Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

They Vote - They're the Future - Looks Grim

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • G David Bock
    replied
    Originally posted by Schmart View Post

    What do you feel the solution is?
    Since the purpose and focus of this thread is on "Civics", and maybe to some it looks more implied than overt, how such has been taught may need a revision, return to former methods. Following is one approach, consideration;

    Making Citizens

    How American Universities Teach Civics
    ...
    Abstract

    A new movement in American higher education aims to transform the teaching of civics. This report is a study of what that movement is, where it came from, and why Americans should be concerned.

    What we call the “New Civics” redefines civics as progressive political activism. Rooted in the radical program of the 1960s’ New Left, the New Civics presents itself as an up-to-date version of volunteerism and good works. Though camouflaged with soft rhetoric, the New Civics, properly understood, is an effort to repurpose higher education.

    The New Civics seeks above all to make students into enthusiastic supporters of the New Left’s dream of “fundamentally transforming” America. The transformation includes de-carbonizing the economy, massively redistributing wealth, intensifying identity group grievance, curtailing the free market, expanding government bureaucracy, elevating international “norms” over American Constitutional law, and disparaging our common history and ideals. New Civics advocates argue among themselves which of these transformations should take precedence, but they agree that America must be transformed by “systemic change” from an unjust, oppressive society to a society that embodies social justice.

    The New Civics hopes to accomplish this by teaching students that a good citizen is a radical activist, and it puts political activism at the center of everything that students do in college, including academic study, extra-curricular pursuits, and off-campus ventures.

    New Civics builds on “service-learning,” which is an effort to divert students from the classroom to vocational training as community activists. By rebranding itself as “civic engagement,” service-learning succeeded in capturing nearly all the funding that formerly supported the old civics. In practice this means that instead of teaching college students the foundations of law, liberty, and self-government, colleges teach students how to organize protests, occupy buildings, and stage demonstrations. These are indeed forms of “civic engagement,” but they are far from being a genuine substitute for learning how to be a full participant in our republic.

    New Civics has still further ambitions. Its proponents want to build it into every college class regardless of subject. The effort continues without so far drawing much critical attention from the public. This report aims to change that.

    In addition to our history of the New Civics movement and its breakthrough moment when it was endorsed by President Obama, we provide case studies of four universities: the University of Colorado, Boulder (CU-Boulder), Colorado State University in Fort Collins (CSU), the University of Northern Colorado in Greeley (UNC), and the University of Wyoming in Laramie (UW).

    We make four recommendations to state legislators across the country:
    1. Mandate a course in traditional American civics as a graduation requirement at all colleges and universities that receive public funding. If the institution itself is unwilling or unable to offer such a course, students must be permitted without penalty to meet the requirement by taking a qualified civics course at another institution.
    2. Establish a public body to set the guidelines for the required civics course, which should at a minimum teach the history, nature, and functions of our institutions of self-government, and which should aim to foster commitment to our form of self-government. The public body should also be charged with reviewing and approving civics textbooks to be used in these courses.
    3. Require that the traditional civics requirement be met only through classroom instruction. Service learning, civic engagement, or analogous extra-curricular activities will not be accepted as a substitute, supplement, or alternative.
    4. End funding for service-learning and civic engagement programs and bureaucracies.


    https://www.nas.org/reports/making-c...cs/full-report

    Leave a comment:


  • Andy H
    replied
    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

    And while raising my sons through K-12 and beyond I was constantly correcting the misinformation and propaganda they were receiving from their teachers, some of which was mandated from either the State or Federal funding that also sets required curriculum content (or exclusions). That was a few decades back, now I continue similar with the grandchildren.

    In recent years through one of the local civic organizations I'm part of, I've been involved in hosting a Constitution Knowledge Bowl for middle school students to compete in.

    I've also been active with the political party of my choice, campaigned for office and helped others campaign for their elections. And am currently active in those roles.

    I don't blame "everyone else", just call out certain parties whom have ideologies and agendas harmful to my community and nation, and do what I can legally and "through the system" to block their efforts and undo the damage they cause.
    Hi G David Bock

    I like your post, the only part for me that let it down was this line:-
    just call out certain parties whom have ideologies and agendas harmful to my community and nation

    There's no political party that isn't, its just a matter of degrees and personal tolerance, that either makes you look the other way or take a stand. There are loathsome aspects to both the Democratic and Republican parties and none should get a free pass. In fact the party I identify with more, I interrogate more harshly. I often vote one way at a local level compared to the national vote.
    My worst fears are when all the levels of Government, from City to State are controlled by one party, as there's often little accountability.

    Sadly in terms of education I fear things will only get worse as the online world replaces school/books/parents as a means to garner knowledge. This is especially worrying in a divisive society where individual thought is replaced herd thought.

    Regards

    Andy H



    Leave a comment:


  • Andy H
    replied
    Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
    There's a reason why our current state of affairs are just as bad as our future outlook. Boomers are just as ignorant on basic civics as our younger generation. No surprise there, ignorant adults leads to ignorant children. But, all anyone wants to do is point their finger instead of holding their own accountable for anything.

    Only 32% of Americans can name the 3 branches of government:

    https://yubanet.com/usa/survey-only-...of-government/

    Basic stuff! 32% is actually an increase over the previous year.

    1 in 5 can't name a single branch:

    https://www.al.com/news/2019/09/1-in...overnment.html

    Only 7% of the country can name the first four presidents:

    https://www.usmint.gov/news/press-re...unding-fathers

    The survey above is from 2007. The kids you're complaining about were only 7 years old at that time. So this is not an issue exclusive to our youth. This is a cultural issue that boomers are just as much at fault for. Americans have been viewed as ignorant for decades and for good reason. We have a reality TV star as President, not because of our youth, but because of our older generation. A reality TV star who thinks you can inject Lysol into the body and his older generation supporters will deflect and defend such comments instead of being intellectually honest enough to call it what it is.
    Hi Tactikill J

    There's also a distinct danger that we score true historical understanding and contextualization by the simple measure of rote learning. I know many individuals who can reel off names and dates of many American historical figures but can tell no more than that. Equally I know several individuals who couldn't say name the first 4 US Presidents but could tell you in depth about at least one of them. Which is the more 'educated'?

    Regards

    Andy H

    Leave a comment:


  • Karri
    replied
    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

    And while raising my sons through K-12 and beyond I was constantly correcting the misinformation and propaganda they were receiving from their teachers, some of which was mandated from either the State or Federal funding that also sets required curriculum content (or exclusions). That was a few decades back, now I continue similar with the grandchildren.
    Well that's a bit of a slippery slope, as you can hear similar stuff from people who believe in Illuminati and deep-state. And while naturally one should correct misinformation, it's not gonna amount to much in the overall scheme of things...youngsters these days know how to check such stuff from the internet anyways.

    In recent years through one of the local civic organizations I'm part of, I've been involved in hosting a Constitution Knowledge Bowl for middle school students to compete in.


    I've also been active with the political party of my choice, campaigned for office and helped others campaign for their elections. And am currently active in those roles.
    It doesn't seem to solve any problems though. I would say that in general it's probably the source of many of the problems. The two-party state is 1984-stuff when it comes to truth and education. Both sides naturally blame each other for everyone, and even when they switch sides all that was bad suddenly becomes good.

    I don't blame "everyone else", just call out certain parties whom have ideologies and agendas harmful to my community and nation, and do what I can legally and "through the system" to block their efforts and undo the damage they cause.
    Is that really the reason why US schooling sucks? What about the funding for example? I read that US schools received funding depending on their area. Isn't that a horribly ineffective and stupid way of doing this? It's like ensuring that poor people wont receive an equal education. In general, the setup seems to enforce a system where truth is based on whoever runs the district, republicans or democrats. The root-issue is not marxist teachers...


    This whole discussion is quite strange to me in many ways, as in Finland pretty much the only problem when it comes to education is whether the state is cutting or increasing funding. It's literally about how much and how well the teachers can teach, as opposed to USA where it seems to be about party lines and ideologies and conspiracies.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bow
    replied
    Maybe IF you taught your children that the world does not stop and start at the USA border and the rest of the world is flat....I can count the times I have run into US students that cant tell Universal time or realize that there are 12 months in a year because here in Canada and the EU we write ..D..M..Y.........

    North of YYZ...

    Leave a comment:


  • Schmart
    replied
    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
    Recent months events show that most of the money spent by this nation on education is a waste.
    What do you feel the solution is?

    Leave a comment:


  • DingBat
    replied
    Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

    They said the same things about MLK. It's an old tactic of the white supremacist. You can't take those people seriously, unless of course you are one yourself.
    You are making a mistake by debating this. The purpose of a Koch mouthpiece is not to make a logical, consistent argument. The purpose of a Koch mouthpiece is to throw up FUD, deflection, distraction, and even fabrications in order to either promote their agenda or simply muddy the waters.

    Ignore it and let it's own inconsistencies just lay there right in the open.

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

    They said the same things about MLK. It's an old tactic of the white supremacist. You can't take those people seriously, unless of course you are one yourself.
    Unfortunately Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo have influence and are taken seriously by the anti-white racists.

    Leave a comment:


  • TactiKill J.
    replied
    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

    Levin is a commentator, and provides the counterpoint to left wing radicals whom are "newscasters", dominating the MSM and presenting propaganda that should be left to the op-ed page.

    Mark Levin: BLM is the equivalent of the KKK​
    And the 'Democrat operatives in the media' keep defending them
    ...
    On "LevinTV" this week, host Mark Levin argued that Black Lives Matter is a "Marxist, anarchist organization" whose goal is to overthrow the United States government. He called out the "Democrat operatives in the media," such as CNN's Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo, for running interference for BLM and Antifa, seemingly without understanding who and what they're defending.

    "BLM is the equivalent of the KKK in terms of its racism, in terms of its antisemitism, in terms of its anti-Americanism. And this is the point that the left refuses to acknowledge and, in fact, attacks anyone who mentions it." Levin said.

    "This is what [BLM] told us. This is what they believe in," Levin said. "And yet Don Lemon keeps running interference for them, as he did Antifa ... 'Fredo' (Cuomo) could be the same. These are Democrat operatives in the media, defending Democrat operatives in the Black Lives Matter movement and the Antifa movement."
    ....
    https://www.theblaze.com/levintv/blm...1#rebelltitem1

    On a related note;

    WATCH: Tucker Plays Lemon’s Comments From 2013 On Black Community That’d Get Him ‘Fired Immediately’ Now
    ...
    On his Fox News show Wednesday, host Tucker Carlson contrasted CNN host Don Lemon’s recent political comments about the black community with comments he made in 2013.

    In the segment, Carlson highlighted comments from this week in which Lemon suggested that “black lives matter” does not mean “all black lives matter,” stating that the movement is not “all-encompassing” and specifically does not focus on black-on-black violence, as well as comments in which he mocked reports about the rising crime rates in major U.S. cities. Carlson then played comments from Lemon in 2013 addressing issues in the black community.
    ...
    “Now if you’re running a channel like CNN, you want dumb people on TV because they are compliant, they will say what they’re told, they will tell the audience what the moment demands, they will never stray from the script, and that’s exactly what Mr. Lemon is doing,” Carlson said. “But just seven years ago, it was a different country and people were kind of allowed to say what they thought was true. And so at the time, here’s what Don Lemon was saying about black communities.”

    In the 2013 CNN clip, Lemon said:
    More than 72 percent of children in the African-American community are born out of wedlock, that means absent fathers. And the studies show that a lack of a male role model is an express train right to prison, and the cycle continues. So please, black folks, as I said, if this doesn’t apply to you, I’m not talking to you. Pay attention to and think about what has been presented in recent history as acceptable behavior.

    Pay close attention to the hip-hop and rap culture that many of you embrace, a culture that glorifies everything I just mentioned. Thug and reprehensible behavior, a culture that is making a lot of people rich, just not you and it’s not going to.

    “Wow,” Carlson said after playing the clip. “Can you imagine what would happen if Don Lemon or his bodybuilding buddy [Chris Cuomo] over there or any of these hair-hats said something like that on CNN tonight or MSNBC? That would be their last live broadcast ever. They would be fired immediately. You can’t express views like that, and so they don’t. It tells you a lot.”
    ...
    https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch...urce=housefile
    They said the same things about MLK. It's an old tactic of the white supremacist. You can't take those people seriously, unless of course you are one yourself.

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    Originally posted by Karri View Post

    What a lame excuse. What have you done to improve the situation? Complained in internet forums? Absorbed the tenants of victimhood culture? blamed everyone else?
    And while raising my sons through K-12 and beyond I was constantly correcting the misinformation and propaganda they were receiving from their teachers, some of which was mandated from either the State or Federal funding that also sets required curriculum content (or exclusions). That was a few decades back, now I continue similar with the grandchildren.

    In recent years through one of the local civic organizations I'm part of, I've been involved in hosting a Constitution Knowledge Bowl for middle school students to compete in.

    I've also been active with the political party of my choice, campaigned for office and helped others campaign for their elections. And am currently active in those roles.

    I don't blame "everyone else", just call out certain parties whom have ideologies and agendas harmful to my community and nation, and do what I can legally and "through the system" to block their efforts and undo the damage they cause.

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    Originally posted by Massena View Post
    Mark Levin is a right wing radical and what he says should be taken with a very large salt pill. Hanson should stick to the classical age.
    Levin is a commentator, and provides the counterpoint to left wing radicals whom are "newscasters", dominating the MSM and presenting propaganda that should be left to the op-ed page.

    Mark Levin: BLM is the equivalent of the KKK​
    And the 'Democrat operatives in the media' keep defending them
    ...
    On "LevinTV" this week, host Mark Levin argued that Black Lives Matter is a "Marxist, anarchist organization" whose goal is to overthrow the United States government. He called out the "Democrat operatives in the media," such as CNN's Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo, for running interference for BLM and Antifa, seemingly without understanding who and what they're defending.

    "BLM is the equivalent of the KKK in terms of its racism, in terms of its antisemitism, in terms of its anti-Americanism. And this is the point that the left refuses to acknowledge and, in fact, attacks anyone who mentions it." Levin said.

    "This is what [BLM] told us. This is what they believe in," Levin said. "And yet Don Lemon keeps running interference for them, as he did Antifa ... 'Fredo' (Cuomo) could be the same. These are Democrat operatives in the media, defending Democrat operatives in the Black Lives Matter movement and the Antifa movement."
    ....
    https://www.theblaze.com/levintv/blm...1#rebelltitem1

    On a related note;

    WATCH: Tucker Plays Lemon’s Comments From 2013 On Black Community That’d Get Him ‘Fired Immediately’ Now
    ...
    On his Fox News show Wednesday, host Tucker Carlson contrasted CNN host Don Lemon’s recent political comments about the black community with comments he made in 2013.

    In the segment, Carlson highlighted comments from this week in which Lemon suggested that “black lives matter” does not mean “all black lives matter,” stating that the movement is not “all-encompassing” and specifically does not focus on black-on-black violence, as well as comments in which he mocked reports about the rising crime rates in major U.S. cities. Carlson then played comments from Lemon in 2013 addressing issues in the black community.
    ...
    “Now if you’re running a channel like CNN, you want dumb people on TV because they are compliant, they will say what they’re told, they will tell the audience what the moment demands, they will never stray from the script, and that’s exactly what Mr. Lemon is doing,” Carlson said. “But just seven years ago, it was a different country and people were kind of allowed to say what they thought was true. And so at the time, here’s what Don Lemon was saying about black communities.”

    In the 2013 CNN clip, Lemon said:
    More than 72 percent of children in the African-American community are born out of wedlock, that means absent fathers. And the studies show that a lack of a male role model is an express train right to prison, and the cycle continues. So please, black folks, as I said, if this doesn’t apply to you, I’m not talking to you. Pay attention to and think about what has been presented in recent history as acceptable behavior.

    Pay close attention to the hip-hop and rap culture that many of you embrace, a culture that glorifies everything I just mentioned. Thug and reprehensible behavior, a culture that is making a lot of people rich, just not you and it’s not going to.

    “Wow,” Carlson said after playing the clip. “Can you imagine what would happen if Don Lemon or his bodybuilding buddy [Chris Cuomo] over there or any of these hair-hats said something like that on CNN tonight or MSNBC? That would be their last live broadcast ever. They would be fired immediately. You can’t express views like that, and so they don’t. It tells you a lot.”
    ...
    https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch...urce=housefile

    Leave a comment:


  • Karri
    replied
    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
    Fairly easy to tell whom are not parents nor have raised children in the USA during the past few decades, dealing with the institutions of K-12 "education" as it self-destructs here.

    Clue, check the funding sources and demands such place .... for a start.
    What a lame excuse. What have you done to improve the situation? Complained in internet forums? Absorbed the tenants of victimhood culture? blamed everyone else?

    Leave a comment:


  • TactiKill J.
    replied
    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

    I didn't claim it was "NOT" taught, I claimed it was taught less and understood less than in decades past. If you can show where I said it was "not taught", quote from a post, than we will know you aren't lying.

    One class in span of middle to high school education is not going to be enough. Your link mentioned that regarding 90%, though should be 100% and more than one class during course of school years.

    Civics spans history, USA and individual state, as well as government and Constitution. In recent years while staffing a booth at the regional fair, we've had a wheel to be spun and where the arrow lands determines which question on civics the spinner will be asked. Lost count of how many times the first response was "What is civics?", and further exchanges with the young persons revealed admissions of how little such is taught. The questions we would select from to ask were from that naturalization test, and often even the simpler ones would stump the students.

    Point of the OP was providing examples of how little the current generation knows or understands civics and how they have a part in such. Their recent riots and demonstrations like CHAZ/CHOP prove this.
    You claimed it's taught less. So do you have any data you can reference showing that more than 90% of students took civics back in the 80s or earlier? If not, then you were wrong.

    Interestingly, the link points out another white privilege more than anything else.

    The point of your OP was to take a swipe at the younger generation for not knowing civics, ignoring the fact that the majority of boomers are just as ignorant on the subject, if not more so according to data trends. You then threw in baseless claims as to why, "taught less", which I debunked.

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

    The article says it's taught at 90% of schools. Your claim that it's not taught was false, period. Backpedaling doesn't change your original statement.



    Don't start lying.
    I didn't claim it was "NOT" taught, I claimed it was taught less and understood less than in decades past. If you can show where I said it was "not taught", quote from a post, than we will know you aren't lying.

    One class in span of middle to high school education is not going to be enough. Your link mentioned that regarding 90%, though should be 100% and more than one class during course of school years.

    Civics spans history, USA and individual state, as well as government and Constitution. In recent years while staffing a booth at the regional fair, we've had a wheel to be spun and where the arrow lands determines which question on civics the spinner will be asked. Lost count of how many times the first response was "What is civics?", and further exchanges with the young persons revealed admissions of how little such is taught. The questions we would select from to ask were from that naturalization test, and often even the simpler ones would stump the students.

    Point of the OP was providing examples of how little the current generation knows or understands civics and how they have a part in such. Their recent riots and demonstrations like CHAZ/CHOP prove this.

    Leave a comment:


  • DingBat
    replied
    Your country has become captive to big corporations and hyper wealthy individuals who have used their money to hijack political parties, tear down regulations and undermine the protections that citizens deserve, all in the pursuit of greater profit and somehow its the younger generation that's the problem. Maybe their parents should have a few refresher courses.

    Levin's hypocrisy is hilarious. He's basically a paid shill for the Koch network. Americans for Prosperity owns his sorry ass.

    C'mon you guys. Stop getting sucked into debating these bullshit stories. They're just distraction.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X