If you haven't heard, and why should you as the story goes against the fictional narratives being pushed on us, Maspeth High School in New York has been revealed as a massive fraud.
At highly rated Maspeth High School in Queens, students know they can play hooky, skip course work, flunk tests — and still pass.Teachers there give the students a 65 on everything no matter what. The thing has blown up now, but since it's not as important as blackface costumes, we don't hear about it.
They call it the “Maspeth Minimum,” meaning everyone gets at least the minimum grade or score needed to pass or graduate, no matter what.
Whistleblowers call it fraud. The secret to the school’s 98% graduation and 90% Regents pass rate, they say, is simple: “Cheat!”
That article in the New York Post led me to a blog called Chaz's School Daze which details the corruption rampant in New York City schools and, unquestionably, in school districts across the country. Dig this.
There is no way you can have a 100% passing rate for classroom grades and a 7% standardized test passing rate without massive fraud.
Why the fraud? Why the need for the fraud? This is why.
It's not the teachers or the system or the Department of Education or even our political enemies. The problem is us. The fraud covers up the cultural rot all around us. Dig this comment from Chaz's blog.
I work in a school in which approximately 10% (100) of the students have serious emotional, psychological, family, and/or drug problems. It feels more like 50% because they require so much attention and cause so much havoc.When my daughter was younger and attending a public high school in suburban San Diego, she had similar stories. She wasn't in a rough neighborhood, she was in an upper-middle-class neighborhood.
Not only is no one admitting or addressing their needs, these troubled students are also interrupting, curbing, pilfering the education of the others. It is only when the students who attend school for academics go to college they have to work twice as hard to catch up with the rest.
Chaz's blog is an excellent source for stats and anecdotes, but it's got a big blind spot. There is no way for the schools to succeed if the families at home are in ruins. In the end, you are responsible for your own success and for the success of your children. Not the teachers, not the government, not society, you. Nuke the traditional family as we have done and you destroy the foundation necessary for success.
Well, that and costumes, of course. I mean, seriously. If it weren't for costumes worn 25 years ago by people we've never met, attending a party 1500 miles away with people we don't know, then a 50-75% illegitimacy rate wouldn't be an issue.
 |
| Way to go, Trudeau. Thanks for ruining it for everyone. |
9 comments:
"Nuke the traditional family as we have done"
Could you explain a bit further what actual actions you, personally, think are responsible for "nuking the traditional family"? You have been saying variations of this for a long time now, but you always stop short of saying exactly what you think happened, and what needs to change in order to fix it.
I mean, whatever was done clearly didn't affect the whole population uniformly. The graph you posted shows that whatever it is, has a wildly disproportionate effect on blacks and latinos, with much weaker effect on whites and practically no effect on asians. Since it has effects that focus mainly on either particular areas, or particular segments of the population, it should be possible to pin down what is different for them. Any ideas?
(I have my own theories, but since I have always lived in areas where the traditional family has not been "nuked", I don't have direct experience, so I'd be interested in hearing yours)
Could you explain a bit further what actual actions you, personally, think are responsible for "nuking the traditional family"?
This deserves a longer response, but here's something to consider.
The corruption itself is the answer. It's a lie we're living so that we don't have to restrict our own behaviors. Traditional sexual morality acknowledges biological reality. When we tossed it because we wanted to get our rocks off, we predictably ended up here. Cheating and lying to "graduate" students who can't pass classes because they lack discipline because they don't have a father in the house because we refuse to admit that all family structures aren't equal is how we nuked the traditional family.
Even when they have to live in the trenches and experience the horrors right up in their faces, they still can't bring themselves to admit the truth. I read several blog posts and went through the comments and no one can say it even though the stats are obvious and the mechanisms for failure plain.
The culture that they swim in, the one that causes the failures and blinds them to the roots of the problem is us. We did this to them, we did this to ourselves.
OK, I need to work this through or it will bug me.
I would argue and I've heard others of those races argue it, that when we gave blacks and Latinos the excuse of racism, it cut the legs out from under the people trying to push personal responsibility. Why try if no matter what you do, the crackers are going to hold you down?
Read the biographies of successful people and you'll find that the more disadvantages they had, the fewer excuses they made. That's what drives me bonkers about screaming "RACISM!" constantly. You couldn't come up with a better way to hold blacks and Latinos down if you tried.
You don't actually need to have monsters under your daughter's bed to keep her from getting up in the middle of the night, you just need her to believe they're down there. That's the beauty of the progs' racism obsession. For all we know, and the evidence seems to point this way, the percentage of actual racists in the population doesn't break 1%. As long as blacks and Latinos think it's 30%, they'll vote (D) and their children will come to the reasonable conclusion that the game is rigged and trying is for chumps.
I dunno, KT. That seems incomplete. Are you really saying that, back in the late 1800s-early 1900s when there actually was real, generally-accepted, government-supported racism, the affected groups were able to just shrug it off and tough it out to make stable families, but that when the actual racism was much reduced and became mostly just a campaign slogan, they couldn't handle it and went all to pieces? And that if we just persuaded everyone to shut up about racism, and flooded poor neighborhoods with missionaries and motivational speakers, they would pull themselves up and get on with life with a song in their hearts?
I suspect there is more to it than that. In particular, I think there is a strong effect of "getting more of what you pay for". I understand that most public assistance programs are designed so that you don't get benefits unless you "need" them. With the issue being that, if you are married parents and have any sort of job, you "clearly" aren't as "needy" as a single, unemployed parent. So the single unemployed get benefits that make them at least as well off as the poorest married couples with jobs, while the married couples that have jobs that are barely adequate to scrape by are eligible for nothing. So, is this really what we want to be paying for in the hopes of getting more of it?
The thing is, this doesn't necessarily have a lot to do with the culture. But, it has everything to do with economics.
Tim, the perverse incentives of the welfare state are definitely a major factor for the very reasons you noted. The Manhattan Contrarian has blogged a good bit on how The Great Society programs coincide very nicely with the sudden destruction of black families writ large - something neither slavery nor Jim Crow could do. His writings are well worth the read.
I think the foundation for all of this traces back to no-fault divorce and the ensuing ground shift in sexual mores which enabled men to be deadbeats who care nothing for their children and women to sleep around with no regard to consequence or familial stability. Welfare fuels the problem by adding monetary incentives for not having a family (or worse to destroy a poor but otherwise stable family solely for monetary benefit).
Travis, have you seen this one? Hilarious!
The guys have porn, video games and enough coin to buy some microwavable meals. What else do they need? Being worthy of a wife is a lot of work and she doesn't bring much to the table when you've got all that.
You could only have missed the warning signs if you'd discarded traditional norms of masculine and feminine behavior because they were "unjust."
Whoops.
Tim, I think it's a trap to think that problems from the past persist. Back in the 1920s, for example, we still had polio and parents took what steps they could to prevent it in their kids. If you did that now, people would rightly think you're a nut. The same goes for racism. It just isn't a major factor any more.
Dittos for economics. For the most part, if you want to learn something or you want your kids to learn something, you can. The Internet is the great equalizer there. You don't need a big library of books in your house or even access to the library. It's all there on your phone. You don't even need to read because YouTube has instructions for all kinds of things. Witness my tobacco experiment.
I've been rich and I've been poor. I've raised kids with a wife and without. There's no comparison. Raising kids on your own is orders of magnitude harder than raising them without money. It's the difference between ocean swells and ocean foam, no joke.
If you've got a culture that doesn't pound this constantly in music, movies, news and everywhere else, you end up where we have - giving into our lizard brains because that's what we're designed to do. Short term pleasure can only be suppressed by discipline and that discipline is too hard for almost everyone without societal support. We threw that support away when we embraced moral relativism and here we are.
That's what I mean when I say it's our fault. We fed the lizard and now we live like lizards.
The now uncritically accepted assumption that men and women are completely interchangeable in all facets of family life - an assumption that was forced into the Western mind by decades of feminist propaganda and, frankly, the acquiescence of lazy and feckless men all too willing to abdicate their mantle as husbands and fathers - has now come home to roost in the pervasive cultural rot only hinted at but oozing through every crevice of that article.
It seems to me that our culture has inculcated a generation of idealists in the worst possible sense of the term: these people want life to conform to their terms without regard to whether their desires are even remotely in comport with reality. Thus you have women waiting until their 30s to even start looking for a husband because they needed to "work on their careers first," all the while ignoring the biological reality that a woman's best childbearing years are in her 20s and low 30s. And what sort of fathers their prospective husbands would be isn't even on the radar! Wintery Knight writes a lot on this (as one who is trying fruitlessly to find a suitable woman not infected with the madness that is feminism).
Post a Comment