Why is MCPS radicalizing our children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing, people. MCPS is indeed a very liberal system. Five elementary schools are now participating in a two-way language immersion program, for example - http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/specialprograms/elementary/two-way-immersion.aspx

Two-way language immersion is a politically-liberal program? Really? I thought that it was a good way to educate kids in two languages in elementary school. Is all foreign-language instruction politically liberal, or just foreign-language instruction in elementary schools?

Yes, it's strange. You'd think that PP was claiming that ignorance is a right-wing value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing, people. MCPS is indeed a very liberal system. Five elementary schools are now participating in a two-way language immersion program, for example - http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/specialprograms/elementary/two-way-immersion.aspx

Two-way language immersion is a politically-liberal program? Really? I thought that it was a good way to educate kids in two languages in elementary school. Is all foreign-language instruction politically liberal, or just foreign-language instruction in elementary schools?

NP here: Maybe it's liberal as in the grand liberal tradition that built society, but politically liberal? It is weird that pragmatically teaching languages to prepare children to take their place in society would be seen as political.

But when we are in a county that has sunk so low that immigrants are openly vilified by the president, there are rants about a wall, and minorities are now routinely harassed by the worst of our society as they take cues from the president, well then, maybe it is political.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's clear the poster is an avid consumer of fake news since all the best school systems skew liberal. They don't call it conservative arts for a reason.

Drifting off topic here but liberal arts refers to a classical liberal education, exactly the thing political conservatives are trying to preserve in our schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear the poster is an avid consumer of fake news since all the best school systems skew liberal. They don't call it conservative arts for a reason.

Drifting off topic here but liberal arts refers to a classical liberal education, exactly the thing political conservatives are trying to preserve in our schools.

Really? It seems to me that there have been a lot of efforts lately, from people who call themselves political conservatives, to get rid of the liberal-arts departments at public universities -- English, foreign languages, and so on. The idea being that if it doesn't provide a specific technical training for a job where you can earn money right away, it's a waste of time and money. Maybe these people aren't actually political conservatives, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing, people. MCPS is indeed a very liberal system. Five elementary schools are now participating in a two-way language immersion program, for example - http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/specialprograms/elementary/two-way-immersion.aspx

Two-way language immersion is a politically-liberal program? Really? I thought that it was a good way to educate kids in two languages in elementary school. Is all foreign-language instruction politically liberal, or just foreign-language instruction in elementary schools?

NP here: Maybe it's liberal as in the grand liberal tradition that built society, but politically liberal? It is weird that pragmatically teaching languages to prepare children to take their place in society would be seen as political.

But when we are in a county that has sunk so low that immigrants are openly vilified by the president, there are rants about a wall, and minorities are now routinely harassed by the worst of our society as they take cues from the president, well then, maybe it is political.

My child is in a dual language program. For generations (and this is true for some of my young coworkers), kids were punished for speaking home languages other than English in school. The goal presented to kids in school was become English dominant and assimilate to "American" culture. At my daughter's school the best thing to be is bi/multi lingual, teachers are from many different countries and backgrounds, foods from many cultures are served in the cafeteria. For me, one of the big benefits is raising my kid to participate in a multi lingual/cultural/racial society, and to raise her as a "global citizen" (I know that sounds cheesy). I think all of that is really threatening to a segment of people who want the US to be predominantly white and English-speaking, and who start ranting about Soros as soon as you say global or international.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear the poster is an avid consumer of fake news since all the best school systems skew liberal. They don't call it conservative arts for a reason.

Drifting off topic here but liberal arts refers to a classical liberal education, exactly the thing political conservatives are trying to preserve in our schools.

Really? It seems to me that there have been a lot of efforts lately, from people who call themselves political conservatives, to get rid of the liberal-arts departments at public universities -- English, foreign languages, and so on. The idea being that if it doesn't provide a specific technical training for a job where you can earn money right away, it's a waste of time and money. Maybe these people aren't actually political conservatives, though.

The concern is many ‘liberal arts departments’ no longer teach liberals arts. Safe spaces, trigger warnings, blaterhing nonsense about white privileged and patriarchy. Censorship of conservative speakers. Condoning of violence. Voltaire would be disgusted what these Liberal Arts departments have become. Classical liberals are speaking out against these departments, people like Camille Paglia, Christina Hoff Sommers, Jonathon Haidt, not exactly right wingers. It’s reasonable to advocate the dismantling of such anti-education departments. I do agree with you however that college is about building minds, not employees. Somehow we turned inivierotes into employee factories. Vocational school are a much better option for this. Universities need to provide education to develop minds, teach how to critically analyze, pursue truth, and be responsible civic minded, in the classical tradition, citizens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear the poster is an avid consumer of fake news since all the best school systems skew liberal. They don't call it conservative arts for a reason.

Drifting off topic here but liberal arts refers to a classical liberal education, exactly the thing political conservatives are trying to preserve in our schools.

Really? It seems to me that there have been a lot of efforts lately, from people who call themselves political conservatives, to get rid of the liberal-arts departments at public universities -- English, foreign languages, and so on. The idea being that if it doesn't provide a specific technical training for a job where you can earn money right away, it's a waste of time and money. Maybe these people aren't actually political conservatives, though.

The concern is many ‘liberal arts departments’ no longer teach liberals arts. Safe spaces, trigger warnings, blaterhing nonsense about white privileged and patriarchy. Censorship of conservative speakers. Condoning of violence. Voltaire would be disgusted what these Liberal Arts departments have become. Classical liberals are speaking out against these departments, people like Camille Paglia, Christina Hoff Sommers, Jonathon Haidt, not exactly right wingers. It’s reasonable to advocate the dismantling of such anti-education departments. I do agree with you however that college is about building minds, not employees. Somehow we turned inivierotes into employee factories. Vocational school are a much better option for this. Universities need to provide education to develop minds, teach how to critically analyze, pursue truth, and be responsible civic minded, in the classical tradition, citizens.

Hee hee.

But indeed, as you say, universities need departments of history, literature, foreign languages, and so on. Let's tell the governors who are trying to dismantle the public universities in their states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing, people. MCPS is indeed a very liberal system. Five elementary schools are now participating in a two-way language immersion program, for example - http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/specialprograms/elementary/two-way-immersion.aspx

Two-way language immersion is a politically-liberal program? Really? I thought that it was a good way to educate kids in two languages in elementary school. Is all foreign-language instruction politically liberal, or just foreign-language instruction in elementary schools?

NP here: Maybe it's liberal as in the grand liberal tradition that built society, but politically liberal? It is weird that pragmatically teaching languages to prepare children to take their place in society would be seen as political.

But when we are in a county that has sunk so low that immigrants are openly vilified by the president, there are rants about a wall, and minorities are now routinely harassed by the worst of our society as they take cues from the president, well then, maybe it is political.

My child is in a dual language program. For generations (and this is true for some of my young coworkers), kids were punished for speaking home languages other than English in school. The goal presented to kids in school was become English dominant and assimilate to "American" culture. At my daughter's school the best thing to be is bi/multi lingual, teachers are from many different countries and backgrounds, foods from many cultures are served in the cafeteria. For me, one of the big benefits is raising my kid to participate in a multi lingual/cultural/racial society, and to raise her as a "global citizen" (I know that sounds cheesy). I think all of that is really threatening to a segment of people who want the US to be predominantly white and English-speaking, and who start ranting about Soros as soon as you say global or international.

I’m likely the most conservative poster on this site, I am not white. I have no issue what so ever with elective dual language programs. I have no problem with ESOL (however I feel they are rather weak. They should be the equivalent of immersion programs the native English speakers take in other languages).

However I disagree with your racist suppositions. The USA needs to remain a English speaking nation. Fragmenting the nation into disparate linguist interest groups is so utterly divisive its dangerous. Canada, Belgium, Holland, very Western, Rich, and liberal nations are constantly on the verge of civil strife and occasional war (remember Canada the early 70s) due to lingual factionism. Other less affluent nations are in civil war because of these factions. Learn and speak whatever language you desire, more power to you, it makes you a fuller richer (not monetary although it can help) being. Whiteness has nothing to do with it. But if a nation at its core doesn’t have a shared cultural linguistic tradition... it risks not being a nation at all. If America was a white Racist nation as you allude, immigrants from all over the world wouldn’t be sacrificing everything to come here.

To bring this back on topic, these are the ideas that should be taught in school. Not teaching kids to hate and protest everything that runs counter to their shallow world view. And yes, any child’s world view is shallow by definition, they are a child, they need to be taught to open up to multiple ideas of the world, not to shut down dissenting views which is what this protest is really about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

To bring this back on topic, these are the ideas that should be taught in school. Not teaching kids to hate and protest everything that runs counter to their shallow world view. And yes, any child’s world view is shallow by definition, they are a child, they need to be taught to open up to multiple ideas of the world, not to shut down dissenting views which is what this protest is really about.

I'm honestly astonished that you would think that this is what the protest "is really about".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You must understand, mocking all they have. It's the bully mentality. It's really not worth your time. Just know that there are many, many of us out there in MoCo who also have to de-program our children at home. I, for one, don't choose to engage because I know that instead of a meaningful conversation I will be called names and mocked. Continue to do what you are doing with your child and they will grow up to be well rounded, independent thinkers.

In other words, indoctrinate your children that they have a God-given right to arm themselves with war-grade weapons and they will become well rounded, independent thinkers.

I wouldn't use the word indoctrinate, but "yes" to your question. Teach them why the founding fathers added the 2nd amendment to the constitution so they have both sides to the argument. They can then make their own choice. That's the true definition of independent thinking.

Are you also going to tell them what guns the founding fathers had in mind when they wrote the 2nd amendment?

The founders had in mind arms commensurate to what marching soldiers of government had. Today that would be M-16s which are fully automatic weapons. Today citizens however are limited to non fully automatic weapons. Funny thing is, I’m not even protesting (for lack of better term) that infringement. I’m just advocating Schools do not condone our children leaving school to protest for further infringement. Yet I’m being deridrd as crazy. Who is being unreasonable.

That's your interpretation. When are you going to buy that hydrogen bomb, so the government doesn't have an edge over you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear the poster is an avid consumer of fake news since all the best school systems skew liberal. They don't call it conservative arts for a reason.

Drifting off topic here but liberal arts refers to a classical liberal education, exactly the thing political conservatives are trying to preserve in our schools.

Really? It seems to me that there have been a lot of efforts lately, from people who call themselves political conservatives, to get rid of the liberal-arts departments at public universities -- English, foreign languages, and so on. The idea being that if it doesn't provide a specific technical training for a job where you can earn money right away, it's a waste of time and money. Maybe these people aren't actually political conservatives, though.

The concern is many ‘liberal arts departments’ no longer teach liberals arts. Safe spaces, trigger warnings, blaterhing nonsense about white privileged and patriarchy. Censorship of conservative speakers. Condoning of violence. Voltaire would be disgusted what these Liberal Arts departments have become. Classical liberals are speaking out against these departments, people like Camille Paglia, Christina Hoff Sommers, Jonathon Haidt, not exactly right wingers. It’s reasonable to advocate the dismantling of such anti-education departments. I do agree with you however that college is about building minds, not employees. Somehow we turned inivierotes into employee factories. Vocational school are a much better option for this. Universities need to provide education to develop minds, teach how to critically analyze, pursue truth, and be responsible civic minded, in the classical tradition, citizens.

Hee hee.

But indeed, as you say, universities need departments of history, literature, foreign languages, and so on. Let's tell the governors who are trying to dismantle the public universities in their states.

Can you give evidence of one public university being dismantled by a governor. (Hint, reducing funding is not dismantling. Hee hee.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Can you give evidence of one public university being dismantled by a governor. (Hint, reducing funding is not dismantling. Hee hee.)

Take a look at Wisconsin and Arizona.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Can you give evidence of one public university being dismantled by a governor. (Hint, reducing funding is not dismantling. Hee hee.)

And yes, if they reduce funding enough, that actually is dismantling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear the poster is an avid consumer of fake news since all the best school systems skew liberal. They don't call it conservative arts for a reason.

Drifting off topic here but liberal arts refers to a classical liberal education, exactly the thing political conservatives are trying to preserve in our schools.

Really? It seems to me that there have been a lot of efforts lately, from people who call themselves political conservatives, to get rid of the liberal-arts departments at public universities -- English, foreign languages, and so on. The idea being that if it doesn't provide a specific technical training for a job where you can earn money right away, it's a waste of time and money. Maybe these people aren't actually political conservatives, though.

The concern is many ‘liberal arts departments’ no longer teach liberals arts. Safe spaces, trigger warnings, blaterhing nonsense about white privileged and patriarchy. Censorship of conservative speakers. Condoning of violence. Voltaire would be disgusted what these Liberal Arts departments have become. Classical liberals are speaking out against these departments, people like Camille Paglia, Christina Hoff Sommers, Jonathon Haidt, not exactly right wingers. It’s reasonable to advocate the dismantling of such anti-education departments. I do agree with you however that college is about building minds, not employees. Somehow we turned inivierotes into employee factories. Vocational school are a much better option for this. Universities need to provide education to develop minds, teach how to critically analyze, pursue truth, and be responsible civic minded, in the classical tradition, citizens.

Hee hee.

But indeed, as you say, universities need departments of history, literature, foreign languages, and so on. Let's tell the governors who are trying to dismantle the public universities in their states.

Can you give evidence of one public university being dismantled by a governor. (Hint, reducing funding is not dismantling. Hee hee.)

Reducing funding is not dismantling, but does qualify as "trying to dismantle".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You must understand, mocking all they have. It's the bully mentality. It's really not worth your time. Just know that there are many, many of us out there in MoCo who also have to de-program our children at home. I, for one, don't choose to engage because I know that instead of a meaningful conversation I will be called names and mocked. Continue to do what you are doing with your child and they will grow up to be well rounded, independent thinkers.

In other words, indoctrinate your children that they have a God-given right to arm themselves with war-grade weapons and they will become well rounded, independent thinkers.

I wouldn't use the word indoctrinate, but "yes" to your question. Teach them why the founding fathers added the 2nd amendment to the constitution so they have both sides to the argument. They can then make their own choice. That's the true definition of independent thinking.

Are you also going to tell them what guns the founding fathers had in mind when they wrote the 2nd amendment?

The founders had in mind arms commensurate to what marching soldiers of government had. Today that would be M-16s which are fully automatic weapons. Today citizens however are limited to non fully automatic weapons. Funny thing is, I’m not even protesting (for lack of better term) that infringement. I’m just advocating Schools do not condone our children leaving school to protest for further infringement. Yet I’m being deridrd as crazy. Who is being unreasonable.

That's your interpretation. When are you going to buy that hydrogen bomb, so the government doesn't have an edge over you?

Great question, let me refer you back to my statement, ‘marching soldier’. What weapon did the average redcoat have. A musket, this was a weapon that could be carried by a single soldier, it’s also a weapon that a citizen of reasonless means could afford and use. The Foubders didn’t think each citizen had the right to bare a common. Nor a dreadnought. They were too expensive, to complex, and too unwieldy for the individual citizen to utilize. Rifles remain affordable, usable, and potable. Tanks, F-16s, and nukes are not. Japan didn’t invade the USA in 1941 because they feared the US Navy and Army, they feared the fact that every citizen was armed (a wrong assumption on their part but they held it nevertheless) and occupying such a country would be impossible. An armed nation can lose in war but an armed citizenry can never be ruled tyrannically unless absolute total war is engaged upon them but then what’s the point. If one totally eradicates a population, not much left to govern. Thus perfectly logical, reasonable (and I think acceptable) the citizenry be armed with rifles and not cannons (or nukes). This is why we have the 2nd Amendment, this is what children need to be taught in school. Not that ‘those dumb racist rednecks want to kill you. This is the subtext to these marches and that is why I oppose them. Obviously you are entitled to your opinion and to disagree but at least you know where I’m coming from. Wouldn’t it be better for the children if they had such a debate in school? And frankly, why aren’t they??