idealized, hip-hop is the American Dream and the
> African
> American Nightmare rolled into one fat-ass blunt."
> Charles Aaron Spin (Nov.1998)
> Ed Brown - dark...@flash.com
> http://www.charm.net/~darkstar
>
--
olan
DarkStar <dark...@flash.net> wrote:
"
> > > [ Hey Olan! If you can stop tossing McDuffee's salad for a minute
or
> > > two, and gargle as well, defend McDuffee's improper use of the
word
> > > "culture"! ]
> >
> > Can you provide some examples of black behaviors that are culturally
> > black? You know, like being great at math, or excelling at the
retail
> > trades...things like that.
>
> You know, the current "model minority" myth states that Asians are
> culturally predisposed towards math. Now, that's interesting given the
> literary history of "Asians," as a group.
>
> It's interesting that whites aren't given some "behaviors" that are
> culturally white, when whites have done some good things in the arts
and
> in sciences. And the same is true for Blacks.
>
> Interesting...
>
> You just can't stand being "shown up" by a Black person, can you?
Cute. Now please post something that might be thought of as representing
culturally black behavior, or beliefs, or skills, or art.
Kaiju
David McDuffee wrote:
>
> Kaiju wrote:
> > > > > Black culture is the environment that black folk create for
> > > > > other black folk. Plain and simple.
> > >
> > > > So you're saying this is "all blacks behave like this because
> > > > they are black?" Oy.
> > >
> > > It's been apparent to me for some time that those who were the
> > > most emotional
> >
> > Emotional? This is absurd, David. You made an illogical assertion.
> > I challenged your illogical statement using logic...not emotion.
>
> There is no logic whatsoever in your statement, Kaiju. You made a
> statement which had no relation at all to what I had said, and implied
> that you were simply rephrasing my words. And "Oy" is an expression
> of emotion, not a synonym for Q.E.D.
"Oy" is an expression of mild dismay or disbelief. To describe it as an
emotional response is stretching it. As for your statement, I took it to its
logical conclusion. Of course you haven't included the portion of your
statements that actually illuminated the fact that you believe isolated
behavior in set situations define the behavior of the majority or entire
group. But that's okay. The post is still there for review.
> > > in their disagreement with me on this topic were understanding
> > > "culture" differently than the sense in which I was using it.
> >
> > I use and understand "culture" according to the strict standard
> > definition. You, apparently, chose to define it according to
> > personal whim.
>
> I have consulted half a dozen dictionaries, and all of them provide
> definitions which are completely consistent with my use of the term.
You evidently still don't understand what you're reading. More likely you are
manipulating the definition in your mind so you'll think you're using it
correctly. You are not.
> My Webster's Unabridged says:
>
> culture - the sum total of ways of living built up by a group of human
> beings and transmitted from one generation to another.
>
> and various other references, both hardcopy and online, seem pretty
> much in agreement with this definition. I don't see anything here
> which supports your assertion that saying an attitude is cultural
> implies that ALL members of the cultural group must subscribe to it,
> or even to support Ed's milder assertion that the majority of members
> must subscribe to it.
David, you used a few examples and attempted to prove the behaviors of the
people in those discrete environments define the entire group, or even Black
culture. That is absurd. I gave you reasons why it is an unworkable
assertion on your part. I see those examples and my exposition didn't make
your editorial cut, either.
> Logically, if you couple your "culture=universality" definition with
> your oft-repeated "blacks are not a monolith" truism, the only possible
> conclusion is that there is no such thing as black culture, since there
> is no aspect of such a culture which "all blacks" would share.
There are elements of behavior that Blacks do share. Your examples aren't
among them. I'd go so far to say that if you had changed the color and
behavior of the students and attempted to apply those behaviors to an entire,
global group, I'd still say you were misusing the term "culture".
> > > In retrospect, it was a poorly chosen word, because it tended to
> > > sidetrack rather than clarify the discussion.
>
> > It is poorly chosen because it is inaccurate and imprecise. Not
> > because it serves to sidetrack or distract from the discussion.
>
> As far as I'm concerned, the inaccuracy and imprecision is all in your
> mind. I used the word correctly, but whenever I said "black culture"
> you instead heard "all blacks". Obviously, if "all blacks" is what I
> had intended to say, I would have done so. I imagine it was helpful to
> you to recast the ideas in this way because virtually any phrase which
> begins "all blacks" can prima facie be presumed to be false, so no
> thought needs to be expended on a rebuttal. Such dishonesty merely
> sidesteps rather than confronting the issue. As I've said before, when
> people need to distort my position before addressing it, I conclude that
> they find it too difficult to grapple with as originally stated.
David, your examples are not culturally based no matter how you phrase it.
You misused the term/concept. I've told you why. Using your application of
the term, the only conclusion the reader could have is that you were referring
to all, or even most Blacks, and any Black who practices the tenets and mores
of the culture will have the characteristics as you define them. You'd still
be incorrect.
> Reference: http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=420811057
>
> > > I would classify jazz as "black culture", though it's far from being
> > > a universal preference among black folk, and may even be a more
> > > common preference among white folk.
>
> > Jazz was derived from Black culture. You wouldn't recognize this if
> > you don't understand the meaning of the term "culture".
>
> Now you place jazz outside of black culture, as something "derived" from
> it rather than being a part of it. This strikes me as a bizarre,
> idiosyncratic understanding of the term "culture", so I'd really be
> interested in seeing what you're using as your working definition.
You don't have a strong background in musicology, I gather.
> What you're saying seems to contradict the "sum total" wording found in
> Websters, and more specifically contradicts the definition provided at
No. You don't understand what is included in "sum total". The behavior of
students in Shaker Heights does not define Black culture, nor does the Black
culture define what happens in Shaker Heights. That you associate certain
behaviors or traits with Blacks does not mean it is actually a part of the
culture.
> http://www.iversonsoftware.com/sociology/c.html#culture
>
> culture - That complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art,
> morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits
> acquired by man as a member of society.
And what happens at a high school in Shaker Heights is part of the complex
whole, how? All you did was define the culture within that high school, not
within the Black culture.
> > > I'm not sure if "black environments" will be any better, but I'm
> > > going to try using that term instead, unless you have a better
> > > suggestion.
>
> > My suggestion is that you drop this line of <non>reasoning,
> > completely.
>
> I'll drop it in a minute, the moment I'm convinced that it's untrue
> as opposed to being merely misunderstood.
Well, that will never happen. I gave you a concise explanation in my previous
post why you are incorrect, and you chose to ignore it.
> > > > > When black academic achievement is supported by black students
> > > > > in a Marva Collins classroom, that's black culture. When black
> > > > > academic achievement is attacked by black students at Frank W.
> > > > > Ballou High in Washington D.C., that too is black culture.
>
> > > If I substitute "a black environment" for "black culture" in this
> > > paragraph, would you still disagree with the statement?
>
> > No, I wouldn't. I wouldn't for the same reasons stated previously.
> > Your observation is still based upon a stereotype.
>
> Which is the stereotype? Support of academic achievement, or attacks
> on academic achievement?
You extrapolated what happens in a few carefully selected places to an entire
group, David. Okay, you'll object that it's not the entire group, but only
the majority. You are still stereotyping based upon faulty logic an imprecise
usage of sociological terminology. How many different times and ways do I
have to say this before it begins to sink in, David?
Kaiju
David McDuffee wrote:
>
> Kaiju wrote:
> > I provided evidence last year where the Trenton, N.J. school district
> > routinely places Black students in Special Education, although their
> > standardized test scores are the same as the majority of white
> > students. The white students, on the contrary, were not only placed
> > in mainstream courses, they were placed in AP classes so they would
> > not be in classes with Black students. It goes without saying very
> > few of the Black students, no matter their requisite level of
> > achievement, were allowed access to the AP classes.
>
> Yeah, whatever happened with that? The way you described it back in
> January, '98, it seemed like a slam dunk for a DOJ civil rights case.
It should have been a slam dunk for some sort of case if one doesn't take into
consideration the human cost that is involved in developing such a case. But
I forget. You live in that perfect world that is unknown to most humans.
> All the white students were in college prep and AP, and "normal" classes
> had been eliminated, leaving everyone who wasn't in college prep or AP
> classes (mostly blacks, Hispanics, and Cambodians) stranded in Special
> Education classes with emotionally disturbed classmates. It's been over
> a year and a half now, but I've never heard anything more on the news,
> I don't see anything on the DOJ website, and even this latest word from
> you just says "there was a problem last year". Problem resolved?
No, the problem still exists. The Board of Education members and other top
administrators made very real threats to fire the counselors and teachers who
initially made the complaints. In fact, a few of them were demoted on the
spot. Given the relatively small salary these people already earned, they
couldn't afford to pursue the case. They decided to be keep quiet and remain
employed. Unfortunately, this is often the case in civil rights complaints.
Unless the complainant has nothing to lose, (clearly not the case in New
Jersey), nothing happens and the status quo remains intact.
> Reference: http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=319287919
>
> > This is yet more of your rationalization, David. "Blacks complain
> > about nothing. We all are subject to the same injustice, abuse,
> > maltreatment. This really isn't a case of racism." Yarite. What
> > do you need, David? Wide-scale lynching to establish racism is
> > affecting these students?
>
> > > [I]t's not limited to black students.
> >
> > It occurs with greater frequency among Black students, David. This
> > is a prevalent problem affecting Black students, necessarily
> > affecting their later progress. This persistent problem is one that
> > Ed, Art and I address and for which we seek solutions.
>
> My position is this:
>
> Racism is still a problem, and it affects black children more than
> it affects other children. I don't believe racist attitudes are as
> widely embraced as you seem to think; indeed, regardless of what their
> private beliefs might be, most people are at least giving public lip
> service to the idea of equal opportunity.
Lip service and $2.25 will buy you a cup of Starbucks. Maybe.
> And I believe that the system
> offers ways of counteracting and eliminating racism-based injustice,
> abuse, and maltreatment, which are not available for run-of-the-mill
> injustice, abuse, and maltreatment.
I'd be satisfied if the system offered means of educating the students
equally. 40 odd years after Brown v. Board of Education, and things are only
a half-step better than they used to be.
> On balance, therefore, while I
> acknowledge that the playing field remains tilted slightly to the
> detriment of blacks, the remaining bias cannot fully (or even largely)
> explain the remaining differences in performance. Finally, I believe
> the primary responsibility for the next step lies within the black
> community itself.
By all means ignore and minimize the effects of racism and let those
malfeasant Blacks solve all of the problems in isolation. Makes it all neat
and easy, eh? By all means there are some things that will only be
accomplished within the Black community, but that does not obviate or absolve
the necessary improvements in an already racist, unbalanced system. All the
internal work imaginable is not going to improve conditions where "new" books
are those used books shipped in from suburban schools (assuming there are
enough books and classroom materials to work with at all), or AP classes are
not available, where Black students are shunted off to work alone while
Hispanic students are receiving premium bilingual education in K-6, where
"college prep" classes would be remedial training classes in a suburban
school. And so forth.
I think it is telling when the local community college classes are filled with
Black high school students who sincerely want a proper education...and they
and their parents have realized it isn't possible at their high schools. At
the schools in the LACCD, the adult students are actually complaining that
they can't enroll in some core classes because those classes are full of high
schoolers.
> > You claim we dwell in "victimology".
>
> I claim that your "racism is at the root of every problem faced by the
> black community" philosophy counterproductively displaces responsibility
> for many problems which racism is not at the root of.
Then you still haven't grasped what I have been saying all these years.
Perhaps you'd be better served by not trying to tell others what I believe.
You don't know, and for the most part your interpretations are reflective of
your own biases.
> > Most students need to be told they can succeed so that they reach
> > their potential. White and Asian students receive that outside
> > affirmation on a routine basis. Black and Hispanic students do not.
> > That is the issue.
>
> Shouldn't PARENTS be the primary source of that affirmation?
In a perfect world, they would be. In the real, imperfect world, the children
are conditioned by external sources. Then there is that little factor of
pressure to be the ultimate success that often has an opposite effect on the
students. Or did you ever finish reading that article in Atlantic Monthly?
It must be comforting to live in that either/or world of yours, David.
> In the original Washington Post article which kicked off these
> discussions (ref: http://www.shaker.org/news/washpost/washpost.htm ),
> the following facts were noted:
>
> "When asked who they are trying to please by working hard in school,
> white students are more likely to say their parents, while blacks
> tend to say their teachers."
>
> "Likewise, when asked to name the lowest grade that they could bring
> home without angering their parents, whites usually name a higher
> grade than blacks."
>
> Doesn't this suggest that there are differences in the home environments
> which may have a bearing on achievement?
Since you are the expert on culture, doesn't this suggest that with the
relatively shallow history of academic freedom among most Blacks would cause
Blacks to look outside for role models? Especially if their parents aren't
highly educated and are inexperienced in how the system operates?
> > For most students, they need someone to initially tell them they are
> > Somebody.
>
> Mom and Dad?
Mom and Dad aren't always enough, particularly when the message out in the
world is the opposite.
> > Marva Collins' students may recite self-affirming statements to
> > keep them striving and moving forward, but those statements and the
> > prevailing attitude is provided first by Collins, herself.
>
> Not Mom and Dad? What's wrong with this picture?
Ahem. Society is wrong with this picture.
> > You, on the other hand, "understand why teachers have low expectations
> > of Black students".
>
> Yes. I believe most teachers with low expectations are kindhearted
> liberals who don't want to threaten what they see as the fragile self
> esteem of black students by actually challenging them to perform tasks
> which may be beyond their ability.
Yarite. And the kindly conservatives who just have low expectations are what?
> Having observed lower achievement
> for so long, they offer less challenging material in the hope that a
> string of unbroken successes will support self esteem to the point
> where more challenging material may be introduced.
And the conservatives simply cut to the chase and don't even attempt to teach
them at all.
> Such an approach
> frequently fails, because the only success that raises self esteem is
> success in the face of a true challenge.
This is ridiculous. Rhetoric disguised as social and academic policy. I know
that success breeds success. That I admit. How are these kids going to get
that initial success if the system is set to prevent it? So a Black kid is
successful at his neighborhood high school, just to find out that those grades
are meaningless because his classes didn't prepare him to attain high scores
on the SAT or to enter a good university?
> The solution for such teachers is often just to educate them.
No kidding. I can't wait for that to happen. Of course books, safe
facilities, full range of courses, and real college preparation might not be a
bad start.
> > If a teacher has already deigned a certain category of children to
> > be essentially uneducable, they do not belong in the profession.
>
> Well, yeah, but there's a pretty big gulf between "low expectations"
> and considering a class of kids uneducable, wouldn't you say?
Nope. It looks the same to me.
> > You'd better believe I place the blame first on the teachers rather
> > than the students or parents. After all, the studies previously cited
> > by Ed demonstrate that most Black parents, single or otherwise, place
> > the highest priority on education.
>
> No. That's always the conclusion Ed reaches from the studies he cites,
> but the evidence is usually too flimsy to support such a conclusion.
David, the study reported in the recent Newsweek said the same thing.
> For example, he notes a study in which dropout rates and attendance
> rates are equivalent for black and white students, and trumpets that
> the inescapable conclusion is that both groups place equal priority on
> education. While that might be true if an education could be obtained
> just by showing up, it ignores the issues I raised regarding study time
> versus time spent watching TV, for example.
Perhaps so, assuming the parents are home when the children are watching tv.
Very likely they are out struggling to obtain sufficient income to maintain
housing, pay bills and to buy food. Ooops. I forgot. I'm not supposed to
mention reality here.
> > Considering that up to this generation, most parents have not learned
> > how to provide the best educational opportunities for their children,
> > the onus is still on the teachers.
>
> I agree with the first part of your statement, but I would finish up
> with "the onus is therefore on the parents to acquire the skills they
> need, because their own children are depending on them."
Ah...that perfect world of David's again. Would that all could live there.
Then teachers wouldn't have the responsibility to do anything at all,
including educate their charges. Fourth graders would just go to the library
and teach themselves, right?
> > (I participate in a series of seminars designed to teach parents how
> > to support their children through the current educational system.
> > That is how seriously the "Black Culture" takes the problem.)
>
> If I didn't know better, I could swear you're using "black culture"
> the same way I've been using it all along.
If you knew better you'd realize I was being sarcastic.
> I participate in similar seminars in my area. The problem is that the
> parents who are willing, and able, to invest time in such activities,
> are frequently not the parents who most need them.
Then it goes back to the teachers. Look, if the classes were taught equally
across the board, most of the problems would abate, naturally. But they
aren't, and we have the mess we have. So, community churches establish
tutoring and training, recreation centers have tutoring and training,
community based non-profit organizations provide tutoring, kids attend high
school all day and community college at night...all to supplement what the
teachers aren't doing at the schools.
Now what you and your buddies absolutely don't want to acknowledge is that
Blacks have only had a generation or so to work at this. You expect these
problems to disappear automatically within 30 years' time, although the
problems were 400 years in the making. That compounded by the Great Mistake
called the Great Society. Oh, sure that's going to happen overnight.
> > The parents lose the battle when their pumped up children are
> > torn down by the teachers' failures despite being charged with the
> > responsibility of bringing the best out of all students.
>
> I don't favor keeping toxic teachers on the payroll.
Big deal. Toxic teachers *are* on the payroll, the system is set up to keep
them there, and most are sent off to the urban schools because the more
powerful suburban parents won't tolerate them. Further, the schools,
themselves, are still inadequate. Why don't you want to address this, David?
> Given society's
> willingness to compensate public school teachers, however, I don't
> see any alternative to tolerating a lot of mediocre ones. Recognizing
> this reality, wise parents and soon-to-be-wise students will take more
> responsibility for their own educations -- just as Marva Collins
> recommends.
Again with this letting the ones who are charged with the responsibility off
the hook. What's with you and this putting the onus on the targets of abuse?
Do you also say that it is the fault of a raped woman that she is raped? No
need to answer. The latter was a rhetorical question.
olan
DarkStar <dark...@flash.net> wrote:
> David McDuffee wrote:
> >
> > DarkStar wrote:
> >
> > > And, what David will never admit, is that I've posted that I don't
> > > care what the race of the teacher is, if they are not up to
> > > standards, toss them.
> >
> > Why on earth would you think I would be reluctant to admit that your
> > standards for a good teacher are independent of race?
>
> Because you deny everything I post that goes against your idea that
> Blacks don't value education, Blacks have low expectations, Blacks
don't
> care about education, and every other negative variation of Blacks and
> education.
It's obvious that most parents, when asked if they value education, and
do they expect their children to do their very best work, will likely
answer that they do. That does not mean that the parent is actually
doing the things that would validate their "yes" answer to valuing
education.
I think it is a mistake to make the leap that because some particular
set of parents say yes to valuing education, yet their children continue
to lag behind other children academically, that one can rule out that
their might be a problem with what is actually taking place in the homes
of such children. If a parent says they expect the best of their child,
but rarely reads to the child, or uses correct grammar, or begins early
on teaching the child basic concepts, I'd say that parent doesn't
particularly value the education of the child. But you can bet the
house,
when asked on some survey if the do, they will answer yes.
> > Whatever my
> > other quarrels with you, I don't think you're one of those racists
> > who thinks only black teachers can reach black kids, or that bad
> > teachers should get a pass if they're black.
> >
> > --
> > David McDuffee
> > mcdu...@best.com
>
> --
> "Corporatized or idealized, hip-hop is the American Dream and the
> African
> American Nightmare rolled into one fat-ass blunt."
> Charles Aaron Spin (Nov.1998)
> Ed Brown - dark...@flash.com
> http://www.charm.net/~darkstar
>
--
olan
DarkStar <dark...@flash.net> wrote:
> > Can you provide some examples of black behaviors that are culturally
> > black? You know, like being great at math, or excelling at the
retail
> > trades...things like that.
>
> You know, the current "model minority" myth states that Asians are
> culturally predisposed towards math. Now, that's interesting given the
> literary history of "Asians," as a group.
>
> It's interesting that whites aren't given some "behaviors" that are
> culturally white, when whites have done some good things in the arts
and
> in sciences. And the same is true for Blacks.
>
> Interesting...
>
>
You just can't stand being "shown up" by a Black person, can you?
How do you define culture? Are there, IYO, customary beliefs or
shared attitudes that you consider part of black culture? Or Asian
culture? Or southern culture?
I am truly trying to figure out how you see David as misusing the
concept of culture...that's all.
olan
I understand your point, Kaiju, concerning some parent's inability to
properly perform the necessary tasks of beginning the education
process of their children at home. And I applaud your efforts to
rectify those situations. I had a teacher who deals with low income
black students say just such an effort should be developed.
I won't go into the "root causes" or "Great Society" portions of your
response to David, but I do want to say I think your heart is in the
right place by spending the time you do trying to help such families.
David McDuffee
>
> David McDuffee wrote:
> >
> > simply that you "insist that it's the racist system rather than the
> > students' own initiative which is most responsible for defining the
> > outcomes," with "outcomes" in this case being lower academic
> > achievement and corresponding lower admission rates to competitive
> > colleges and universities.
> students because of their race and lowered expectation of their
> ability to learn, this is the primary, isolated fault of the
> students?
If the students "shut down" (to use your excuse) in the face of lowered
expectations, that is the primary, isolated fault of the students and
their parents.
If they instead (as students in Inglewood are doing) take the initiative
to push for higher expectations, they significantly improve their
chances of achieving their potential.
> I know of precious few children who are able to fight adults under
> these types of conditions, and the ones who are successful are
> exceptional by any measure. Children are programmed from pre-school
> to do whatever the teachers tell them to do, to feel what they are
> told to feel, to react as they are told to react. So why are you
> placing the onus on the children as though teachers have no affect on
> their subsequent behavior?
Children who "shut down" (to use your excuse) are not doing what the
teacher tells them to do, feeling what they are told to feel, or
reacting as they are told to react. They are not mindless automatons,
they are free-willed individuals, who are choosing a self-destructive
way of expressing their independence. The onus for THEIR behavior is
on them in any case; I am simply advocating that they be encouraged to
react in ways which will move them closer to their goals rather than
drifting in some other direction.
> > Students who are not admitted to UCLA can still eventually achieve
> > their goals; a spot at UC Riverside is not a one-way ticket to the
> > homeless shelter. Yet, elsewhere in this thread you prophesy
> > "Following what you suggest, we'll have another two or three
> > generations of lost children."
> Children who are not performing to their potential are still lost.
> Further, people like you and the WPR around SCAA will be chortling
> about the loser negroes because they are not attending Ivy League
> schools or a UCLA or UC Berkeley in the same percentages as whites
> and Asians.
People like me and the white power rangers? Now you've really snapped.
I do not "chortle" at the undeniable fact that black students are not
attending UCLA or UCB at the same rate as white or Asian students; I
acknowledge the fact with the same sighs you do. I regard it as a
temporary condition, which I fully expect will be corrected in my
lifetime, as more people come to realize that simply by changing
attitudes and behaviors, they can open doors.
In contrast, the chortling white power rangers are convinced that the
current percentages are a permanent condition, reflecting the innate
intellectual deficits of black people. The idea that I subscribe to
such a repugnant and bankrupt philosophy is so incredible that I don't
believe you even honestly entertain it.
> You will also be writing that the lowered expectation based on the
> inability to excel at the highest levels is understandable and
> acceptable.
Inability, eh? As long as you're entertaining yourself by putting words
in my mouth, why not fantasize about how I'll be burning churches and
organizing lynch mobs?
It's this need you have to demonize which identifies your posts as
"emotional" rather than "logical".
> > While it is certainly possible that a "lost" child may find his
> > way again, this phrase suggests that, at least temporarily, you
> > believe such children have succumbed to the effects of racism.
> Most of those lost children have succumbed to the effects of racism
> because that is what they have been trained to do.
And folks like you, who see a racist behind every rock, are a major
component of such training.
> Racism is a seemingly insurmountable wall that they can't manage to
> deal with unless someone intervenes on their behalf.
Your view that racism is ubiquitous, nefarious, and working powerfully
behind the scenes even when you can't see it no doubt contributes to the
feeling that it is "an insurmountable wall".
I used to think it didn't matter much if people saw racism where there
was no racism. I figured it wouldn't inconvenience white folk too
terribly to experience a little "prejudice" once in a while, but I've
come to realize that it hurts black people when racism is erroneously
felt to be "the prevailing condition". In my opinion, this is
especially true when it comes to school children. For all the good
you do in mentoring black children, on this point I think your influence
is probably detrimental, and I'll tell you why.
There was an article in L.A.'s "Daily News" this past Sunday, about how
the schools are failing our kids.
- Diana Suranyi, 17, who was interviewed by the Daily News in 1988,
- said she believes she'll be well prepared for college despite
- having had to fight some teachers who discouraged her from taking
- tougher academic courses.
- "Some of my teachers have said you're not smart enough. It does put
- your self-esteem down," said Suranyi, a senior at Chatsworth High
- School who hopes to study premedicine at the University of California,
- Santa Barbara, or at Berkeley.
- Diana's mother, Susan, said her daughter's success is her own.
- "Her education was average. I don't think that she got anything
- special," said Suranyi, a school nurse. "If you're going to succeed
- in public school, it has to come from the child. It's her own desires
- and ambitions that she is were she is."
Reference: http://www.dailynews.com/extra/news/09/06/dn06new10.asp
Now, you won't see it on the electronic version, but if you'd care
to check a local library you'll find a picture included with the story
which shows that Diana Suranyi is a white girl. If she were black, I
have no doubt that you'd assume "racism" was the reason teachers were
discouraging her from taking tougher courses. Since she's white, we at
least have to acknowledge the possibility that forces other than racism
sometimes lead to "lower expectations".
But in the face of such expectations, what would lead one student to
fight, while another student shuts down? I would submit that the
motive one attributes to the teacher might be a factor.
If you believe that the teacher merely has a faulty impression of your
abilities, it stands to reason that demonstrating your true abilities
would correct the impression. It seems to me that a student with this
view of the teacher's motives is more likely to "fight" than shut down.
If, on the other hand, you believe the teacher is acting out of a
racist mindset, then it may not matter how much ability you can
demonstrate: the teacher is still likely to regard you as just a
dumb ethnicity. A student with this view of the teacher's motives is
more likely to shut down than fight.
A student who mistakes "faulty impression" for "racism" and shuts
down when a little initiative could have achieved the goal is not
doing himself any favors. Indeed, if you would agree that it is in
the student's best interest to try even when the teacher is motivated
by racism, then it may actually be more effective to regard "racism"
as a mere "faulty impression" once in a while.
> Racism exists, David. You don't know what it is like to be on the
> receiving end,
As a matter of fact, I do.
> but that does not mean it does not have the impact that Ed, Art and
> I have described.
"We can't always control what happens to us. We can always control
our reaction to what happens."
> You seem to expect me to excuse racists and racism, minimize,
> ignore and overlook it. It won't happen, David.
I would be satisfied if you only saw it where it actually existed.
Instead, your operating philosophy seems to be "When in doubt, it's
racism".
> Racism is destructive, it wastes and destroys potential and resources,
> it saps energy and initiative, and it creates generation after
> generation of people who have not fulfilled their potential.
Letting your children watch too much TV is destructive, saps energy
and initiative, and creates people who have not fulfilled their
potential. Yet, even though you recognize this and curtail TV viewing
for your own children, you act like I'm the serpent in the garden if I
suggest that black children would be doing themselves a favor if they'd
put down the remote and pick up a book a little more often.
Such heresy!
> [Y]ou seem to believe it is some sort of character flaw to understand
> and articulate the effects racism have on Blacks.
Understand and articulate, no problem. Overdiagnosing racism, however,
seems to me to be counterproductive.
> It exists, it is there, and it doesn't seem to be abating.
It doesn't seem to you to be abating, because you're still stuck in
the fifties. By all objective measures, and even most subjective ones,
it's been abating your whole life.
> On the contrary, it has just changed its form and continues on its
> destructive way. It is my contention that no adequate, workable
> solution will be established UNLESS the problem is first defined.
> You, on the other hand, really don't want it discussed at all.
> Too bad.
Yeah, I only read this newsgroup for the insightful, pervasive
discussions of the origins of jazz, the black voice in literature,
and the history of black theater.
--
David McDuffee
mcdu...@best.com
James Ewing
>
> David McDuffee wrote:
> >
> > Kaiju wrote:
>
> > > > > > Black culture is the environment that black folk create for
> > > > > > other black folk. Plain and simple.
> > > >
> > > > > So you're saying this is "all blacks behave like this because
> > > > > they are black?" Oy.
> > > >
> > > > It's been apparent to me for some time that those who were the
> > > > most emotional
> > >
> > > Emotional? This is absurd, David. You made an illogical assertion.
> > > I challenged your illogical statement using logic...not emotion.
> >
> > There is no logic whatsoever in your statement, Kaiju. You made a
> > statement which had no relation at all to what I had said, and implied
> > that you were simply rephrasing my words. And "Oy" is an expression
> > of emotion, not a synonym for Q.E.D.
>
> "Oy" is an expression of mild dismay or disbelief. To describe it as an
> emotional response is stretching it. As for your statement, I took it to its
> logical conclusion. Of course you haven't included the portion of your
> statements that actually illuminated the fact that you believe isolated
> behavior in set situations define the behavior of the majority or entire
> group. But that's okay. The post is still there for review.
Isolated behavior? What planet are you living on? Look at the
statistics for the out-of-wedlock birth rates in the Black community and
then tell us this is "isolated". Does majority=isolated in your strange
universe? Look at crime rates, the divergence of SAT scores for ethnic
groups. There is a serious problem here, not "isolated" pockets of
trouble.
It is this kind of stone-wall denial that keeps the Black community
down. If you won't face up to the reality of the problem, you can't
hope to overcome it.
James Ewing
>
> David McDuffee wrote:
> > I claim that your "racism is at the root of every problem faced by the
> > black community" philosophy counterproductively displaces responsibility
> > for many problems which racism is not at the root of.
Here David presents a concise summation of Kaiju's philosophy. Anyone
who reads her posts would acknowledge that is the overriding theme of
her comments on SCAA. Let's see if she will acknowledge it.
> Then you still haven't grasped what I have been saying all these years.
> Perhaps you'd be better served by not trying to tell others what I believe.
> You don't know, and for the most part your interpretations are reflective of
> your own biases.
Hmmm...no surprise here, folks. Let's take a look at this; it has all
the typical Kaiju obfuscation.
We unwashed just can't seem to grasp what she's saying, even though her
posts go on ad nauseam about how racism is the root of the problems in
the Black community. She just won't admit to David what can be seen
over and over in her posts. As she likes to say, it's all there on
deja.com. Despite the fact that David understands the English language,
she claims his interpretation is not based on his reading of what she
writes, but rather are "reflective of your own biases". This is really
pretty funny. Spout off about racism in nearly every post, and then
when someone encapsulates this theory, claim, "No, that's your own
biases that are getting in the way".
Hey, Kaiju, the man can read. If you want him to stop reading this
philosophy of yours, you might want to stop writing it.
James Ewing
>
> David McDuffee wrote:
> >
> > Kaiju wrote:
> > > Marva Collins' students may recite self-affirming statements to
> > > keep them striving and moving forward, but those statements and the
> > > prevailing attitude is provided first by Collins, herself.
> >
> > Not Mom and Dad? What's wrong with this picture?
>
> Ahem. Society is wrong with this picture.
Boy, you're pretty big on self-reliance, aren't you? Yeah--hate them
liberals, don't you? How come you do such a dead-on impression of one,
in every single post? David asks about "Mom and Dad" and now you tell
us that if Dad impregnates Mom and then splits, or if the parents do not
emphasize the importance of doing well academically, that is society's
fault? Sheesh...and we wonder why the latest headlines scream "Ethnic
gap widens in SAT scores". As long as Kaiju keeps telling Black kids it
is society's fault, they will keep believing it.
James Ewing
>
> Kaiju wrote:
> > Racism exists, David. You don't know what it is like to be on the
> > receiving end,
>
> As a matter of fact, I do.
It might be instructive to the discussion if you would give us some
examples. Based on your writings, it would seem you are rather anxious
to assure us that you are a Black man (with the concomitant, if sweetly
insecure, notion that this somehow confers additional credibility to
your insights). But I'll go for the bait. Are you?
>
> > but that does not mean it does not have the impact that Ed, Art and
> > I have described.
>
> "We can't always control what happens to us. We can always control
> our reaction to what happens."
And this is the ballgame, right here. The whole enchilada.
Unfortunately, Kaiju is the perfect embodiment of the liberal mindset,
which tells us that a person in no more than the sum of his or her
traumas, be they real or imagined. Black youth gets the message. This
has a deadening effect on personal growth. For some unknown reason, she
can't figure this out.
Again, she prefers the cheap solace of creative rationalization to the
hard work of internal self-development that so many other oppressed
cultures have used to succeed. Why is it, pray tell, that the emphasis
on Cutural Capital that ethnic groups like Jews and Asians have employed
to such astounding results is simply not attractive to the Black
community?
olan
James Ewing <schoo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> Kaiju wrote:
> >
> > David McDuffee wrote:
> > >
> > > Kaiju wrote:
>
> > > > Marva Collins' students may recite self-affirming statements to
> > > > keep them striving and moving forward, but those statements and
the
> > > > prevailing attitude is provided first by Collins, herself.
> > >
> > > Not Mom and Dad? What's wrong with this picture?
> >
> > Ahem. Society is wrong with this picture.
>
> liberals, don't you? How come you do such a dead-on impression of
one,
> in every single post? David asks about "Mom and Dad" and now you tell
> us that if Dad impregnates Mom and then splits, or if the parents do
not
> emphasize the importance of doing well academically, that is society's
> fault? Sheesh...and we wonder why the latest headlines scream "Ethnic
> gap widens in SAT scores". As long as Kaiju keeps telling Black kids
it
> is society's fault, they will keep believing it.
>
Did you notice Kaiju's comment in her last post to David about the
"great mistake known as the Great Society"? I've been posting in SCAA-M
for the last few months, and maybe this is something she has commented
on before, but it's the first indication that I've seen of her feelings
concerning
the effects of LBJ's Great Society programs.
--
olan
James Ewing
>
> Kaiju wrote:
> > Racism is destructive, it wastes and destroys potential and resources,
> > it saps energy and initiative, and it creates generation after
> > generation of people who have not fulfilled their potential.
>
> Letting your children watch too much TV is destructive, saps energy
> and initiative, and creates people who have not fulfilled their
> potential. Yet, even though you recognize this and curtail TV viewing
> for your own children, you act like I'm the serpent in the garden if I
> suggest that black children would be doing themselves a favor if they'd
> put down the remote and pick up a book a little more often.
> Such heresy!
>
> > [Y]ou seem to believe it is some sort of character flaw to understand
> > and articulate the effects racism have on Blacks.
>
> Understand and articulate, no problem. Overdiagnosing racism, however,
> seems to me to be counterproductive.
>
> > It exists, it is there, and it doesn't seem to be abating.
>
> It doesn't seem to you to be abating, because you're still stuck in
> the fifties. By all objective measures, and even most subjective ones,
> it's been abating your whole life.
>
> > On the contrary, it has just changed its form and continues on its
> > destructive way.
It has changed its form alright. It used to manifest itself in slavery,
and then legalized discrimination in housing, employment, voting rights,
education. All these barriers have been torn down, and we even brought
about remedial tools such as affirmative action, but you would have us
believe that George Wallace is still blocking the door to the
schoolhouse. When was the last time you saw Blacks refused entrance to
the public library because of the color of their skin? Or might it be a
person's own choice (and parents' acquiesence) as to whether time is
spent studying instead of watching TV or grooving to the boombox?
James Ewing
> Did you notice Kaiju's comment in her last post to David about the
> "great mistake known as the Great Society"?
I did. Of course, I was the one that forced her to cough up that
particular hairball when she tried to do her old Tough Gal routine (but
look the other way at my liberal policy prescriptions, please) on the
old SCAA.
> I've been posting in SCAA-M
> for the last few months, and maybe this is something she has commented
> on before, but it's the first indication that I've seen of her feelings
> concerning
> the effects of LBJ's Great Society programs.
>
> --
> olan
Well, she's against it, in theory, but she wants to do it all over
again, in reality, if truth be told.