Sen. Tom Cotton has 1619 problems, but revision ain't one

[phcitywarrior]

Idk if attending those schools makes you elitist by default. It does put you in elite company and gives you access to an elite network, however.

There has to be more outside of the education.

 

[Secure Da Bag]

Booker and Obama are elitists by default, according to that line of thinking

If they're not elitist, then they're regular people? Went to Ivy league or lL level schools and both work for the US gov't for years. Yeah, they're elitist.

 

[88m3]

the senators in this country have become a parody

 

[phcitywarrior]

If they're not elitist, then they're regular people? Went to Ivy league or lL level schools and both work for the US gov't for years. Yeah, they're elitist.

So is it the education or the position that makes them elitist?

Btw, I agree Obama and Booker are of the elite class through a combination of their education and career at the higher/est levels of government.

Would a high school science teacher with a BA from Harvard and Phd in Education from Yale be considered elitist? And I’m not talking head of the county school board. Just your regular degular chemistry teachef.

 

[Secure Da Bag]

So is it the education or the position that makes them elitist?

I clearly said both. I used the word "and".

 

[get these nets]

Idk why you are trying to play this song and dance. They are elitist. Obama ran as a president for the liberal elite. This shouldn’t be a controversial statement.

I don't resent or begrudge anybody's path in life or success. Elitist has a negative connotation to me, and I think it's unfair to paint an entire segment of people with such a broad brush.

 

[acri1]

So is anybody who went to college an elitist? Do you have to have a graduate degree? Or is it only if you went to an Ivy League school? Or do you have to be a politician?

I've never been 100% clear on the definition. I got a bachelor's degree myself, so if I'm an elitist it might be time I start acting like it

 

[wire28]

Are elite law school graduates elitist by default, including those who aren't politicians?

now youre getting it

So is anybody who went to college an elitist? Do you have to have a graduate degree? Or is it only if you went to an Ivy League school? Or do you have to be a politician?

I've never been 100% clear on the definition. I got a bachelor's degree myself, so if I'm an elitist it might be time I start acting like it

if i dont like you, yes youre an elitist

hopefully we get an answer to these and the many other questions that have been ignored in this thread so far though

 

[ORDER_66]

Tom Cotton wants to tax 'liberal' universities for teaching history accurately

This is fukking ridiculous with these fukking people!!!

 

[mastermind]

I don't resent or begrudge anybody's path in life or success. Elitist has a negative connotation to me, and I think it's unfair to paint an entire segment of people with such a broad brush.

I never begrudged or resented anyone who is an elitist, so don’t put words in my posts on this topic.

And I don’t care if elitist or elite has a negative connotation to you, it is what the Obamas, Tom Cotton, Corey Booker and many others are.

 

[Shogun]

Funny article title considering proponents of the project admit this isn’t about teaching history accurately.

Lawmakers Push to Ban '1619 Project' From Schools

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Funny article title considering proponents of the project admit this isn’t about teaching history accurately.

Lawmakers Push to Ban '1619 Project' From Schools

That's a ridiculous interpretation of that article.

 

[Shogun]

That's a ridiculous interpretation of that article.

The lessons aren’t designed to convince students to believe certain ideas, but rather to encourage them to question, he said: What would it mean to center the experience of Black Americans in our telling of U.S. history? What if we understood the beginning of slavery in this country as a foundational moment?

“It’s deliberately provocative,” said Schulte. “It’s the kind of thing teachers love, because it gets students thinking, it gets them debating.” This week, the center announced the launch of a new online network for educators using the materials.

While the 1619 Project has seen popularity with many teachers, it’s also faced criticism from some historians, who object to the interpretations and conclusions that the essays draw—such as the claim that one of the primary reasons the colonies decided to declare independence was to preserve the institution of slavery.

But these critiques shouldn’t preclude teachers from bringing the material into their classrooms, Zimmerman said. Teachers don’t have to—and in fact, shouldn’t—present the 1619 Project’s conclusions as “unalloyed truth,” Zimmerman argues. The goal isn’t just to replace one narrative with another.

 

[Shogun]

That's a ridiculous interpretation of that article.

Since you’re probably going to start crying about forum rules and call me a white supremacist, here’s an article pointing out the projects short-comings from another of it proponents.

The Fallacy of 1619: Rethinking the History of Africans in Early America | AAIHS

Please advise if I’m following the rules to your liking.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

The lessons aren’t designed to convince students to believe certain ideas, but rather to encourage them to question, he said: What would it mean to center the experience of Black Americans in our telling of U.S. history? What if we understood the beginning of slavery in this country as a foundational moment?

That's exactly how interpretation of history is SUPPOSED to be taught. The idea that teachers pass on unquestionable truth to students about how they should interpret the psat is bullshyt propaganda. We can't even agree how to interpret the incidents that are happening right now and you think there's "one right way" to interpret the meaning of events 400 years ago that all teachers should force upon their students?

Was slavery "essential" to the character of early America or an unfortunate aberration? Should Black Americans be central in the retelling of each era of this country's past or should the be treated as a side issue? Was the desire to preserve slavery a primary reason the colonists chose to rebel, or was that just a side benefit?

None of those questions can be answered conclusively because they rely on subjective interpretation and knowing the internal thought processes of people whose thoughts we'll never have access to. The best teachers of history lay out the facts that we know (or the best guesses that we know, in the many cases where the exact facts are uncertain) and then offer differing possible interpretations of those facts. THAT is the most accurate teaching of history. If you went to college post-1970s and took a single decent history class you should know this.