Happy Independence Day!
The Fourth is one of my favorite holidays as an opportunity for all of us to celebrate our common article of faith in the independence of a nation committed to freedom and individual rights. This country remains the greatest hope for freedom in the world and these protests reaffirm those rights. We celebrate the ideals of the people we strive to be — and the millions who came before us. With the adoption of the Declaration of Independence, the Framers placed themselves and their families at the greatest peril for the principles of self determination and democratic rule. The American Republic was always meant to be a work in progress. Yet, our Constitution created the most successful and stable constitutional system in the history of the world.
This is a great day for family and food and fun. It is also a day to remember and to celebrate what we have accomplished in the protection of liberty. We have the ability to change our society but our constitutional system remains the greatest vehicle of justice and equality in the world. There is more that unites us than divides us and this holiday is a reminder of that transcendent fact. Many of us will join today to celebrate these United States and its history and values.
I truly love this holiday because it ideally celebrates what we have in common as opposed to what divides us. For all of our faults and failures, we have triumphed over great evils from without and within. The Framers gave us a system that has withstood it all through the test of time and turmoil. It will withstand these days and we will find a course forward as a nation.
Once again, as a Madisonian scholar, you will have to forgive my quoting James Madison from Essays for the National Gazette, 1792:
“In Europe, charters of liberty have been granted by power. America has set the example … of charters of power granted by liberty. This revolution in the practice of the world, may, with an honest praise, be pronounced the most triumphant epoch of its history, and the most consoling presage of its happiness.”
Happy Fourth, everyone.
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.i-beiPq_88aDi6rOhIKtDAHaFj%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=5d9bc464a6adecb491091f34a58d3cb158049eae15541b130378194c354cffa6&ipo=images
Well, I meant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther
led to the expectation of everybody reading the bible for themselves, so the requirement of enough public education, say 9 years, to be able to read the Luther Bible.
So my father’s parents in Norway received 9 years of schooling, for example.
Anonymous
“This was true until January 6th.”
Because ?
In what world is political protest inconsistent with the Constitution ?
Form 1791 through 1794 – not long after the Constitution was Ratified we had the Whiskey Rebellion – Washington has to form and send an Army to put that down.
Involving more than 500 actually ARMED men. Thoguh 20 were arrested – all were either acquitted or pardoned.
In the 60’s the US Capitol was Bombed.
In 2018 Kavanaugh
Protestors actually acoosted Senators in their cloak rooms, rest rooms, and one took an Axe to a Senators desk.
I think the Constitution can cope with protestors peacefully marching through the capitol after a rigged election.
Nor was the whiskey rebellion the Only past example.
I counted atleast 20 ARMED insurrections just through 1900.
Several over election fraud.
What is true of J6 is that is the FIRST time unarmed political protests have been called an insurrection.
But that is democrats for you.
Left wing nuts think that you can choose your sex.
That the US is the most racist country in the world and this is the most racist moment in history.
They are entirely ignorant of reality.
Across America, it is easy to find individual non-religious families comprised of good, decent, charitable, hardworking people. At the societal level, however, the absence of sincere religious faith—which can exist even among regular churchgoers—can be disastrous.
Over recent decades—while we were busy abandoning God and immersing ourselves into the culture—our communities, our states, and the nation were becoming increasingly dysfunctional. Rampant crime, drug addiction, homelessness, men abandoning their children and the mothers of their children, able-bodied men leaving the workforce, a lack of kindness toward those who disagree with us, and hearts that are unforgiving.
Without returning to God, it will be difficult to address any of our problems with lasting effect.
You say, “Without returning to God, it will be difficult to address any of our problems with lasting effect.”
To which I say, “Amen and ‘not difficult’ but rather impossible to address…” and I ask, “Has there been salvation or renaissance of the souls of men without religion?”
“Has there been salvation or renaissance of the souls of men without religion?”
Ancient Greece, the Renaissance, the Enlightenment.
I think you may have misunderstood Paladin, Sam.
There was certainly widespread religion and faith in Ancient Greece and during the Renaissance and the Enlightenment.
The Methodist Church had its advent with John Wesley during the Enlightenment.
‘Has there been a renaissance of the souls of men without religion?’
Some of our great thinkers and artists and explorers were men who had a fraught relationship with organized religion, but most of them still believed in God and were faithful to Him in their own way.
It seems to me that the three eras you listed were times of the expansion of reason and faith. They both were expanding and they tempered each other’s vices.
All three (Ancient Greece, the Renaissance, and the Enlightenment) had an emphasis on knowledge and beauty. Sometimes to be wielded, but more often, I think, because it is nice to appreciate and be surrounded by them. I wish Sir Roger Scruton was still here to speak to such things more widely.
That is absolutely spot on! This sentence bears repeating: At the societal level, however, the absence of sincere religious faith—which can exist even among regular churchgoers—can be disastrous.
So for all those that zealously deny the very idea of the existence of God and push to erase God from our culture, I humbly ask, how’s that working out for this nation so far? I can respect an individual’s choice to live a good, decent, charitable, hardworking life without a belief in God. I used to be that person. But I simultaneously believed our country could not function as designed without an overwhelming majority of citizens trying to live a Judeo-Christian life. We’ve tried to do it without and we’re failing miserably. I would say to those without such faith that if you are a good, decent, charitable, hardworking citizen of this country, be zealous at least for a thriving Judeo-Christian culture around you. Because they will be the zealous defenders of your natural rights.
“I humbly ask, how’s that working out for this nation so far?”
How did it work out in the Dark and Middle Ages?
“Because they will be the zealous defenders of your natural rights.”
How does one defend individual rights based on a premise that is mystical and unprovable?
Sam,
“How does one defend individual rights based on a premise that is mystical and unprovable?”
That is a good question.
The Founders emphasized that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. Those rights are to be found in the Bible, though they are not exactly explicitly stated. They are derived.
Free speech is there repeatedly when Abraham questions God, and in the stories of Moses, Esther, Jesus, the prophets.
Privacy and to be secure in your person is there from Genesis (the knowledge that some things are private and should be covered).
“. . . are to be found in the Bible . . .”
It does not help your case to rely on a book that is based on a mystical, unprovable premise.
I recognize that, Sam. But, people including the Founders, take their faith seriously. Where did they get these ideas of Natural rights being endowed by a Creator?
At least their beliefs are based on something (even if it is mystical), rather than on nothing at all.
““How does one defend individual rights based on a premise that is mystical and unprovable?”
The soul and consciousness are rather mystical, too, but we recognize it in one another.
The Bible is an ancient book about the human condition and relationships between God and man and between each other. I suppose it is, in part, a distilled or refined expression of long-observed reality and wisdom of the ages.
Sam,
“How did it work out in the Dark and Middle Ages?”
Knowledge and education was not widespread during the Middle Ages. That ability to read and to become educated expanded during the Renaissance and further during the Enlightenment–thanks in wide measure to religious people and the desire for people to read the Bible and be saved.
A rediscovery of ancient wisdom and ideas helped end “The Dark Ages”, too.
“Knowledge and education was not widespread during the Middle Ages.”
*Because* of religion.
“. . . the Renaissance and further during the Enlightenment–thanks in wide measure to religious people . . .”
That is either gross historical ignorance or evasion.
The Renaissance was not the rebirth of religion. It was the rebirth of Reason.
Sam,
“Knowledge and education was not widespread during the Middle Ages.”
“*Because* of religion.”
Because there was no printing press.
“. . . the Renaissance and further during the Enlightenment–thanks in wide measure to religious people . . .”
“That is either gross historical ignorance or evasion.”
Religious people wanted everyone to read the Bible (hence it being the first book to be printed on the printing press). Schools were started to not only accomplish this but to build general knowledge and learning. Methodists started many schools, for instance.
My knowledge of history very likely has gaps (there is a great deal of history to learn). What am I missing?
“The Renaissance was not the rebirth of religion. It was the rebirth of Reason.”
I didn’t say it was the rebirth of religion. I noted the two rode alongside each other and tempered each other’s vices. Yes, Reason was built up extensively because ancient works were rediscovered by Europeans (in Spain, I think) after the expulsion of the Moors who had preserved the works. I agree that there had been an inadequacy of Reason in the Dark Ages
Yet, the role of religion and belief played an important role in these time periods. Michelangelo’s David. Bach’s organ music. Even little known naturalists like Maria Merian reflected an importance of faith and religion in people’s lives.
Perhaps we have an inadequacy of Faith now. That lack of Faith in God could be generalized to a lack of faith in one another (loss of trust), lack of faith in the potential for a brighter future, a lack of faith in our own potential to be better (hence all the insecurities and failure to launch).
So tiresome.
And useless.
Like retreading old tires, agreeing to diasgree, or reaching acrosss the aisle
That someone sees reality wrongly is itself reality.
Most people are fantasists; they’re dead set on avoiding reality.
Accept it; you will not change it.
Getting hit on the head by a club called reality, run over by a truck named reality, or ruined by running away from reality MIGHT make a fantasist come to reality.
Probably not!
Arguing about differences is a waste of time.
It does not bring a fantasist to reality.
Everyone has their dogmas. When atheists invoke the Middle Ages they do it so as to are cast aspersions and ignore a period encompassing 1000 years (~ 500 – 1500 AD). That is what post-modernists do, people who engage in relativism, self-referential thinking and condescension of those who disagree with them, i.e. Sam
In the history of Europe, the Middle Ages or medieval period (also spelled mediæval or mediaeval) lasted approximately from the late 5th to the late 15th centuries, similar to the post-classical period of global history.
Wiki
People who deny the existence of God and arrogate unto themselves “enlightenment” are like animals. John Locke said as much. NB: John Locke is dubbed the “Father of Empiricism”.
John Locke on Religion
https://www.thoughtco.com/john-locke-quotes-4779304
“So that, in effect, religion, which should most distinguish us from beasts, and ought most peculiarly to elevate us, as rational creatures, above brutes, is that wherein men often appear most irrational, and more senseless than beasts themselves.”
“The Bible is one of the greatest blessings bestowed by God on the children of men. It has God for its Author, salvation for its end, and truth without any mixture for its matter. It is all pure, all sincere; nothing too much; nothing wanting!”
“Whosoever will list himself under the banner of Christ, must, in the first place and above all things, make war upon his own lusts and vices.”
“As men, we have God for our King, and are under the law of reason: as Christians, we have Jesus the Messiah for our King, and are under the law revealed by him in the gospel.”
“That is what post-modernists do, [. . .] i.e. Sam”
Nice smear campaign. And obviously not an argument.
It’s e.g., not “i.e.”.
You still have not rescued religion from the horrors it created during the Dark/Middle Ages.
“When atheists invoke the Middle Ages they do it so as to [. . .] ignore a period encompassing 1000 years (~ 500 – 1500 AD).”
Accusing others of doing precisely what you (and other religionists) are doing (just like Leftists do). Nice projection.
“That ability to read and to become educated …thanks in wide measure to religious people and the desire for people to read the Bible and be saved.”
Correct me if I am wrong, but at the time, most people could not read the Bible or anything else, except Jews that educated their young, teaching them how to read by age 13. They continued with their learning, and that is why, as Jews wandered from one country to the next in exile, they were taken by other nations and placed in important positions where such knowledge was a necessity.
S. Meyer,
“Correct me if I am wrong, but at the time, most people could not read the Bible or anything else, except Jews that educated their young, teaching them how to read by age 13.”
Yes, but, grammar schools were becoming more common for the middle class. Many, many people still could not read, but education, even for girls, was expanding.
Maria Sibylla Merian, the daughter of a publisher and then step-daughter of an artist, could read and write and drew beautiful illustrations of flowers and insects. She was born in 1660.
Prairie, you are using recent anecdotal proof that doesn’t satisfy the argument.
The Jews were educated, becoming important figures in the government and elsewhere. This occurred throughout their history from Babylonian times, through the times of Muslim intellectual growth, to the times Britain ruled the seas and today.
Your example fails to meet the needs in this discussion.
I will add a point to our earlier discussions. Education of the young occurred even though those with means had to pay. Education was almost universal among the Jews, but there was no governmental control.
S. Meyer,
???
I wasn’t trying to refute your point about Jews being well-educated throughout history. I agree with that point.
What recent anecdotal proof are you dismissing? I can find more scholarly work about education during the Renaissance and Enlightenment. I held up Maria Merian as an interesting example of the wider trend because she was middle class and female and educated to a degree. 1660 is not exactly recent.
Jews, by and large, deeply value knowledge and education. Nothing can replace a culture that values education, wisdom, and knowledge.
“What recent anecdotal proof are you dismissing?”
‘Maria Sibylla Merian… could read’ Most people could not read. Education was not public or free. Your comment seems to dispute the lack of education to the masses.
S. Meyer,
I agree that the masses of poor people could not read. However, the middle class was being educated at least somewhat. Maria Merian was middle class. It wasn’t until the 1700s that public education began to emerge much. There was some prior, but it was not widespread.
Adam Smith, Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson all advocated for public education, though their conception was that it should be in a very hands-off manner of state support (much more local control).
“However, the middle class was being educated at least somewhat.”
Very little in your time frame and before. I think Sweden started the process in the late 1600s.
Thomas Jefferson advocated education, as did many, but they didn’t want an educational system controlled by teacher’s unions and large government entities. They didn’t object to private schooling, nor do I believe they would have objected to the concept of charter schools.
Jefferson was involved with a bill to educate children for three years at the public expense. After that time, the costs would have to be an individual responsibility.
S. Meyer,
“nor do I believe they would have objected to the concept of charter schools.”
Yes, he would have because it is taxation without representation.
The schools in colonial times were more like charter schools because education wasn’t standardized, and the fee went directly to the school, which might have been a single independent teacher. I don’t think we saw anything like you envision until the mid-1800s.
I believe religious institutions were at the forefront of education. Jewish education started with the Torah, but the children were far from educated in the fashion of your discussion.
S.Meyer,
“the fee went directly to the school, which might have been a single independent teacher. I don’t think we saw anything like you envision until the mid-1800s.”
You are mistaken on this point. School boards were elected by the community, even during colonial times. School boards selected the teacher. The school board, just like today, set the tuition and collected the fees and paid the teacher (in part–room and board for the teacher was often provided by the families of the children in the school).
You are correct that it was not initially standardized. Overall, though, they would have included more or less the same content if their goal was to educate.
No one said that there was no board to hire teachers, etc. That is what a charter school is, a private entity contracted by a school board.
Today a public school is less personalized working within a system that deals with politics and teachers’ unions.
S. Meyer,
“I think Sweden started the process in the late 1600s.”
No, I don’t think they advanced education as much as other countries did, namely France, Germany, England, the Netherlands.
“No, I don’t think they advanced education as much as other countries did, namely France, Germany, England, the Netherlands.”
I didn’t say Sweden advanced education better than any other country. I said, “I think Sweden ***started the process*** in the late 1600s.”
“That is what a charter school is, a private entity contracted by a school board.”
Perhaps that might be so with brick and mortar charter schools. However, charter schools have their own boards that are NOT elected by the people, by taxpayers, yet they use taxpayer money however they wish with no recourse for taxpayers. In Iowa, the people, the taxpayers lost all control of the school tax dollars. If a local district tells a charter school to shove off, we are not approving you, the charter school can go to the State and get approval to operate in a district. Pretty heavy handed that. With taxation without representation as a cherry on top. Decided by a bureaucrat no less.
“Today a public school is less personalized working within a system that deals with politics and teachers’ unions.”
Less personalized? What is this trendy new word being thrown around? It is complicated and at risk of manipulation this word. So the Feds and corporations instituted a heavy degree of testing and standardization, now all of that has to be dismantled so corporations can put into place digital-driven “personalization” that undermines national cohesion. Geez. Get rid of Industrial education so we corporations can put in Digital 4th Industrial education to educate the cogs in their machine.
How about we educate people to be knowledgeable, free people that can govern themselves in our constitutional republic and understand the lessons of history and stand against manipulative marketing schemes.
The best education balances independent learning with group learning. It happened under the so-called Prussian model because education is more about content and instruction than organization and bells. I got a pretty darn good education at a public school because my teachers and the leadership all recognized the value of a classical liberal education that prepared people to communicate and to think and to do things well with your hands and your mind and to know a great deal about the world, past and present. A Trivium or Quadrivium education can happen quite nicely in the system we have if the Feds and corporations stopped their undue interference.
“Perhaps that might be so with brick and mortar charter schools. However, charter schools have their own boards that are NOT elected by the people, by taxpayers, yet they use taxpayer money however they wish with no recourse for taxpayers.”
You are wrong. The charter schools in NYC are brick and mortar. Those charter schools are approved by the school board, the city, and the State.
I lack data on what happens in Iowa and question your knowledge of the situation. It seems hard for taxpayers to lose control since they vote for their representatives. Perhaps a group of taxpayers were only arguing, like you are, against all charter schools. Let us know more details.
“Less personalized?”
Yes. School systems were kept closed by the teachers union.
If a charter school isn’t personalized to the needs and desires of the community, parents will not send their children, and those schools will cease to exist.
“How about we educate people to be knowledgeable, free people that can govern themselves in our constitutional republic and understand the lessons of history and stand against manipulative marketing schemes”
How about we stop the public school system from indoctrinating our children? I am for parent choice. You are against parent choice.
In NYC, the inner city school children are failing in the public schools while many of the same group are going to college.
Charter schools have their own boards that are NOT elected by the citizenry or taxpayers yet they use taxpayer money however they wish and taxpayers have no recourse or control over that money.
Case in point:
Board of Directors
Vik Sawhney, Chair
The Blackstone Group
Peter Daneker, Vice-Chair
CSP Partners LLC
Karim Assef
Bank of America
Merrill Lynch
Hank Azaria
David S. Blitzer
The Blackstone Group
Porter Braswell
Jopwell
David Cohen
Jennifer Dalven
American Civil Liberties Union
Jason DeLand
Anomaly
Dr. Joan Fallon
Curemark
David Flannery
Vista Equity Partners
Stuart A. Fraser
Cantor Fitzgerald
Michele Joerg
Stefanie Katzman
S. Katzman Produce
Bobby Le Blanc
ONEX
Chris Leonard
Deutsche Bank
Curtis Martin
NY Jets
Alden Millard
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett
Colbert Narcisse
TIAA
Vered Rabia
Skadden
Tony Reagins
MLB
Kenneth Rosh
Fried Frank
Jeff Samberg
Acadia Woods Partners
Robert Sheehan
Skadden
David Sobotka
Binghamton Rumble Ponies
Jamie B.W. Stecher
Don Truesdale
Ardea Partners
Gregg Walker
Muller & Monroe
Diana Weiss
PwC
https://wearedream.org/our-leadership/
A brick and mortar NYC charter school.
“Charter schools have their own boards that are NOT elected by the citizenry or taxpayers yet they use taxpayer money however they wish and taxpayers have no recourse or control over that money.”
School boards hire companies to help them make decisions. They choose from those suggestions.
A charter school (NYC) is hired by the school boards if it meets their standards.
The public school system in NYC is mostly failing those in the lower socio-economic group, while charter schools have reversed the trend and led to college for many.
The parents opt for charter schools because they recognize their children are being better educated.
The comparison of charter and public schools is made with the same populations, randomly comparing the same grade taught in the same building.
S. Meyer,
“It seems hard for taxpayers to lose control since they vote for their representatives.”
Marketing campaigns aim to steer people towards the desired outcome of others (e.g., business intetests). I corresponded with representatives who acknowledged that taxation without representation was never discussed. No one had thought about that issue. No one recognized the ramifications of the law for representative republican government. I’ve talked to taxpayers that didn’t recognize it for what it was because “choice” sounds good on the surface. Marketing and group identity can be very strong.
“If a charter school isn’t personalized to the needs and desires of the community, parents will not send their children, and those schools will cease to exist.”
Failure on the taxpayer’s dime and they cannot even do anything to rectify the problems because they have no representation. How are they going to attend 20 different charter schools that might all operate in their district? Why would those Boards even listen to them if they don’t have kids there or even if they did since they can be told they aren’t a “good fit” at that charter school and should go elsewhere?
“How about we educate people to be knowledgeable, free people that can govern themselves in our constitutional republic and understand the lessons of history and stand against manipulative marketing schemes”
“How about we stop the public school system from indoctrinating our children?”
Sure. Go to your district’s school board meetings. Ask to see the curricula and resources. Look at the Policy Manual. Ask to sit in on classes. Look at your child’s homework or talk to people in the district who have kids if you don’t. Call your school board members. Advocate for the Great Works, history, and a more classical curriculum. Then talk to your state and Federal representatives. A lot of the problems are coming from those levels, the Federal level especially.
“I am for parent choice. You are against parent choice.”
Parents should not be able to choose how to spend their neighbor’s educational tax dollars. They are not elected to make those decisions.
“Marketing campaigns aim to steer people towards the desired outcome of others (e.g., business interests).”
Do you think the teacher’s union doesn’t do that? Their marketing campaigns are more powerful than those of the largest corporations.
” I corresponded with representatives who acknowledged that taxation without representation was never discussed. No one had thought about that issue.”
There is a reason. There is no issue.
“I’ve talked to taxpayers that didn’t recognize it for what it was because “choice” sounds good on the surface.”
Choice is a primary desire of a free people and is how the marketplace functions.
“Failure on the taxpayer’s dime and they cannot even do anything to rectify the problems because they have no representation.”
Bull. Charter schools are under more scrutiny than public schools. The public schools failed for decades on the taxpayer dime, and they are getting worse. The charter schools succeeded and proved themselves based on the exams given by the state to both groups.
“How are they going to attend 20 different charter schools that might all operate in their district?”
Where do you come up with such ideas? You are thinking like those who want a command economy. I believe in a marketplace and choice.
” Why would those Boards even listen to them if they don’t have kids there or even if they did since they can be told they aren’t a “good fit” at that charter school and should go elsewhere?”
You seem to be siding with my argument. Let the parents decide.
“How about we educate people to be knowledgeable, free people that can govern themselves in our constitutional republic and understand the lessons of history and stand against manipulative marketing schemes”
Charter schools are doing that. The parents are on lines hoping for a position for their child. The parents of those children know better than you.
“Sure. Go to your district’s school board meetings. Ask to see the curricula and resources. Look at the Policy Manual. Ask to sit in on classes. Look at your child’s homework or talk to people in the district who have kids if you don’t. Call your school board members. Advocate for the Great Works, history, and a more classical curriculum. Then talk to your state and Federal representatives. A lot of the problems are coming from those levels, the Federal level especially.”
When you hit a brick wall, one goes around it and doesn’t wait for their child’s destruction. Sign up for a charter school or something else.
“Parents should not be able to choose how to spend their neighbor’s educational tax dollars.”
The name of the game is education. Taxpayers should not be paying schools that fail to educate children. What you are listening to is the teacher union’s argument to provide themselves with more money and power.
S. Meyer,
—“[Teacher’s Union’s] marketing campaigns are more powerful than those of the largest corporations.”
I doubt it. They likely use the same marketing firms. Cyber charter schools use taxpayer money to try to garner more students. Not an appropriate use of taxpayer money, considering taxpayers cannot even really have any input or control over cyber charter school budgets since the boards of these outfits are selected rather than elected.
—” I corresponded with representatives who acknowledged that taxation without representation was never discussed. No one had thought about that issue.”
There is a reason. There is no issue.”
I disagree. It is taxation without representation.
—“I’ve talked to taxpayers that didn’t recognize it for what it was because “choice” sounds good on the surface.”
Choice is a primary desire of a free people and is how the marketplace functions.”
My elderly neighbors are getting their ability to choose taken from them by unelected parents sending their kids (any my elderly neighbors’ tax dollars) to charter schools of the parents choosing. My elderly neighbors had the opportunity to discuss the use of their tax dollars at school board meetings and they can choose to elect other people who will hopefully make better choices if the present board is not making wise decisions with money, curricula, etc. If parents want to choose how to use *their own hard-earned money* then they certainly can; they should not be choosing how to use *their neighbors’ hard-earned money*.
—“The public schools failed for decades on the taxpayer dime, and they are getting worse.”
Then that is the fault of parents and taxpayers for not paying sufficient attention to their public schools and working to make improvements.
—“The charter schools succeeded and proved themselves based on the exams given by the state to both groups.”
This is definitely not the case for cyber charter schools; most of those perform worse than the average public school. And, most brick and mortar schools are not performing better than most middle class public schools; they perform about the same. So, there isn’t something magical about the charter schools. It’s about the emphasis on education and the expectations for achievement that the schools work to instill and maintain. But, even that is not easy to achieve without the parents working towards that same goal. Charter schools can decide whether a student is a good fit or not; if students won’t or cannot work to the expectations they have to go elsewhere.
—“How are they going to attend 20 different charter schools that might all operate in their district?”
Where do you come up with such ideas? You are thinking like those who want a command economy. I believe in a marketplace and choice.”
It is unreasonable to expect taxpayers to attend 20 different charter school board meetings, to try to maintain a reasonable degree of oversight on the budget, quality of curricula, and quality of the teachers (etc) on 20 different charter schools, and hope that the unelected board members of these 20 different charter schools actually take taxpayer concerns seriously (which they have no reason to since they are not elected, they are selected to serve on these boards).
—“Sure. Go to your district’s school board meetings. Ask to see the curricula and resources. Look at the Policy Manual. Ask to sit in on classes. Look at your child’s homework or talk to people in the district who have kids if you don’t. Call your school board members. Advocate for the Great Works, history, and a more classical curriculum. Then talk to your state and Federal representatives. A lot of the problems are coming from those levels, the Federal level especially.”
—“When you hit a brick wall, one goes around it and doesn’t wait for their child’s destruction. Sign up for a charter school or something else.”
Yep, choose the something else with your own money, not someone else’s. I thought Republicans and conservatives didn’t want people getting a free ride off other people’s money? At least at public schools people have pooled their money and everyone gets an opportunity to decide how that money is spent, what kind of curricula the kids of the community get, etc. You can discuss your perspectives with your elected school board members, you can attend school board meetings and ask to look at materials, and participate in the elections of those who vote on how to direct the education of the kids of your community.
—“Parents should not be able to choose how to spend their neighbor’s educational tax dollars.”
“Taxpayers should not be paying schools that fail to educate children.”
I agree. They should pay attention to their local schools and work to effect positive change if kids are not getting a good education. Even schools with “good scores” need people to pay attention because the curricula has been badly manipulated since NCLB. Even schools with good scores are not necessarily educating kids to be free and able to participate in their own self-governance. Educating kids for the Digital 4.0 Industrial Revolution is the name of the game nowadays.
—“What you are listening to is the teacher union’s argument to provide themselves with more money and power.”
Teacher’s unions (especially at the national level), as far as I can tell, are in cahoots with the big money and power players of corporations and federal government control.
I am arguing for American citizens to reassert their birthright to self-governance in a constitutional republic. I am arguing for the American people to reassert their authority over local education and their hard-earned tax dollars. If Americans really want a government of the people, by the people, for the people, then they need to be in charge and that means participating in the decision-making but charter schools sever people’s ability to participate in the decision-making for their money. They need to attend school board meetings, talk to board members, look at the curricula, look at the budgets, vote, yes, but voting is after everything else.
>>“[Teacher’s Union’s] marketing campaigns are more powerful than those of the largest corporations.”
>I doubt it.”
What corporation has had an advertising campaign for decades? Even you seem to believe too much of what they say. The teachers union effectuated the closure of many schools while teachers continued to receive their salaries. The teacher’s union was shown on video protecting teachers who were violent toward their students.
“I disagree. It is taxation without representation.”
You are wrong.
“My elderly neighbors are getting their ability to choose taken from them”
Your elderly neighbors voted for the schools to educate. The charter schools succeeded, while the public schools failed. Your elderly neighbors (giant unproven anecdote) should vote to fund education or stop the funding. NYC public schools aren’t doing their job. Fire the public schools.
“Then that is the fault of parents and taxpayers for not paying sufficient attention to their public schools and working to make improvements.”
Go Prairie go, blame the parent who has no education and might not even have a job. It’s time for reality testing.
“This is definitely not the case for cyber charter schools”
I am not arguing for cyber charter schools. I am arguing for choice that creates competition leading to better use of funds.
In any event, I have excellent evidence of charter schools dramatically improving student performance. You have giant unproven anecdotes that are meaningless. As I said earlier, the public school lobbying experts hired by the teacher’s unions have done a fantastic job.
“So, there isn’t something magical about the charter schools.”
In the past, I provided you with numbers. You couldn’t see that a 70% proficient rating was better than a 70% failure?
“It is unreasonable to expect taxpayers to attend 20 different charter school board meetings,”
I think when they see their children able to read while their neighbors in the public school can’t, that tells them something. Don’t you think that is correct? They are dealing with one school, the school their children are in.
“Yep, choose the something else with your own money,”
Your preference is that children graduate from public school ignorant.
Taxpayers should not be paying schools that fail to educate children.
“I am arguing for American citizens to reassert their birthright to self-governance in a constitutional republic. ”
The choice is to continue letting students graduate public school without an education or permit competition proven successful.
“They are not hired.”
Charter schools are paid, by the city, to educate students. They have done an excellent job.
“And, in NYC, there is a giant school board for the entire city that makes that decision. Not exactly local control.
Charter schools must provide a specified curriculum, and their students take the same exam as public school students. The charter students pass while the public school students fail.
” It sounds like the middle and upper classes are doing fine.”
Those with money pay for education outside one of the most expensive public school systems.
“Over-simplified ”
The word is successful. What is over-simplified?
S. Meyer,
–““Charter schools have their own boards that are NOT elected by the citizenry or taxpayers yet they use taxpayer money however they wish and taxpayers have no recourse or control over that money.”
School boards hire companies to help them make decisions. They choose from those suggestions.
A charter school (NYC) is hired by the school boards if it meets their standards.”
They are not hired. And, in NYC, there is a giant school board for the entire city that makes that decision. Not exactly local control. Maybe the school board shouldn’t pass the buck of responsibility.
“Their standards”. Interesting.
—“The public school system in NYC is mostly failing those in the lower socio-economic group, while charter schools have reversed the trend and led to college for many. The parents opt for charter schools because they recognize their children are being better educated.”
I think an interesting analysis would be to see why the lower socio-economic group is having such a hard time in the NYC public school system. It sounds like the middle and upper classes are doing fine.
“The comparison of charter and public schools is made with the same populations, randomly comparing the same grade taught in the same building.” Over-simplified and only in NYC. There are way more variables than for broad conclusions to be drawn from this alone.
“When you hit a brick wall, one goes around it and doesn’t wait for their child’s destruction.”
So taxpayers and parents should be paying attention to their local public schools to keep them maintained educationally as well as physically. Far too many schools have let their education deteriorate–and I include schools with “good” scores in this assessment. NCLB and Common Core are waypoints in the transformation to just a new kind of Industrial Education. Lots of “good” schools are still not educating students to be a free people; they are educating them for career pathways in the 4.0 Industrial Revolution.
“So taxpayers and parents should be paying attention to their local public schools to keep them maintained educationally as well as physically.”
When that fails and “you hit a brick wall, one goes around it and doesn’t wait for their child’s destruction.”
“I didn’t say Sweden advanced education better than any other country. I said, “I think Sweden ***started the process*** in the late 1600s.””
Sorry. Lack of clarity on my part. I don’t think they started it either. Perhaps we have read different things. Public education grew in fits and starts in scattered locales primarily in the places I mentioned. As far as I know, Sweden was not the originator.
” I don’t think they started it either. Perhaps we have read different things.”
There isn’t a sudden start in things of this nature, but I think the Swedish Parliament instituted a nationwide public school system sometime before our Civil War. If you find an earlier nationwide public school system in Europe let me know.
S. Meyer,
“If you find an earlier nationwide public school system in Europe let me know.”
What do you mean by nationwide public school system?
The United States’ system, such that it was, was a local one implemented by communities all over the United States via their elected representatives on school boards. The school boards organized and directed the education for the children of their communities (everything from figuring out fees and finances to the curriculum and book selections to the hiring of teachers and the building of school buildings). This is a nationwide public school system that was not directed by the nation-state.
While monarchs tried to get things started here and there (e.g., Charlemagne and Elizabeth I) and reformers advocated for universal education (e.g., John Calvin and John Comenius), it was inconsistent and spotty.
Frederick the Great, of Prussia, seems to have been the first to most consistently and successfully provide universal education (~1760). He was a complicated fellow. A monarch through and through, but one who encouraged freedom of religion, freedom of speech and of the press. It seems to me that our Founders decided to take what was good about his governance and set aside the bad, as they appeared to do in so many other arenas of developing the Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and our Bill of Rights.
https://stanfordfreedomproject.com/what-is-freedom-new-essays-fall-2014/frederick/
“What do you mean by nationwide public school system?”
I think I answered that in my response. “There isn’t a sudden start in things of this nature, but I think the Swedish Parliament instituted a nationwide public school system sometime before our Civil War.”
Though the European countries under discussion today have federal systems, I believe Sweden was the first.
“This is a nationwide public school system that was not directed by the nation-state.”
I specified European with top-down influence ( Swedish Parliament instituted).
S. Meyer,
“I specified European with top-down influence”
Then that was Frederick the Great of Prussia (reign 1740 – 1772).
Norway, rather poverty stricken, still managed to have some schooling required since 1739.
🙂
Because educating their communities’ children mattered to them. They saw the benefit for all.
S. Meyer,
“The first official school under Jewish auspices was established at Shearith Israel (the Spanish and Portuguese Synagogue) in 1731 in New York City. Focusing on Hebrew studies, the school (although attached to the synagogue) operated as a separate entity with its own fees. In 1755, Shearith Israel expanded to include secular subjects, such as English composition. After closing during the Revolutionary War, the school reopened and functioned as a day school until 1821, receiving state funds as part of New York’s newly created common school system that enabled poor Jewish children to receive an education.”
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/jewish-schooling/
Yes and the Jewish children learned to read long before the Jamestown Colony.
Yes, but so did many Christian kids. I grant you the percentage of Jewish kids being educated was far higher, but there were schools for Christian kids, too. Queen Elizabeth I set aside money for schools before Jamestown. Not much, though. Schooling for everyone was not fairly widespread in parts of Europe til the late 1600s and into the 1700s.
“Yes, but so did many Christian kids.”
Really? The word many can mean relatively few percentage-wise. Is that your claim? What percent of middle-class Christian kids knew how to read? Start in Babylonian times and work your way forward.
“Schooling for everyone was not fairly widespread in parts of Europe til the late 1600s”
At that time, what percent were illiterate? Most.
S. Meyer,
” What percent of middle-class Christian kids knew how to read? Start in Babylonian times and work your way forward.”
This is silly.
Why are you trying to have a debate on the literacy rates comparing Jews and Christians like it’s some competition? Both are people of the Book. Americans in general would do well to pursue intellectual pursuits to a far greater extent.
“Schooling for everyone was not fairly widespread in parts of Europe til the late 1600s”
“At that time, what percent were illiterate? Most.”
Total percentage for the entire population was high because the percentage of poor people was high. The percentage of literate middle class people was probably fairly high because they were wanting to emulate the literate and successful upper class. Social mobility was beginning in the 1600s or so and people wanted the education that went with success.
It was also just in the culture to want to learn deeply about the world for pleasure.
Prairie, I am not making a comparison. I am stating that until very recent times, literacy rates were extremely low. A singular example of literacy among the vast illiterate community is meaningless. Even Jews were mostly not literate despite their religious teachings. But the literacy rate and education were high enough that despite their small numbers, the leadership in places they were permitted to wander through chose them for many important positions.
This discussion is about literacy not a comparison of literacy among the “people of the Book.”
“Total percentage for the entire population was high because the percentage of poor people was high.”
That is the reason some of your statements on the subject are silly.
“The percentage of literate middle class people was probably fairly high because they were wanting to emulate the literate and successful upper class.”
I don’t believe a middle class existed throughout history. The development of the middle class and the industrial revolution changed the world.
S. Meyer,
“I don’t believe a middle class existed throughout history. The development of the middle class and the industrial revolution changed the world.”
I never said anything about “throughout history”. Something of a middle class developed during the Renaissance, which is when literacy rates increased, as I noted. The printing press dramatically enabled the increase in literacy.
“A singular example of literacy among the vast illiterate community is meaningless.”
My example of Maria Merian was not simply a single example of literacy. I made note of her to put an interesting face on literacy in the 1600s rather than just a dry discussion point about increased literacy. Not only was she a literate woman, but she wrote and self-illustrated books about insects (etc) and their metamorphosis cycles. These books were purchased by other literate people (enough so that she could support herself even). She wanted her books to not only be of interest to scholars but also to the average person and help them better understand the insect world (misconceptions about insects were rife at the time). People like Audobon were inspired by her (for good reason–her illustrations are beautiful and quite detailed and her notes were careful and thorough).
“I never said anything about “throughout history”. Something of a middle class developed during the Renaissance, which is when literacy rates increased”
To make sure we were on the same page, I mentioned ancient Babylonia. You were on a different page.
Literacy rates didn’t spike until more recently, though, as the middle class developed, literacy increased.
“My example of Maria Merian was not simply a single example of literacy.”
She was a product of the higher class and educated family that had nothing to do with the literacy of the masses.
S. Meyer,
“She was a product of the higher class and educated family that had nothing to do with the literacy of the masses.”
She was not a product of the higher class. She was middle class. Publishers were still a kind of tradesman. Literacy was slowly expanding beyond the nobility. At the time of her birth the middle class was fairly literate.
I grant you that literacy of the masses was not yet realized. The poor still could not afford what meager school fees there were, or, they could not afford to spare their children who were needed to work to support their families. There may have been schools for the poor supported by churches, but in 1660, I don’t think there were very many schools everyone, as you say ‘the masses’, could afford to attend. That opportunity slowly continued to expand as time went on.
What do you mean by literacy?
“Publishers were still a kind of tradesman.”
Her father was literate (only a tiny percentage were), financially secure, and well-known in a field where reading was essential. She was a poor example and not part of the masses.
“I grant you that literacy of the masses was not yet realized. ”
Literacy of the masses was the crux of the discussion.
S. Meyer,
“She was a poor example and not part of the masses.
“I grant you that literacy of the masses was not yet realized. ”
Literacy of the masses was the crux of the discussion.”
Part of the discussion included the slow expansion of literacy to more people beyond the nobility and clergy following the invention of the printing press and the increase in a middle class. And, she demonstrates the excellence that can be achieved when reason and faith ride along together in people and in the wider culture.
“she demonstrates the excellence that can be achieved when reason and faith ride along together in people and in the wider culture.”
She does but people like her existed throughout history.
S. Meyer,
What do you mean by literacy?
“What do you mean by literacy?”
The precise definition of literacy is in the dictionary, but one should deviate from our present understanding to one based on time and place. One could say it is relative to the existing factors.
S. Meyer,
““What do you mean by literacy?”
The precise definition of literacy is in the dictionary, but one should deviate from our present understanding to one based on time and place. One could say it is relative to the existing factors.”
Literacy simply means the ability to read and write. There are obviously gradations for that–Dr. Seuss’s Hop on Pop to Shakespeare’s King Lear or Homer’s Iliad or the government’s legalese. What level is necessary to participate in our own self-governance as our Founder’s envisioned? I am literate but not as much as I could or should be.
” but one should deviate from our present understanding to one based on time and place. One could say it is relative to the existing factors.”
Could you elaborate? What do you mean?
“What level is necessary to participate in our own self-governance as our Founder’s envisioned?”
A lot less than is needed today.
S. Meyer,
“A lot less than is needed today.”
A lot less of what?
Are you saying less literacy is needed or less of something else? Surely you do not mean less literacy is needed.
I think it is obvious that increasing amounts of literacy are required today.
S. Meyer,
I am glad we are in agreement that more literacy is needed.
““What level is necessary to participate in our own self-governance as our Founder’s envisioned?”
A lot less than is needed today.”
A lot less of what?
Do you think we are talking about pork bellies?
Sorry. I finally grokked your answer.
“What level is necessary to participate in our own self-governance as our Founder’s envisioned?”
You wrote “A lot less than is needed today.”
I think we meant different things. I thought you meant less Federal involvement, less standardized testing, or something else like that. I was mistaken in that way.
I meant “as they envisioned” in a more structural manner overall than during the time period it was devised, as I think you meant.
For we the people to self-govern in our constitutional republic at the local, state, and federal level as the Founders envisioned, you are correct, the Founders and the people needed, in some ways, less knowledge and a lower degree of literacy than we do today because less was known about the world in general, and, we were not the world power that we are today.
However, to be able to self-govern, where we the people discuss domestic and foreign affairs with our elected representatives and understand pending legislation (etc), we the people need to know more of what the Founders knew about history, rhetoric, the rise and fall of civilizations and an understanding of mankind through the Big ideas and the Great Works, as well as have quite a bit of knowledge about the world both foreign and domestic in its many aspects to judiciously consider the issues at hand.
To better engage with complex issues, we need a store of knowledge and the ability to ask questions. We need a strong and broad foundational education, but we also need an inclination to continue learning across a wide range of subjects. Thomas Jefferson was a Renaissance man. Maybe we need to aim more towards that than the hyper specialization and “career pathways” we’ve slid (or been pushed) into.
Prairie, we need an educated society and trust that people can think for themselves. Taxpayers spend a lot of money attempting those relatively simple ideas.
Start with the families and the children. Educate the children and permit parents to make decisions for themselves and their children.
Make a decision. What is most important? Educated children or a concept you hold that is flawed in many ways. To educate our children, we must do better everywhere, especially in those places where education failed our children, like NYC. Permit choice and let it lead to a competitive environment, so our schools fight to improve education instead of working toward the lowest common denominator.
S. Meyer,
“where education failed our children”
Did education fail our children or did the so-called adults fail the children? Did their parents fail them?
“Educated children or a concept you hold that is flawed in many ways.”
A constitutional republic is the best means to promote liberty for as many people as possible. It begins to falter when people take that liberty for granted and do not keep up their duties and responsibilities to maintain it. If people participate in their own self-governance and pay attention to how schools are educating children, then the children will be educated. If people do not look after liberty and education and everything else needing attention in a free society then someone else will fill that vacuum, and, vacuums will be created because that “someone else” is motivated to shift power unto themselves.
“Permit choice and let it lead to a competitive environment, so our schools fight to improve education instead of working toward the lowest common denominator.”
That environment only means different schools will pop up, not better. When a business fails, it doesn’t mean something better fills its place, only something different. Could be better or it could mean that it, too, might fail.
How about we help our schools know what it means to educate a free people.
“Did education fail our children or did the so-called adults fail the children? Did their parents fail them?”
In this case, it is the school system that failed our children. Yes, you can blame the parents, and if you blame them, maybe you can also blame God, but it is the school system that we are dealing with. Some people are preventing competition, so yes, they are very much at fault.
“A constitutional republic is the best means to promote liberty for as many people as possible.”
You are starting to go far afield. The marketplace is the best at getting value for dollars. You are against competition for public schools.
“That environment only means different schools will pop up, not better. ”
You were proven wrong in NYC.
Of interest:
“Rob Gleason, a former Pennsylvania Republican Party chairman and now a Cambria County school board member, called on Republican lawmakers to support charter school reforms. Over the years, GOP lawmakers have shown resistance toward reforms that they believe could curb the growth of this school choice option.
He said charter schools do not have elected school boards and are not required to have board representation from the community they serve. They can contract with a for-profit company to run their school. Once they do, he said the public loses its ability to see how the for-profit company spends the taxpayer dollars.”
https://www.pennlive.com/politics/2023/02/charter-school-reform-has-become-like-groundhog-day-in-pa-advocates-say.html
I’m not the only one who sees taxation without representation.
The most important thing for the safety of the children is their education. Every parent, with their eyes and ears, can help in the evaluation. The state or locality can make rules, but I listened to your complaint months ago when you said it wasn’t fair because public schools had to do things a certain way, impacting costs and education.
That is the name of the game. Competition leads to better ways of doing things. Charter schools create competition.
The lawmaker concluded but provided no information about the specifics, so we know no more than we did before his statement. We can’t even be sure of what he is talking about. Maybe he was hoping the teacher’s union would look favorably on him.
How did it work out in the Dark and Middle Ages?
Sam, that’s a fair question. There are parallels between then and now as to how the ruling authority justified their powers to exert their will on the people. In fact, from the first moment that two or more people gathered together, they used something to justify how they would relate to one another. I’ll call that relationship both government and culture. While humans are inherently social creatures, they also have by their existence certain natural rights that they desire to protect. Human history is a story of how different cultures evolved and how they were governed, given the fact human nature never changes.
The Old Testament is a perfect example of how a culture struggled with their nature. The point is not necessarily that it proves or disproves the existence of God. It proves what happens when any culture abandons their faith in a power greater than man. Mosaic Law was always designed to combat the force of human nature. Even the principles derived from the teachings of Jesus Christ in the New Testament stand as a guide for our human nature. Throughout history, human nature has defeated those laws and principles. Does that prove God does or does not exist? That would be the shallowest of interpretations. Civilizations advanced when they rose out of their self-incurred nonage. (Kant) They used reason from their own interpretations to best advance their cultures. And as always, it has been man’s nature that has gotten in the way.
If you’re basing your thesis on the idea the failures of our human existence are the result of a flawed belief in the existence of God, you’re missing the entire point. Judeo-Christian theology proves our failures are rooted in man’s nature, with and without a belief in God. If you want to focus on reason and what is provable, then begin with the evidence of what man’s nature has done throughout history. Not in the name of God or gods, or no God to justify their actions, but rather in defiance of the Laws and Principles intended to secure the natural rights of man. Our current story is a continuation of the story throughout history where the dominant culture once again believes man is the highest power. You can point to the Enlightenment as the great turning point in history. You can use reason, logic and science to prove how far we’ve advanced in the last 400 years. And yet none of that has evolved human nature. We have the same capacity for doing evil as in the beginning of time.
This is a great article connecting our DoI with Judeo-Christian theology. Believe in God or nothing at all, but at least believe in the principles necessary for the security of our natural rights.
https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2023/07/six-biblical-principles-embodied-declaration-independence-robert-m-still.html?mc_cid=af6ce75292
“Judeo-Christian theology proves our failures are rooted in man’s nature . . .”
Only if one accepts that view of man’s nature — which is that man is a metaphysical misfit, burdened with two factions constantly at war: mind and body.
Incidentally, that mind-body dichotomy is one of the religious ideas that undercuts the Founders’ argument for self-governance. And it is a premise that has always been used to justify theocracy.
Only if one accepts that view of man’s nature — which is that man is a metaphysical misfit, burdened with two factions constantly at war: mind and body.
One does not need religion to understand man’s nature can manifest itself in behaviors to do purely good or purely bad things and everything in between. That’s not even controversial.
Incidentally, that mind-body dichotomy is one of the religious ideas that undercuts the Founders’ argument for self-governance. And it is a premise that has always been used to justify theocracy.
BS. That entire statement is your premise. The fact the Framer’s rejected the idea of a theocracy puts your premise in a tight spot. They understood man’s nature as I described. They also knew this new form of government was going to be an experiment in self-governance. An experiment because it required diligent oversight, both internally and externally, as a check against the lurking threat of man’s pernicious nature. When Franklin warned, a republic, if you can keep it, he knew the oversight from the people themselves no guarantee. They had the same nature as those they elect.
“They understood man’s nature as I described.”
No, they did not. They assumed that Renaissance/Enlightenment premise that man is perfectible.
If you want to see a period that took that premise *seriously*, try the Dark/Middle Ages — where there was a combined power of church and state. Or look at Iran and communism.
“Believe in God or nothing at all . . .”
That is a false dichotomy. And has been around for some 2,500 years.
As intended, it’s not false at all. It was intended to describe the range of possible beliefs from one extreme to the other. And it’s been around since man first walked the planet.
“It was intended to describe the range of possible beliefs from one extreme to the other.”
No. That false *alternative* is intended to convey the fallacy that there is not a third alternative — a this-worldly, non-mystical concept of morality. Such codes exist and have existed since Aristotle.
One might honestly attempt to refute a scientific view of morality. But one cannot evade their existence. To do so, is the fallacy of false alternative. And it is intellectually dishonest.
Dozens of new Americans take the Oath of Allegiance in Richmond: ‘You inspire us’
“It doesn’t matter if you’ve been an American citizen for 100 years or 100 minutes. The cloak, all of those things that come with it, the protection and hopefully the embrace of other Americans, will be with you always,” Judge Gregory said. “You inspire us that good people like you want to be citizens of our country. And to me, that says a lot about hope.”
The home countries of those obtaining citizenship ranged from Bhutan to El Salvador to Vietnam.
https://www.wtvr.com/news/local-news/new-americans-take-the-oath-of-allegiance-july-04-2023
Viva USA!
🇺🇸
“Yet, our Constitution created the most successful and stable constitutional system in the history of the world.”
I think that statement has been overtaken by events.
Hats off to 𝐑𝐢𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐝 𝐇𝐞𝐧𝐫𝐲 𝐋𝐞𝐞, whose bright idea some 247 years ago was to “put forth the motion to the Continental Congress to declare Independence from Great Britain, which read (in part):
Resolved: That these united colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.”
Richard Henry Lee
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Henry_Lee
Americans who complain about America really need to get out more. Somalia beckons, Russia calls, Sudan awaits…It’s pathetic, the hijacked mind, so weak, so angry…hey, no one ever said the human realm was easy. Losers lose, winners win and in closing Harvard needs their legacy students to keep it real.
The Truth About France.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLKmwuuo5h0
No, it is not a celebration of July 4th. It is what happens when the left feels their oats and wishes to destroy. We saw that in Russia; we saw it in China. We saw peaceful demonstrations with BLM and Antifa intermittently seeing it after a criminal dies and is resurrected as a leftist god.
Yes, what is happening in France is leftist agitation combined with Islamists. Yes, it happens here, but let’s not stop it as long as Joe Biden can sell America down the drain.
When we see this video, we can see the effect of the BLM riots in 2020. The American Left (journalists, academics, media generally, and politicians) is not only destroying this country but as much of Europe as it can influence. It is notable and encouraging that eastern Europe seems to be relatively immune to the anti-Western propaganda coming from our country’s elites.
Jean Raspail Camp of the Saints
Orwell was not the only novelist to see dystopia’s future.
.-“””””””-.
.’ __ \_
/ / \/ \
| \_0/\_0/______
|:. .’ oo`\ \
|:. / \ !
|’ ; | | 1
|:.. . \_\______ |
|::.|’ , \,_____\ /
|:::.; ‘ | . ‘| ====)_/===;===========;()
|::; | | ; ; | | # # # #:::::::::::::::::::::
/::::.|-| |_|-|, \ # # # #::::::::::::::::::::
/’-=-‘` ‘-‘ ‘–‘\ # # # #:::::::::::::::::::::
/ \ # # # #::::::::::::::::::::
H A P P Y
F O U R T H O F J U L Y
I hope everyone is having a nice holiday & the 4th.
Here’s the real America most of us still live in:
https://www.newswars.com/the-most-epic-star-spangled-banner-2/
OT| Gunman arrested for Philadelphia mass shooting which left 5 dead is BLM activist who wore women’s clothes: sources
The rifle-wielding suspect who donned a bulletproof vest before allegedly shooting dead five men and injuring two children in Philadelphia has been identified as a Black Lives Matter supporter who shared gun-toting memes on social media. Kimbrady Carriker, 40, was nabbed shortly after the bloodshed in the city’s Kingsessing neighborhood Monday night, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported, citing sources. Cops haven’t yet publicly disclosed the suspect’s identity. In his Facebook page, Carriker posted two pictures of him wearing a bra, a women’s top and earrings with his hair braided long in March, three months before the alleged shooting.
https://nypost.com/2023/07/04/kimbrady-carriker-ided-as-philadelphia-gunman-accused-of-killing-5/?utm_source=sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news_alert&utm_content=20230704?&utm_source=sailthru&lctg=62680bbe38a279b1870b18c5&utm_term=NYP%20-%20News%20Alerts
Happy Independence Day! The American Revolution never really ends. We get a new “Mad King George III’ most every election. We’re jealous with our liberty and we ought to be. Let freedom ring and remember the ones resting and watching in Arlington and fields from Saratoga to New Orleans to Gettysburg to the Argonne to Normandy to Inchon to Khe Sanh to Kandahar who “bought” the bell. Ring it loud, they deserve to hear it.
Happy 4th of July, America!
Enjoy the wholly unconstitutional matriculation affirmative action, grade-inflation affirmative action, employment affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, minimum wage, rent control, social services, forced busing, public housing, utility subsidies, WIC, SNAP, TANF, HAMP, HARP, TARP, HHS, HUD, Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Labor, Energy, Obamacare, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Social Security Supplemental Income, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc.
Article 1, Section 8, provides the power to tax for ONLY Debt, Defense and general Welfare. The same Article and Section deny regulation other than that of the value of money, commerce among nations, States and Indian tribes, and lland and naval Forces. The absolute 5th Amendment right to private property allows ONLY the owner to “claim and exercise” dominion.
Abraham Lincoln threw the baby out with the bathwater; Lincoln threw the Constitution out with reprehensible slavery and commenced the incremental implementation of the principles of communism which America exists under today. American freedom has been going, going gone since 1860. Lincoln’s pen pal, Karl Marx, is smiling ecstatically.
Thank you to the Supreme Court which has failed every step of the way to support the “manifest tenor” of the Constitution over the implementation of the principles of communism. It all began with the Supreme Court failing to support fully constitutional secession which is not prohibited by the Constitution and was not prohibited or discouraged by the Founders and Framers.
_______
“Toto, I’ve a feeling we’re not in [America] anymore.”
– Dorothy, The Wizard of Oz
Happy Independence Day!
Jonathan: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. That’s all I remember from physics. Anyway, the right-wing majority on the SC has found Harvard’s affirmative action admissions policies are unconstitutional because they discriminate against white and Asian student applicants. So in reaction Harvard is facing a new federal civil rights complaint over Harvard’s “legacy” policy–the school’s practice of giving a leg-up to the children of wealthy donors and alumni. The organizations filing the complaint say the “legacy” policy gives preferential treatment to mostly white applicants–almost 70%–many of whom would not otherwise qualify for admission to Harvard. A lawyer for the complainants says: “Particularly, in light of last week’s decision from the Supreme Court, it is imperative that the federal government act now to eliminate this unfair barrier that systematically disadvantages students of color.
So turn about is fair play. The complainants are laying down a marker–telling the SC they can’t have it both ways. If affirmative action policies to create more diversity are unlawful, then the historic “legacy” policies that favor white applicants are equally unlawful. Will the SC conservative majority agree to hear the challenge? Don’t bet on it!
Hey Dennis McIntyre, how many of those legacy spots are held for the children of liberal oligarchs and politicians. Maybe your gotcha is going to get a bunch of your liberal friends. Sorry. I know you weren’t capable of thinking of that. How many of those white applicants are the children of liberal woke parents. I say let the culling began. Double Duh.
Dennis forgot to provide the link to the popular GoFundMe account for the French police officer charged with killing an illegal immigrant, thug who refused to obey instructions during a traffic stop in Nanterre, near Paris that led to the riots.
The fundraiser, set up by Jean Messiha, a former advisor to politician Marine Le Pen, has raised over a million euro so far. Dennis would support this police officer if he could but since his employer is China, he can not. apparently everyone else is though, in Euros though
GoFundMe: “Soutien pour la famille du policier de Nanterre”
https://www.gofundme.com/f/z86fy-soutien-pour-la-famille-du-policier-de-nanterre
Clearly affirmative action is antithetical and unconstitutional bias and favoritism. Clearly, there is success and failure in every aspect and facet of life. Affirmative action is dictatorship; affirmative action is the “dictatorship of the proletariat.” Affirmative action is not freedom. Affirmative action is an irrational and unreasonable attempt to compensate the losers.
The singular American failure has been and remains the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court. The entire communist American welfare state is unconstitutional. Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto 59 years after the adoption of the Constitution because none of the principles of the Communist Manifesto were in the Constitution. Had the principles of the Communist Manifesto been in the Constitution, Karl Marx would have had no reason to write the Communist Manifesto. The principles of the Communist Manifesto were not in the Constitution then and the principles of the Communist Manifesto are not in the Constitution now.
Affirmative action is the inverse of equity. Equity is the absence of bias and favoritism. You’re writing nonsense. The Constitution provides rights and freedoms. The Constitution exists in equity. The Constitution provides for freedom. The Constitution does not provide for diversity, bias or favoritism. You do not believe in freedom, you believe in the “dictatorship of the proletariat,” you believe in oppression of speech, thought, opinion, belief, choice, mind, cognition, ideas, conviction, discrimination, etc.
Congress has the intrinsic, natural and God-given authority to legislate against bodily injury and property damage. Congress has no authority to compel acceptance, rejection, adoration, loathing, success, failure, appreciation, disparagement, love, abhorrence, etc., of any person, place or thing in the universe. Defamation may be actionable by civil law.
It is unfortunate that you believe in dictatorship; you espouse and expound on dictatorship over thought and speech.
Please, and by all means, explain to the audience how you are not a direct and mortal enemy of the American thesis that is freedom and self-reliance, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, Americans and America.
Dennis, in your long, partisan rant you failed to mention if you think the Justices were right about the “leg up” some minorities receive is Constitutional. Is it Constitutional to discriminate against Asian kids? Simple answer would be nice.
Since we are on the topic of things that aren’t Constitutional please let is know if you think Joe Biden, contra to what Pelosi and he himself stated previously, had the legal right to waive 450 Billion DOLLARS without Congressional approval.
Maybe the legacy pool has changed.
Just remember, if they do away with legacy admissions, that does not mean that your favored minorities will win the admissions. Because of the ruling, admissions will still be based on merit (in theory), as they should be.
However, the claimants would first have to establish standing, and then show actual demonstrable harm; and of course they would have to work their way through the courts. Right now it is just lawyers braying threats in an act of political theater.
many of whom would not otherwise qualify for admission to Harvard
Harvard has shared the highest SAT scores are asians, then Legacy students, then the rest. That you are so gullible is no surprise. That’s what confirmation bias looks like.
Dennis – I suspect that even many of the “legacy parents” recognize that discrimination against deserving Asian applicants is unAmerican and must be stopped at any cost. The fact that 1/3 of the Supreme Court seems to find such raw racism to be kosher should be sobering and frightening.
My fondest dream is that people who hate this nation would have been born in Russia or China or Venezuela or Columbia where they couldn’t voice their hate of their nation on a blog such as this. This is a day when I celebrate the Minute Men, the Bluecoats, the Doughboys and the GI’s of World War Two. I am thankful that in this nation My son was able go to college and start his career with a salary that it took me fifty two years to achieve. I’m also thankful that my son believes that it his responsibility to pay back his student loans in a spirit of gratitude. Thank you Lord for The United States of America. May her flag forever wave.