stop inflicting your privilege on your kids

[vaskidmark]

http://davidthompson.typepad.com/davidthompson/2015/05/just-surrender-to-the-will-of-clever-people.html

It starts out with

Just Surrender to the Will of Clever People

When it comes to authoritarian presumption, it seems that leftist intellectuals just can’t help themselves:

Is having a loving family an unfair advantage? Should parents snuggling up for one last story before lights out be even a little concerned about the advantage they might be conferring?

Fair warning:  There be dragons red cutain of blood, (out)rage inducing, hair-tearing, blood pressure spiking words beyond here.

What we realised we needed was a way of thinking about what it was we wanted to allow parents to do for their children, and what it was that we didn’t need to allow parents to do for their children.

It seems necessary, at this point, to remind you that the blog author is discussing what other people have said - not declaring those views  as something he supports.  It's just that when wading through a cesspool such as he exposes that it can be difficult to remember he is just the guy who uncoverd it, not the one who filled it.

The comments, BTW, are rather refreshing - even if someone occassionally drops the F-bomb.  (But they are Brits and it's not such a big thing there.  Much less troublesome than saying "bloody".)

stay safe.

[MechAg94]

If given unlimited authority, I can easily see lefties trying to "abolish the family". 

[cordex]

If given unlimited authority, I can easily see lefties trying to "abolish the family". 

If not abolish, at least heavily tax it.

[freakazoid]

If given unlimited authority, I can easily see lefties trying to "abolish the family". 

Wouldn't supprise me.

[brimic]

Message to liberals: stop trying to retard my children's intellectual growth.
-Stop teaching them common core math, because ultimately I have to spend more hours outside of their classroom reteaching them to do math the right way.
-Stop sending my kids home with brainwashed messages about how FDR was the greatest president, or how MLK created equal rights, or the importance of global warming or earth day. Once again, more hours of my time teaching....

Oh, and take your social justice and 'white privilege' bull *expletive deleted*it and shove it up your ass. If you think someone is owed something for nothing, then pay it out of your own pocket.

[MechAg94]

If not abolish, at least heavily tax it.

No, that is sort of a free market solution.  A true lefty would try to mandate everything thru laws or regs. 

[HankB]

Shortly after Sesame Street first aired, liberals told parents they shouldn't let their children watch it, as the educational content their kids absorbed would give them an unfair advantage when they started school.

In the '80s and '90s, liberals told parents not to give their children computer access, again, because the knowledge their kids absorbed would give them an unfair advantage over other children in school.

(IIRC, teacher's unions were part of each of these.)

So it doesn't surprise me that the lefties have doubled down on their insanity.

Next up: Healthy babies have an advantage over crack babies, so all pregnant women will be required to smoke, drink, and do drugs.

[Fitz]

I recommend everyone read the article linked from the clickbait in the OP... Really read it, and think about what he's saying.

[Jamisjockey]

One way philosophers might think about solving the social justice problem would be by simply abolishing the family. If the family is this source of unfairness in society then it looks plausible to think that if we abolished the family there would be a more level playing field.

I didn't get past that tripe.  Try and "abolish" my family.  Things will get sporty.

[Fitz]

I didn't get past that tripe.  Try and "abolish" my family.  Things will get sporty.

Short version: Academics like him deal in hypotheticals to develop theories. The dude and others are attempting to develop theories that relate to the family structure and its impact. The remainder of the interview makes it clear that things like reading to your child are positive things. The discussion is an academic exercise directed towards identifying what testable aspects go into the theory, and evaluating the raising of a child and the role of parenthood.

The words "it looks plausible," in an academic discussion context, don't mean the person speaking those words AGREES. In fact, he makes it clear that he doesn't.

I really think you may have a bit of a different take on things if you read the whole article, and or listen to the interview.

Academics in all fields do this when developing theories.

[zxcvbob]

"I can't see what the problem is with Mr Swift's modest proposal."   

[dogmush]

So we don't read Harrison Bergeron in High School English any more?

[brimic]

So we don't read Harrison Bergeron in High School English any more?

High School??
We read that one in 6th or 7th grade...

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Short version: Academics like him deal in hypotheticals to develop theories. The dude and others are attempting to develop theories that relate to the family structure and its impact. The remainder of the interview makes it clear that things like reading to your child are positive things. The discussion is an academic exercise directed towards identifying what testable aspects go into the theory, and evaluating the raising of a child and the role of parenthood.

The words "it looks plausible," in an academic discussion context, don't mean the person speaking those words AGREES. In fact, he makes it clear that he doesn't.

I really think you may have a bit of a different take on things if you read the whole article, and or listen to the interview.

Academics in all fields do this when developing theories.

I read it all and I got a completely different impression than you.  Maybe I'm too cynical (or you're not cynical enough?), but I don't see it as just another intellectual thought experiment.  I think they're laying the foundation for an eventual attack on families.  They're building the body of work that will justify future policy changes.

That's how the game works.  A group of leftist control freaks decide they can't allow something.  They find or invent some rationalization for disallowing it.  They use that rationalization to justify their agenda.  Academic research, theories, studies, findings make excellent rationalization material, even when (especially when) the justification is outrageous or completely bogus.

[Viking]

I read it all and I got a completely different impression than you.  Maybe I'm too cynical (or you're not cynical enough?), but I don't see it as just another intellectual thought experiment.  I think they're laying the foundation for an eventual attack on families.  They're building the body of work that will justify future policy changes.

That's how the game works.  A group of leftist control freaks decide they can't allow something.  They find or invent some rationalization for disallowing it.  They use that rationalization to justify their agenda.  Academic research, theories, studies, findings make excellent rationalization material, even when (especially when) the justification is outrageous or completely bogus.

Yep. Nothing is by accident. This is the first step, to familiarize the public with the general idea. The next steps will involve propagande to sell the idea to the population and enough law-makers to make it reality.

[RevDisk]

I really think you may have a bit of a different take on things if you read the whole article, and or listen to the interview.

Academics in all fields do this when developing theories.

Meh, it's the more conservative version of Tumblr. Why use an ounce of research when outrage is sufficient?


I'm kidding, mostly. 

[Northwoods]

Message to liberals: stop trying to retard my children's intellectual growth.
-Stop teaching them common core math, because ultimately I have to spend more hours outside of their classroom reteaching them to do math the right way.
-Stop sending my kids home with brainwashed messages about how FDR was the greatest president, or how MLK created equal rights, or the importance of global warming or earth day. Once again, more hours of my time teaching....

Oh, and take your social justice and 'white privilege' bull *expletive deleted*it and shove it up your ass. If you think someone is owed something for nothing, then pay it out of your own pocket.

There is solution to your problem. 

[Hawkmoon]

I read it all and I got a completely different impression than you.  Maybe I'm too cynical (or you're not cynical enough?), but I don't see it as just another intellectual thought experiment.  I think they're laying the foundation for an eventual attack on families.  They're building the body of work that will justify future policy changes.

That's how the game works.  A group of leftist control freaks decide they can't allow something.  They find or invent some rationalization for disallowing it.  They use that rationalization to justify their agenda.  Academic research, theories, studies, findings make excellent rationalization material, even when (especially when) the justification is outrageous or completely bogus.

^^^ This

The liberals just can't stand the fact that kids from intact, functional families generally do better in school than kids from broken, disfunctional families. Since they haven't figured out a way to make disfunctional families functional, the obvious solution is to go the other way and make ALL families broken (or non-) families. That will "even the playing field."

[French G.]

Replacing the family with the state is a pretty standard goal for commies. Any authority other than the state weakens it. Not that this bit of mental fappery accomplishes anything towads that goal, just kind of shows that the dream is still alive in la-la land.

[BlueStarLizzard]

I'm with Fitz, sort of.

The academics think this stuff up. Mental exercise, conjecture, blah, blah, blah. It's not real to them, it's acedemic.

The problem stems from people who can't think that way and apply something that cannot (or should not) be applied.

It's pretty much the larger picture of all the social justice BS going on right now. Yes, there is such thing as being socially privileged and social disenfranchised based on things an induvidial has no control over.
There is also no way for an individual or a group to gain control. The overall idea is way too abstract actually do much about it.

The only application is to be aware of it and do what you can actually do. The lesson to be taken from this study is to encourage good child rearing habits among the disenfranchised, not take away from the privileged.
But from a SJW perspective, that's just not *fair*, thus the BS.

[Scout26]

Let's take the guy responsible for some of the worst performing schools in the nation and make him SecEd.   

And for those that don't think the left is trying to break-up/destroy the traditional family, may I present this:

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/05/12/obama-education-secretary-proposes-public-boarding-schools-certain-kids-we-should-have-247/


Anyone here doubt that "certain kids" will become "all kids"... to indoctrinate. 

[Firethorn]

And for those that don't think the left is trying to break-up/destroy the traditional family, may I present this:

My I point out that I get the feeling that it's not the kids of traditional families that they're trying to put in boarding schools?

I'd be after the kids of broken homes.  You know, the ones who are practically feral, that have to come early and stay late otherwise they don't eat?  Etc...

There are kids out there where being away from their 'families' would be for the best.

[vaskidmark]

I'm going to introduce the "Eww" factor into the discussion.  From what little I've read these 24/7 boarding schools are pretty much modeled on the English "public schools" of the 19th century.

I would be much more in favor of the notion if they were instead modeled after the Borstals http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borstal but served the children of the 1% while the children of the 99% continued as they are.  (There are several sites where you can access the movie on line free.  Google "borstal boy online")

stay safe.

[MechAg94]

My I point out that I get the feeling that it's not the kids of traditional families that they're trying to put in boarding schools?

I'd be after the kids of broken homes.  You know, the ones who are practically feral, that have to come early and stay late otherwise they don't eat?  Etc...

There are kids out there where being away from their 'families' would be for the best.

It always seems like a good idea at first.

Remember that the govt and public school officials are the ones that are doing their level best to prevent any private school from helping the same kids.  There are individuals who could successfully help kids from broken families, but a govt run school would likely run off any of those individuals in favor of educrats.

[makattak]

My I point out that I get the feeling that it's not the kids of traditional families that they're trying to put in boarding schools?

I'd be after the kids of broken homes.  You know, the ones who are practically feral, that have to come early and stay late otherwise they don't eat?  Etc...

There are kids out there where being away from their 'families' would be for the best.

There are VERY FEW kids where being away from their families would be for the best.

I've got an idea, though.

How about, instead of tearing down well functioning families because it's not fair to those that don't function, we encourage people to form well functioning families?

Clearly these academics recognize that a family greatly benefits a child. (Note, though, how without any data they are claiming that a "family" can be any number or make-up of people. But, of course, they don't have an agenda.)

Look at what their first instinct is: WE HAVE STOP PEOPLE WHO GET UNFAIR BENEFITS! Yeah, yeah, they realize that sounds bad and so try to flesh out that some things are ok.

They didn't once mention encouraging a supportive family structure. Their only response is to tear down, not build up.

Funny, that.