All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[hyped78]

...it's not indoctrination at all.

Of course it is. A maths book with official statistics that show that, proportionately, black people commit more crimes than white people would be what? Reality or indoctrination?

It's in the video that was provided in the post that you replied to -- they investigated the books in question and requested more examples, nearly all of which cited were not even in the books.

Overall though this isn't something I'm interested in debating: if you truly feel that these books are indoctrinating children with these questions and that representation is indoctrination then I'll leave you to it.

Edit: Found the problem with at least two of those four "examples" (that aren't even questions but just objectives) -- promoting empathy and concern for others.

------

"SEL helps students “develop healthy identities, manage emotions and achieve personal and collective goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain supportive relationships, and make responsible and caring decisions,” the Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning says...."

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/04/22/u...les/index.html

The video doesn’t say that those examples are fictional (in fact, CNN didn’t review even half of the books, if you’ve noticed how many they say they reviewed). An article from Politico mentions that some of the rejected books were published by Pearson, including the book with the images from the CNN article:
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/0...views-00030503

“They pointed to pages that discussed “racial profiling in policing” and “discrimination in magnet school admission,” along with one instance in which the book mentioned there were “too many” white police officers in the NYPD compared with the racial makeup of the community.
This textbook, published by Pearson, was one of dozens renounced by the state. Another book from Pearson covering precalculus honors was dinged for a section that asked students what algebra can help tell about “racial bias.”

The list of 54 books is here: https://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse...NotRecList.pdf

Your assertion that those examples were fictional remains basically unproven/ wrong. If your assertion is that this is not indoctrination and that it’s OK to have materials like these in maths textbooks, I respect your opinion but disagree with it.

And Yes, that content is indoctrination - also see my comment above.

That OxFam guide is an example of people, oh excuse me, individuals, whose hearts are in the right place, but go a bit too far and become quite absurd. Often they throw a whole bunch of new terms out at once and expect the rest of us to get on board immediately. That's really just setting yourself up for a backlash.

Totally agree, 100%

[hyped78]

As someone who has to provide context so much, did you read any of the responses to these conservative attacks or the document in question before coming in here to crow that something is woke and bad? It doesn't seem like it to me.

It seems to me like a book of suggestions written by an orginization that's trying to reach out to people across the planet (Many of whom don't speak English) has a point when it says that we shouldn't force everyone we deal with to learn our language first. At least that's how I took that section when viewed in context.

However with those on the right ready to pounce on any perceived wokeness across the planet, it wasn't the wisest move.

Who said anything about “conservative attacks”? (or just conservative attacks, rather; LBC isn’t a Conservative outlet and the UK isn’t the US)

And yes, I skimmed through the 92-page guide yesterday, thanks for asking. It’s available here:
https://policy-practice.oxfam.org/re...-guide-621487/

Happy reading. I am beginning to get offended that your native language is the oppressive language of colonization! (kidding, of course)

[aja_christopher]

[CaptainEurope]

The only proof of trump being arrested is trump, a pathological liar with a persecution complex. I wont believe it until I see him in cuffs

Patently untrue.
We know that the Manhattan DA, a week ago, gave Trump the opportunity to testify in front of the grand jury, as the DA is required by state law before an indictment.

We also know that Law enforcement agencies are discussing potential security plans for the possibility that former President Trump is charged in connection with a grand jury probe next week. The NYPD, the FBI, the Secret Service.

So maybe Trump just put those pieces together and picked a date. But it's not true to say that the only thing we have is his truthing socially. Things are happening, and soon.

[aja_christopher]

Of course it is. A maths book with official statistics that show that, proportionately, black people commit more crimes than white people would be what? Reality or indoctrination?

Your assertion that those examples were fictional remains basically unproven/ wrong.

If the statistics are factual, they would be reality -- not indoctrination.

And I asserted that the examples ("more examples") in the video were proven not to be in the books -- not all of the examples provided.

There is no point in discussing matters with those who like to misrepresent ideas and the views of others -- much less redefine words just to "win" an online argument.

Again -- if you feel that is sufficient evidence of indoctrination then that is completely your prerogative.

[hyped78]

If the statistics are factual, they would be reality -- not indoctrination.

And I asserted that the examples ("more examples") in the video were proven not to be in the books -- not all of the examples provided.

There is no point in discussing matters with those who like to misrepresent ideas and the views of others -- much less redefine words just to "win" an online argument.

I asked you to demonstrate that those specific examples from the CNN article (from one of the Pearson books) are imaginary/false. You pointed to the video as “proof” and now the video isn’t really proof? OK, so you’re unable to demonstrate that the examples are false - could’ve saved us both some time. The Politico article identifies one of the Pearson books as having the example of the statistics on racial bias.

I am not trying to win anything. You’re the one who said “a few questions that were allegedly in those books -- many of which were shown not even to be in the books in question.”, but apparently you’re unable to prove that statement regarding those four examples?

So you are OK with maths textbooks (we’re not even talking about social studies, etc.) teaching kids that black americans are more likely to commit crimes, proportionally, than white americans - if those statistics are factual? (And how can statistics be “factual” without the proper context, methodology background etc.?) That would be indoctrination too, I’m afraid. I’m sure the GOP would love to teach kids “maths” like that, but that would be wrong too. Very wrong.

[aja_christopher]

I asked you to demonstrate that those specific examples from the CNN article (from one of the Pearson books) are imaginary/false. You pointed to the video as “proof” and now the video isn’t really proof? OK, so you’re unable to demonstrate that the examples are false - could’ve saved us both some time.

And I provided counter-evidence in video that they were utilizing false examples -- including two in your article about teaching "empathy" being indoctrination.

Again -- if you want to see this as indoctrination based on those few examples then so be it but stop trying to force others to agree with you, especially with such flimsy evidence.

I'm not sure why it's so hard to simply agree to disagree here -- you see this as indoctrination and I don't.

Both of us should be comfortable with that assessment and leave it at that.

[hyped78]

And I provided counter-evidence that they were utilizing false examples -- including two in your article about teaching "empathy" being indoctrination.

Again -- if you want to see this as indoctrination based on those few examples then so be it but stop trying to force others to agree with you, especially with such flimsy evidence.

I'm not sure why it's so hard to simply agree to disagree here -- you see this as indoctrination and I don't.

Both of us should be comfortable with that assessment and leave it at that.

You didn’t provide any “counter evidence”, I’m afraid. Far from that (they reviewed less than half of the books…)

But I democratically agree to disagree, of course.

[thwhtGuardian]

Of course it is. A maths book with official statistics that show that, proportionately, black people commit more crimes than white people would be what? Reality or indoctrination?



The video doesn’t say that those examples are fictional (in fact, CNN didn’t review even half of the books, if you’ve noticed how many they say they reviewed). An article from Politico mentions that some of the rejected books were published by Pearson, including the book with the images from the CNN article:
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/0...views-00030503

“They pointed to pages that discussed “racial profiling in policing” and “discrimination in magnet school admission,” along with one instance in which the book mentioned there were “too many” white police officers in the NYPD compared with the racial makeup of the community.
This textbook, published by Pearson, was one of dozens renounced by the state. Another book from Pearson covering precalculus honors was dinged for a section that asked students what algebra can help tell about “racial bias.”

The list of 54 books is here: https://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse...NotRecList.pdf

Your assertion that those examples were fictional remains basically unproven/ wrong. If your assertion is that this is not indoctrination and that it’s OK to have materials like these in maths textbooks, I respect your opinion but disagree with it.

And Yes, that content is indoctrination - also see my comment above.



Totally agree, 100%

They don't show that, so yes that would be indoctrination. A person's race has no bearing on whether they may or may not commit a crime any more than a car's color has anything to do with how fast it goes.

[aja_christopher]

You didn’t provide any “counter evidence”, I’m afraid. Far from that (they reviewed less than half of the books…)

But I democratically agree to disagree, of course.

What are you "afraid" of -- that you can't just let this go and agree to disagree without "winning" the "argument"?

There is no argument here -- you can accept the information provided or not.

The counter-evidence is in the video -- they showed three examples provided by DeSantis that were not even in the books.

It was false information provided by DeSantis that wasn't even the math books they were claiming to ban.

[hyped78]

They don't show that, so yes that would be indoctrination. A person's race has no bearing on whether they may or may not commit a crime any more than a car's color has anything to do with how fast it goes.

Statistically and factually you are obviously wrong, FBI data 2019 (can find more recent data, if needed):
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s...ables/table-43

Cross this with the % of population by race in the US and you get statistical proportion. How would you like to see this in a maths textbook for kids? How would this be even relevant for maths exercises? (Statistics on perceived racial bias are also not relevant for maths exercises)

These are statistics without any context or background. Much needed context or background to the FBI statistics above would be something like “african americans are discriminated, targeted by the police and suffer more economic hardships”. See where I’m trying to get at?

[hyped78]

What are you "afraid" of -- that you can't just let this go and agree to disagree without "winning" the "argument"?

There is no argument here -- you can accept the information provided or not.

The counter-evidence is in the video -- they showed three examples provided by DeSantis that were not even in the books.

It was false information provided by DeSantis that wasn't even the math books they were claiming to ban.

I already agreed with you that we can agree to disagree! Honestly.

The video doesn’t say what you’re trying to prove, unfortunately. If you can clearly prove, for example, that one of those Pearson books never had that racial bias table (as mentioned in the Politico article), then go for it. Prove that that table is fake. I’ll wait.

[hyped78]

Silicon Valley Bank UK arm hands out £15m in bonuses days after £1 rescue

https://news.sky.com/story/silicon-v...escue-12836853

“The British arm of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB UK) has handed out millions of pounds in employee bonuses just days after its insolvency was averted through a Bank of England-orchestrated rescue deal.”

Oh boy…

[aja_christopher]

I already agreed with you that we can agree to disagree! Honestly.

The video doesn’t say what you’re trying to prove, unfortunately. If you can clearly prove, for example, that one of those Pearson books never had that racial bias table (as mentioned in the Politico article), then go for it. Prove that that table is fake. I’ll wait.

I never said it said anything other than that DeSantis was utilizing false examples to make the case for banning books.

Again -- I don't need to prove anything to you nor am I trying to prove anything to you.

If you want to believe what DeSantis is saying then so be it -- you're misrepresenting what is being said regardless and more dialogue is not going to change that.

[hyped78]

I never said it said anything other than that DeSantis was utilizing false examples to make the case for banning books.

Again -- I don't need to prove anything to you.

If you want to believe this then so be it.

I’m getting confused - is the racial bias table from Pearson fake or real? Or you don’t know/ not sure? Simple question. If you state that it’s fake then obviously I’d like to see proof of that (it’s a simple request).

And no, you don’t need to prove anything to anyone, this is an internet forum where strangers are having discussions!

I've learned something new - next time Dalak asks me for links/ stats/ articles that show/ prove what I'm saying I'll just quote you that I don't need to prove anything