• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

62 Years After Brown v. BOE, Court Orders Schools to Desegregate

If you let the blacks in, the school will suck?

Only if liberals oversee it and institute their beloved affirmative action approach. You end up with the lowest-common-denominator curriculums and diploma factories of today.

(Actually it usually gets fixed through AP classes. You have two schools in most public schools these days; the AP school, and the dumbed-down school.)
 
Here's a truth that liberals don't want to hear.

Have you ever been to Mississippi? I have through work, and let me tell you, blacks and whites get along very well there. Yes, they often do live on opposite sides of town (like most everywhere), and yes, they do have differences.

But what I've noticed is that they very much celebrate those differences and openly mention them without hatred and vitriol toward each other. They work together and eat together and genuinely have a real affection for each other. At the end of the day, however, they do go home to different parts of town.

Meanwhile, in Boston you simply don't see blacks and whites even look each other in the eye. Boston claims to be "progressive", and yet it has some of the most deeply seeded racism in the country.

Alinsky tactics work. Just call Mississippi racist, and it will deflect from where the real racism exists, in places like California, Massachusetts, Illinois, etc.
 
Maybe blacks like being separate, why don't you leave them alone and stop putting your values on them?

Lol, you're dangerously close to being on the side of proud anti-semite. :lol:
 
In the past, you had white public schools, which were pretty good, and black public schools, which sucked. Now the schools are integrated, and they all suck.

There's a lesson there for he who has eyes to see and ears to hear.

They don't all suck. A lot of public schools are doing an excellent job and I know because my wife works at one and I've worked in public schools. It just makes a better story in the media to say they all suck.

It's up to the student and the parents how well they do. The resources are there, the teachers are dedicated. My wife puts in 15 hour days and grades papers all weekend. Ignorant people like you make me angry.
 
Only if liberals oversee it and institute their beloved affirmative action approach. You end up with the lowest-common-denominator curriculums and diploma factories of today.

(Actually it usually gets fixed through AP classes. You have two schools in most public schools these days; the AP school, and the dumbed-down school.)

Does that solve the problem of integration, then?

In other words, IYO, does that leave the dumbed down classes for the blacks, while the more intelligent whites attend the AP classes?
 
Maybe blacks like being separate, why don't you leave them alone and stop putting your values on them?

Maybe they do.
Then, let the parents decide where to send their kids and keep the federal government out of it.

How's that for a "liberal" approach?
 
They don't all suck. A lot of public schools are doing an excellent job and I know because my wife works at one and I've worked in public schools. It just makes a better story in the media to say they all suck.

It's up to the student and the parents how well they do. The resources are there, the teachers are dedicated. My wife puts in 15 hour days and grades papers all weekend. Ignorant people like you make me angry.

And what is the racial make up of that school?
 
Maybe they do.
Then, let the parents decide where to send their kids and keep the federal government out of it.

How's that for a "liberal" approach?

The federal court just ruled against that, they are bound and determined to stick their noses in here.
 
Here's a truth that liberals don't want to hear.

Have you ever been to Mississippi? I have through work, and let me tell you, blacks and whites get along very well there. Yes, they often do live on opposite sides of town (like most everywhere), and yes, they do have differences.

But what I've noticed is that they very much celebrate those differences and openly mention them without hatred and vitriol toward each other. They work together and eat together and genuinely have a real affection for each other. At the end of the day, however, they do go home to different parts of town.

Meanwhile, in Boston you simply don't see blacks and whites even look each other in the eye. Boston claims to be "progressive", and yet it has some of the most deeply seeded racism in the country.

Alinsky tactics work. Just call Mississippi racist, and it will deflect from where the real racism exists, in places like California, Massachusetts, Illinois, etc.

Most of my family are from Canton, MS near Rankin county. No disrespect, but that statement in bold is false. There is still a lot of tension between blacks and whites and I seen it first hand when I visit every year.
 
What does that have to do with the cost of building a new school as opposed to simply allowing the parents to choose their school?

Do certain parts of the US have a history of segregating whites from blacks?
 
Maybe they do.
Then, let the parents decide where to send their kids and keep the federal government out of it.

How's that for a "liberal" approach?

One more vote for charter schools.
 
I caught this story on USA Today yesterday morning. One lady was quoted as saying that it would be beneficial for their city to mix the kids so that when they are adults they will work together even more than they do now.

I believe that she is on to something. If no one in this thread has children in school in Cleveland MS, we don't really get a say in the matter.
 
I caught this story on USA Today yesterday morning. One lady was quoted as saying that it would be beneficial for their city to mix the kids so that when they are adults they will work together even more than they do now.

I believe that she is on to something. If no one in this thread has children in school in Cleveland MS, we don't really get a say in the matter.

Apparently, according to the feds, neither do the folks who have children in school in Cleveland MS.
 
When looking around on this I found the demographics of each student body but I couldn't find faculty demographics. Anybody find those?

This "segregation" seems to be an effect of poverty (what side of the tracks they live on) rather than racism. However, the feds cannot say this because then it clearly falls outside of their grant of power. A federal government more concerned with the people than their white horse cause would offer grants and help to the economically disadvantaged side of the tracks through the state's government.
 
Does that solve the problem of integration, then?

In other words, IYO, does that leave the dumbed down classes for the blacks, while the more intelligent whites attend the AP classes?

The choice is entirely the student's.
 
Do certain parts of the US have a history of segregating whites from blacks?

In my experience, kids tend to segregate themselves. I went to school in a multiculturalists' wet dream, the Bay Area of California. Black kids sat at the back of the bus, white and Hispanic kids sat in the middle and front. No one told the black kids to segregate themselves to the back of the bus, they did it by themselves.
The same thing happened at recess, black kids hung out together at lunch, white kids hung with mostly whites and Hispanics by themselves. Some intermingling occurred, but it was rare.
How do you explain this?
 
In my experience, kids tend to segregate themselves. I went to school in a multiculturalists' wet dream, the Bay Area of California. Black kids sat at the back of the bus, white and Hispanic kids sat in the middle and front. No one told the black kids to segregate themselves to the back of the bus, they did it by themselves.
The same thing happened at recess, black kids hung out together at lunch, white kids hung with mostly whites and Hispanics by themselves. Some intermingling occurred, but it was rare.
How do you explain this?
Did they all live in the same areas? Same economic opportunists for their parents? You grew up there, and would have more information than I would.
 
When looking around on this I found the demographics of each student body but I couldn't find faculty demographics. Anybody find those?

This "segregation" seems to be an effect of poverty (what side of the tracks they live on) rather than racism. However, the feds cannot say this because then it clearly falls outside of their grant of power. A federal government more concerned with the people than their white horse cause would offer grants and help to the economically disadvantaged side of the tracks through the state's government.

My understanding of the situation is that all of the schools in that city have a majority black and hispanic student demographic. The contention seems to be around the fact that one of the two high schools in question is 100% black. They're just fighting over how to carve up the minority white students in a city where the majority of students are black no matter which district you're in.
 
Not the case here. One school is integrated, the other is not. The integrated school does better.

But as explained in the original thread, this is all a bit of a lie on the part of the feds. The supposed white only school has a 52% minority population. The other school is 100% minority population. Whites don't want to go there, nor do the minorities.

Right...I was going to point out the same thing as well. These schools aren't even segregated so I don't even understand the lawsuit. What's the point here? You gotta spread the whities around for some reason or another?
 
The schools were to be desegregated yes/no? They did not do that yes/no?

No and no. There were no segregated schools. The whole thing is misleading.
 
Does that solve the problem of integration, then?

In other words, IYO, does that leave the dumbed down classes for the blacks, while the more intelligent whites attend the AP classes?

No. That leaves any student that is interested in putting in the work and learning with the opportunity to excel.
 
Do certain parts of the US have a history of segregating whites from blacks?

The southland, of course. Now, California, where segregation was never the law of the land, has more segregated schools than in most of the rest of the country.

Maybe blacks and whites don't want to go to school together, or at least maybe some don't. Shouldn't that be their choice?
 
Did they all live in the same areas? Same economic opportunists for their parents? You grew up there, and would have more information than I would.

Many of the black kids were far better dressed than I was, they all seemed to have $150 Jordans, expensive jackets, etc. I don't think that many of them were poor, they seemed better off than many of the white and Hispanic kids.
All the kids that rode my bus lived in roughly the same area, as the bus route picked up and dropped off kids from the same general neighborhood.
I just think they related to each other more than they did kids from other races, and that's why they chose to all sit in the back of the bus. I was friends with one black girl in particular, we'd talk in class, but once school was over, she'd go with the black kids and I'd go with the white and Hispanic kids.
 
Back
Top Bottom