I feel like Negroes and the white Southerner have innately different learning styles, and that integration hurts us both.
Was Brown vs Board of Education a mistake?
Posts
Total:
36
-->
@Segregationist
How is the learning style of blacks different from the learning style of whites? I think the BoP is on you.
-->
@Alec
Black kids start puberty a year earlier, which can cause a lot of bullying and tension in schools with large, multiracial populations. It also affects learning styles, so it makes it hard to run a class when you have kids at two different stages of development. Puberty also causes a general decline in motivation when it comes to academics, which may cause black kids to lag behind white kids and give them a bit of an inferiority complex. If your group starts struggling for the most part, and the white kids are mostly still focused and docile, that just strengthens group identification. lowers self-perception, and can lead to resentment. Teachers are also liable to being to perceive black students as 'problem students' or 'troublemakers' because of this. The human brain likes narratives, and if you see the black kids getting rowdy and falling behind, and then the white kids getting rowdy and start to slip academically about a year later, it's very likely that our pattern recognition will pick up on that and unfairly blame the black children for 'starting it'. There are also differences in athletic ability (both basically and due to early puberty) and learning style/behavior (https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED226077).
I don't think that public schools should be de jure segregated, but I do think that districts should follow real, organic community lines (like parishes in the parochial school system). In that scenario, most schools would probably end up being either majority white or majority black. Schools should also focus more on career preparedness than on standardized testing.
-->
@Segregationist
I feel like Negroes and the white Southerner have innately different learning styles, and that integration hurts us both.
I hope you're at least 90 years old. Or a Russian bot.
-->
@Segregationist
There exists zero scientific data that shows the color of your skin has anything to do with the DNA affecting intelligence. There is no scientific direct cause and effect. There is no way that you can put a person's skin under a shade chart and say definitively what their DNA is regarding intelligence and back it up with real science.
-->
@Segregationist
I agree. Blacks and most whites should be in one school, and white Southerners like yourself should have their own "special" school.
I even have a suggestion for the department to oversee the white Southerner schools: Corrections.
-->
@Stronn
He has the right to his opinion so advocating for "correcting" someone over a political disagreement is emulating a dictatorship.
-->
@Segregationist
As a southerner, I assure you we have the same learning styles.
-->
@Segregationist
Darker eyed white people and darker eyed black people, prefer fast-paced learning. They will tend to perform better in exams per IQ point they have and be very bad liars.
Lighter eyes white people and lighter eyed (relative to the darkness of brown) black people will not necessarily perform well in school if they are geniuses. They will tend to have a high capacity to lie, strategise and think deep but struggle with fast-paced immediate-measurement type learning and performance.
Darker eyed types make fantastic 'on the grounds' members of armies and lighter eyed types make fantastic Generals and politicians but the issue comes when the tendency to be honest/blatant/fast and deceitful/smart/slow becomes the less desirable version of it that backfires on the team relying on that tendency in the individual.
-->
@Stronn
Lmao that was funny
Welcome to the Constupidists. This is why Conservatives get a bad rap.
This is the most stupidest post I have ever seen. There is no evidence suggesting skin color effects. Even if someone hit puberty faster, there is no bullying cooralation
This is why the South is the poorest because they don't know what the hell is going on besides wanting slavery back so they don't have to work.
8 days later
-->
@Vader
This is why the South is the poorest because they don't know what the hell is going on besides wanting slavery back so they don't have to work.
The south is poor because they are not urban and their GDP per capita is comparable to Europe. They don't want slavery back.
71 days later
Is this guy serious?
-->
@Pinkfreud08
I think so.
18 days later
I feel like Negroes and the white Southerner have innately different learning styles, and that integration hurts us both.
So why not just separate them based on their learning styles instead of their skin colors? Keep the visual learners in one group, the auditory learners in another, and the kinesthetic learners in another.
257 days later
-->
@Segregationist
What. The . Absolute. (Censored by the mods). Is wrong with you
-->
@Segregationist
I guess innate implies biological differences or something that is going happen. I would disagree and say the differences are mainly in other factors. It is pretty easy to influence people at a young age to think a certain way and there hasn't been data that white southerners are more competent at a young age. Kinda weird the example I use because this involves children plus segregation. It is the A Class Divided experiment which found out it is easy to change a person's behavior to go as far as bullying people based on the color of their eyes while also lower self-confidence and worsen academic performance.I feel like Negroes and the white Southerner have innately different learning styles, and that integration hurts us both.
If I agree there are differences not biologically but before they enter the classroom is it worth spending time and resources more specifically integrating people? To that I say it depends on what you value. I guess the author values some sort of white community because of a perceived positive which I don't think can be traced to anything concrete mainly feeling. To me I would say it is pretty shitty to exclude people that had worse lives than you just because you can. I don't even need to accept it on those grounds since I think engaging with other cultures helps add stuff. I like noodles and if Asia was simply rejected to immigrate and we weren't trading I wouldn't be able to eat noodles. You could say well you wouldn't really feel a sense of loss about something you have never experienced, to that I say true but only really negatives can be made on a what if and even then I would have to agree since we can't in anyway test what would occur if we changed the past.
Another direction would be if you were black you would be pretty annoyed that you had or have a crappy life so why do you accept it? I think the answer would be you are not black but I think you would agree that there lives on averages are worse than whites.
Don't think you will read this but whatever.
-->
@TheRealNihilist
If I agree there are differences not biologically but before they enter the classroom is it worth spending time and resources more specifically integrating people?
I mean, does it really require more resources to maintain one school for all races or does it actually require more resources to have one school for the whites, one for the blacks, one for the Arabs, one for the Asians, etc.?
The rest of what you say makes sense but to say that integration "costs" resources sounds a bit absurd. The actual savings would vastly outweigh any beauocratic costs.
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Lets say white people are equal to 1. Lets say blacks are 1. Lets say Arabs are 1 and Asians are 1. Just by adding in more races there is more people. There will be an increases but I doubt like the transaction would be worse for America. Social safety net for immigrants = Taxable Americans, providing a product or service to Americans and more people part of the democracy.I mean, does it really require more resources to maintain one school for all races or does it actually require more resources to have one school for the whites, one for the blacks, one for the Arabs, one for the Asians, etc.?
The rest of what you say makes sense but to say that integration "costs" resources sounds a bit absurd. The actual savings would vastly outweigh any beauocratic costs.
Oh yeah I was looking at one part of the transaction. I basically said it would cost time for people get treated for cancer neglecting to mention the potential positives of said outcome.
-->
@TheRealNihilist
The topic of the conversation is education segregation. I am not exaggerating in the least when I say I have no idea what you are talking about.
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Please quote whatever it is and I'll rephrase it.The topic of the conversation is education segregation. I am not exaggerating in the least when I say I have no idea what you are talking about.
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Please quote whatever it is and I'll rephrase it.
0% of post 19 has anything to do with education segregation. It is just a tangent about the "Social saftey net" and "Taxable Americans"
Poat 19 was a response to my post where I disagreed with this quote:
If I agree there are differences not biologically but before they enter the classroom is it worth spending time and resources more specifically integrating people?
(You can tell that is what I was responding to in post 18 because it is in a quote box).
So I guess if you want to rephrase something you could start by just explaining why you think that having one school system for all races would require more resources than having seperate school systems for each.
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
0% of post 19 has anything to do with education segregation. It is just a tangent about the "Social saftey net" and "Taxable Americans"
The first part was about adding in other people into a school. This would mean more people in a classroom or maybe extra classroom which would need a teacher and the other stuff. If you are talking about non-whites literally starting in a mostly white school then it probably no real expense added in. I think the one I could think of is a language barrier if they are quite young due to their parents not speaking English.
The tanget you spoke of is like seeing stuff outside of just education.
So I guess if you want to rephrase something you could start by just explaining why you think that having one school system for all races would require more resources than having seperate school systems for each.
Adding people in not through the traditional way as in applying and joining instead like some sort of government program would require more teachers and space.
If you mean different races are simply applying for a school and going in the same way as whites then there would most likely be no issue other than the really rare one I did speak about which probably isn't a problem.
-->
@TheRealNihilist
You are saying that integration means educating more people but that is obviously false.
Let's take a town where 500 people need to be educated. There are two ways to do it.
Integration:
Let's pay for one school system and set up all the infrastructure for it then put 500 people into it.
Segregation:
Let's pay for one school system and set up all the infrastructure for it then put 250 whites into itThen pay for another seprate school system and all its infrastructure and put 100 blacks into it.Then pay for another seprate school system and all its infrastructure and put 50 Asians into it.Then pay for another seprate school system and all its infrastructure and put 50 Arabs into itThen pay for another seprate school system and all its infrastructure and put 50 Indians into it.
You are suggesting that the second option sounds cheaper. Again your quote:
If I agree there are differences not biologically but before they enter the classroom is it worth spending time and resources more specifically integrating people?
I am suggesting that you may not have thought too hard before writting that.
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
You are saying that integration means educating more people but that is obviously false.
How does integrate mean not adding in more and no your later response isn't exactly answering that?
Let's pay for one school system and set up all the infrastructure for it then put 250 whites into itThen pay for another seprate school system and all its infrastructure and put 100 blacks into it.Then pay for another seprate school system and all its infrastructure and put 50 Asians into it.Then pay for another seprate school system and all its infrastructure and put 50 Arabs into itThen pay for another seprate school system and all its infrastructure and put 50 Indians into it.
I want to see these as real-life examples unless these are shown through as private schools. Public schools are already built and would most likely be reflection of the races around the area.
I am suggesting that you may not have thought too hard before writting that.
I guess I can agree to that.
My rephrasing would be If I agree there are differences not biologically but before they enter the classroom is it worth integrating people of other races?
-->
@TheRealNihilist
My rephrasing would be If I agree there are differences not biologically but before they enter the classroom is it worth integrating people of other races?
Okay. Well my answer to that would be yes. I see no justification for the increased financial costs of segregation, not to mention the obvious moral concerns.
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Okay. Well my answer to that would be yes. I see no justification for the increased financial costs of segregation, not to mention the obvious moral concerns.
I don't think he will care about your morality since he would say something like this and that is probably the main reason he is opposed to it. I am bunching his feelings and morality together.
Yes, it was. Brown vs. The Board of Education was a means of ingratiating so called "black" students into the "public" public school system--which is pretty much a network of detention centers, and indoctrination camps. In said public school systems, not only are so called "black" children conditioned and exposed to so called "white," predominantly female authorities, but they're fed with false narratives especially about their history. Integration erodes indigenous cultures, and that hasn't bode well for so called "black" demographics in the United States.
20 days later
I'll note, first, the Brown v. Board of Education [1954] was a unanimous 9-0 decision by the Warren Court and, second, that 9-0 decisions number as the most plurality decision of the Court over the last 150 years since a 9-justiceCourt was established in 1869. No other ratio of decisions has a greater plurality. In fact, in the last 50 years, the Court has settled cases with unanimous decisions 59% of the time; a clear majority. So much for the political bias argument the Court is often accused of having, regardless of subject matter.
Brown v Board of Education was chiefly an argument over the established "separate but equal" condition that found precedent in Plessy v Furguson [1896], in which Plessy, a person who was 7/8 white, and therefore deemed black [go figure!], sat in a white trolley car, marked as such, when the law demanded that he sit in a car marked for blacks. Being 7/8 white, what do you think Plessy looked like? Google him; there's a photo of the man. You decide. The argument was that each car was equal in every respect relative to its facilities, thus meeting "separate but equal" conditions. That argument died with Furguson by the simple argument that the designating signs, themselves declared inequality. Brown v. Board of Education was not at all wrong. The entire decision-making process was made, not by legal mumbo-jumbo argument, but argument of common sense so the people would understand it more fully.
8 days later
-->
@Christen
Keep the visual learners in one group, the auditory learners in another, and the kinesthetic learners in another.
Assuming none of those can change (I don't know what style I'm in), I like this idea.