Napoleon's Thoughts on Bernie Sanders

[HellRell804]

Charter schools have been an unmitigated disaster


Even the original people that were pushing for them have backed off in a major way

The undeniable efficacy of charter schools

Two studies were released this month from universities in California that demonstrate the effectiveness of school choice and the need for more options in education.

In early October, the Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University released a study which followed the educational progress of over 97,000 charter school students in New York over the course of four years. The research concluded that charter school students perform at a level equivalent to receiving an additional 22 days of learning in reading and 63 days in math per year when compared with their public-school counterparts. The results for students attending schools associated with a Charter Management Organization were even greater, adding up to approximately 57 additional days in reading and 103 in math.

Charter school minority students, who accounted for 92 percent of the study's population, tested at a level equal to receiving at least 23 extra days of learning in reading, and 57 days in math when compared to traditional public-school minority students. CREDO was clearly justified in concluding that, for minority students, attending charter schools "indicated a significant academic advantage." However, this was not the study's most significant finding.

The most impressive subgroup in the study was charter school students in poverty, who outperformed non-poverty traditional public-school students. Their growth was equivalent to over 55 days of supplementary learning in math, and they tested at the same reading-level as "their more affluent peers."

 

[Dr. Acula]

Any country should have a stable manufacturing base, the fact that you call those jobs "cushy" reveals your bias against manual labor. In my opinion its completely immoral to support outsourcing of those jobs to countries with little to no support for human rights and worker protections. Its basically saying "I'm cool with slave labor as long as it's not in my backyard and Amazon and Walmart keep the cheap shyt coming in"

You're applying your own perception to what I said. I'm more addressing the fact that the economy was setup in a way that you could have a single parent of a two parent household get a union manufacturing job at one time and have enough money to feed their whole family alone and send kids to college with just a highschool. I think that is great and I wish it was still the same but its obviously more "cushy" than now where they now require a degree to answer phones while unions are busted up and we are now moving towards a system where the worker is becoming more discardable.

The furst tweet i agree with James Woods completely, you cant just continue to attack people and not expect them to mobilize against you. I only wish black men did the same when we were first targeted in the 90s. Instead, we bent the knee and we've been the scapegoats and whipping boys ever since.

For the 2nd tweet I agree with it, but for probably different reasons. I think that there has been a large and concentrated effort to miseducate black people. Our "culture" as depicted by mainstream media and now perpetuated by ourselves, is one of ignorance and apathy. Our schools are purposely underfunded while so called "safety nets" are well stocked, basically encouraging failure.

In Africa it's even worse. We support dictators and keep the continent in conflict and chaos, all so the corporations who own our government can access cheap resources and make endless profit. It's hard to get a proper education when you're dodging bullets from your neighbors and drone strikes from your allies who claim they're looking for "terrorists". But it's all good as long as we get cheap computer chips to throw in IPhones.

Without the intervention of our supposed "allies" I believe black people would be the leaders in all fields, not just sports and entertainment. But that doesn't serve the needs of people who want to keep us ignorant and dependent on them so they can have jobs for life and dole out cake jobs paying big (tax) money to their close friends and family.

In regards to James woods, here is why he is wrong. Because its not just "white men should die" rhetoric that sets off accusations of "anti-white racism". Its the idea that any mention of racism and inequality is an attack on them. I personally remember going on a trip to a plantation and the guide was discussing the obviously heavy shyt of what it was like to be a slave. Not that white people are scum of the earth. Just that this is how slaves were treated and this is why it was horrible. This white dude on the tour got real agitated about it and said something to the effect "you know, I don't think slaves were treated that bad. At least they were fed and housed for free". I tell this anecdote because the idea that this widespread perception is based on legitimate gripes fully is not true. The mere mention of history and racism, and you can observe it yourself on twitter and places like that, brings accusations of "anti-white racism". The irony is that they want blacks to assume the role you described of bending the knee and not saying shyt. Anything different, they are threatened.

The second tweet, is not even accurate from a scientific standpoint. One, there is no up to date data in African countries outside of the same tired tables they reference since the 80's and 90s from folks like Richard Lynn that have been debunked and dissected since they were released. Secondly, the tweet implies that IQ, or what they always tie to intelligence, is a stagnant quantity and this directly contradicts other phenomenon like the Flynn effect which has shown. You can't agree with the tweet and ignore the obvious implication of people like Stefan Molyneux who believe that race and IQ are eternally linked and there is a genetic inferiority of "sub-saharan Africans" that will never let them progress (which is what he said).

You speak of "Supporting dictators" when in a lot of cases, he who controls the monopoly on violence controls the country. That isn't an issue of support as it is in a lot of cases a literal decision of life and death. Many people choose life.

 

[Lord_Chief_Rocka]

I know you're just going to insult me, but could you provide some links to substantiate your claim?

Here's a couple. Basically cities are taking funds and putting into privatized charter schools. Bringing capitalism into education is a recipe for failure.

The “Choice” Bait and Switch

Michigan Gambled on Charter Schools. Its Children Lost.

The Charter School Profiteers

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7bc082247d97

 

[HellRell804]

You're applying your own perception to what I said. I'm more addressing the fact that the economy was setup in a way that you could have a single parent of a two parent household get a union manufacturing job at one time and have enough money to feed their whole family alone and send kids to college with just a highschool. I think that is great and I wish it was still the same but its obviously more "cushy" than now where they now require a degree to answer phones while unions are busted up and we are now moving towards a system where the worker is becoming more discardable.


In regards to James woods, here is why he is wrong. Because its not just "white men should die" rhetoric that sets off accusations of "anti-white racism". Its the idea that any mention of racism and inequality is an attack on them. I personally remember going on a trip to a plantation and the guide was discussing the obviously heavy shyt of what it was like to be a slave. Not that white people are scum of the earth. Just that this is how slaves were treated and this is why it was horrible. This white dude on the tour got real agitated about it and said something to the effect "you know, I don't think slaves were treated that bad. At least they were fed and housed for free". I tell this anecdote because the idea that this widespread perception is based on legitimate gripes fully is not true. The mere mention of history and racism, and you can observe it yourself on twitter and places like that, brings accusations of "anti-white racism". The irony is that they want blacks to assume the role you described of bending the knee and not saying shyt. Anything different, they are threatened.

The second tweet, is not even accurate from a scientific standpoint. One, there is no up to date data in African countries outside of the same tired tables they reference since the 80's and 90s from folks like Richard Lynn that have been debunked and dissected since they were released. Secondly, the tweet implies that IQ, or what they always tie to intelligence, is a stagnant quantity and this directly contradicts other phenomenon like the Flynn effect which has shown. You can't agree with the tweet and ignore the obvious implication of people like Stefan Molyneux who believe that race and IQ are eternally linked and there is a genetic inferiority of "sub-saharan Africans" that will never let them progress (which is what he said).

You speak of "Supporting dictators" when in a lot of cases, he who controls the monopoly on violence controls the country. That isn't an issue of support as it is in a lot of cases a literal decision of life and death. Many people choose life.

You say that but it was Democrats who passed the free trade agreements that destroyed those jobs. And now they're advocating for a lax immigration policy that's going to depress wages even further. And to top it all off, after eliminating the main path to the middle class, naturally crime is gonna increase, so they got "tough on crime " and locked up a whole generation of black men. And these are the people you trust at over a 90% clip.

I dont put too much stock in IQ because it is so culturally biased but what you cant deny is the achievement gap. African americans aren't achieving anything close to their peers. And that's mainly due to ineffective education.

And I wasn't saying the people support dictators, I'm talking about the US government. We supply money and weaponry to leaders who will protect our interests. Thats how brutal dictators maintain power, they are infinitely better funded and armed than any opposition. Until they decide to actually act in the interest of their own people, then they prop up the next one

 

[Dr. Acula]

You say that but it was Democrats who passed the free trade agreements that destroyed those jobs. And now they're advocating for a lax immigration policy that's going to depress wages even further. And to top it all off, after eliminating the main path to the middle class, naturally crime is gonna increase, so they got "tough on crime " and locked up a whole generation of black men. And these are the people you trust at over a 90% clip.

As far as the first part, you're not getting much disagreement from me. What you describe is the neo-liberalism popularize by people like the Clintons and modern Democratic party. It's not FDR and Henry Wallace style liberalism. However, neo-conservativism of Reagan and so on also contributed to the exact same thing you described. They are both equally free-market capitalists to the nth degree and believers in globalization. They also were both "tough on crime". But at least the tough on crime part can't be viewed in a vacuum. The tough on crime idea came from the violence and issues from the crack era and rise in gang violence of the 80s and 90s. Neither side wanted to appear weak and Clinton himself said the worst thing to be viewed as is "lax on crime". Folks who are black and had clout were also pushing for more punishment and law and order to fix the issue they saw and thought it was the solution. In retrospect, we now see the wrong headiness of that policy.

However, the fact of matter is, and this isn't caping, just stating a fact. Its the left for the past decade who have been pushing the overton window on "criminal reform". It was the Obama administration that started actually implementing changes to criminal justice reform with conservatives being late to the party after seeing it as a politically popular stance.

The president’s administration also found plenty of less visible ways to tinker around the edges of mass incarceration. In 2010, Obama made good on a campaign promise to reduce the 100-to-1 sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine. This relic of the “crack boom” is one that had been maligned by activists as racist for decades. Since Obama lobbied for and signed the bill, federal prosecution of crack offenders has been cut in half. This mirrors drops in drug prosecution across the board after Holder’s DoJ announced “smart on crime” reforms in 2013 that expanded so-called compassionate release, and guided prosecutors away from seeking maximum punishments for smaller-scale drug crimes.

Through executive orders, Obama has also ended the practice of placing federal juvenile prisoners in solitary confinement and made it illegal for most federal agencies to ask job applicants if they have been convicted of a crime, part of a broader movement known as “ban the box”.

The president commissioned the 21st Century Task Force on Policing in the wake of unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, and followed up by hosting more than one roundtable bringing together activists and law enforcement officials in an effort to try and bridge divides between the two.

His White House has also promoted collaborative programs such as the Data-Driven Justice Initiative, which encourages cities, towns and counties to share strategies for cutting unnecessary arrests and holding fewer suspects pre-trial when they do not pose a threat to public safety.

Personally I'm pushing for more economic populism on the left and that is what I personally support. At the same time, I'm not going to ignore racial issues either and pretend that its not the right who is currently looking for a conservative leaning supreme court for the near future and have publicly stated desires to overturn shyt that had real tangible impact on black people's life like the Civil Rights Act, Affirmative Action, and the Voting Rights Act. I'd gladly admit to being a single issue voter on that front.

 

[HellRell804]

Here's a couple. Basically cities are taking funds and putting into privatized charter schools. Bringing capitalism into education is a recipe for failure.

The “Choice” Bait and Switch

Michigan Gambled on Charter Schools. Its Children Lost.

The Charter School Profiteers

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7bc082247d97

I only read 2 articles but for the first one, the basis of the article is that in the relatively short time that the charter school program existed, the charter schools didnt make a complete 180 of the kids (who spent the majority of their lives in inefficient public schools). They even had the nerve to say "Charter proponents will point out, correctly, that you could work up a similar indictment of any number of public schools in struggling cities like Detroit. But in theory, at least, public-school districts have superintendents tasked with evaluating teachers and facilities"

Now think about that for a moment, they're saying yea public schools are bad but at least in theory there is a superintendent to be held accountable.

Now idk about you, but if I have a choice of where to send my kid, and the school is not up to par I'm moving my kid. If I take my money and other parents join me, that school is going to lose money and have to close. So the school has to do better. If there are teachers that aren't up to snuff, they gotta go. Good teachers now have options. For all the "why don't teachers get paid more" crowd, good teachers would actually have leverage to get paid more for doing a good job

Now compare that to public schools. Good teachers have no choice but to move up into administration or find another job if they want to make a comfortable living. What are we left with? Teachers barely out of college teaching high school and middle school and having sex with students. Substitute teachers beating off under desks. They're just taking warm bodies at this point.

The last one I read didn't damn charter schools from a performance perspective, just said they were bad because they were segregated. As if most schools public or private arent basically segregated. It's only in major cities that you tend to see a balanced mixture of races. Most of America is not big cities. But even if the schools are segregated, if the students are paying for the school and the funds are managed correctly, why should that matter? You see how they subtly put the idea in your head that black schools ran by black people are inherently inferior and doomed to fail? Stay woke lol

 

[Dr. Acula]

Anyways, as far the topic, I agree depending on how you identify "identity politics".

If you're talking about making POLICY that addresses and help particular groups, nah if anything black people need to advocate more for that and anyone trying to stifle that need to fukk off.

However, if you're talking about the type of identity politics like "First black gay tranny elected to dog catcher" or the "FUTURE IS FEMALE" style politicians and politics, then yeah, Bernie was right that that shyt is trash and there has been a noticeable amount of that type of political rhetoric in the past few years.

This is the epitome of tokenism and should be something that if you're advocating for positive outcomes for your community should be see as bad. It's like a company giving a black person an unimportant role in the company to avoid any accusations of racism. Doesn't solve the underlying racism, it's just feel good "positive" rhetoric and tool they can use to show "their diversity".

If the color of someone skin for example was all that matter, fukk I should have voted for Herman Cain over Obama because he was even more blacker than him.

 

[kwazzy100]

So posters here want politicians to focus on black issues but not identity politics? Y'all don't realize that black issues IS identity politics?



Pure stupidity

I feel like identity politics has gotten worse. In the 20th century, marginalize people (The poor, blacks, Latinos, women, gays) could all agree that the system wasn't made for them and supported each other against political parties. Now, it turned into a competition. Like, how are black men lumped into being as "problematic" as white men?

 

[PikaDaDon]

Hispanics were acting clownish around her too:

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

 

[???]

So what indian he's a cac, GTFOH dude. U are mad now that you are being ignored by thecoli, kamala has taken away your shine, you dumb ass.

 

[Snoopy Loops]

Doesn't stick. Im sorry

Weak evidence to support a #NeverBernie hashtag

 

[Majestic]

this fool has always been a fraud. I'm ashamed to admit that I was on that Bernie wave too back in 2015 and 2016. They're all the same in the democratic party, in that they all share anti black views. Look at how they are all fighting each other now, if Trump somehow loses in 2020 it'll be one of the biggest shocks on world history. This is the weakest the democrats have ever been, it's going to be a layup for Trump.

 

[Tenchi Ryu]

Doesn't stick. Im sorry

Weak evidence to support a #NeverBernie hashtag

He made these exact same threads in 2016

 

[Kyle C. Barker]

this fool has always been a fraud. I'm ashamed to admit that I was on that Bernie wave too back in 2015 and 2016. They're all the same in the democratic party, in that they all share anti black views. Look at how they are all fighting each other now, if Trump somehow loses in 2020 it'll be one of the biggest shocks on world history. This is the weakest the democrats have ever been, it's going to be a layup for Trump.

You say all that but you're still pro trump