Yeah, people are always clamoring to move into areas with crappy schools and low taxes.
At least in around these parts, the #1 thing people look at when buying a home is good schools. And businesses also tend to try and locate where the population they’ll be hiring from is well educated.
Well, that problem is solved, if these people are anything like the ultra-orthodox in Israel. The men just don’t work.
I don’t want to sound like I’m taking their side, but frankly, parents of disabled children often face issues of lack of choice. They can’t get services any place but the public schools, or if the child happens to be deaf or blind, the state school that serves those populations, where the child must often be a residential student. If the parents object to a little too much mainstreaming, like the child being forced to participate in “Holiday programs” that are blatantly Christian pageants, not really any different from the ones I participated in at school, exactly one year after the passing of PL 94-142 (the Education of All Handicapped Children Act), except that they no longer have the word “Christmas” in them, they get patted on the head, assured that the kids will sing that dumb dreidl song, and that makes everything OK (even though Hanukkah will be over by the date of the pageant).
Parents ought to be able to have their children educated in any school that is considered generally adequate, but schools lose a lot of money when a Special Ed. pupil goes someplace else.
Now, I understand that the yeshivas may have been only wink wink nudge nudge adequate, and the school system was loathe to give them any support, but it should have been nipped in the bud. It sounds like this has been boiling up for a while. It’s not really the fault of the Hassidim that it was allowed to reach this critical point.
I am not defending the response; I’m just recognizing that this is not a problem limited to Hassidim: Spec. Ed. kids are woefully underserved, and the unwillingness of school boards to allow children out of their home schools is part of the problem.
No, I question motives when I see people making assumptions.
Right, and at no point in the article or the OP did the idea come across that all Jews were responsible for this.
That was intentional. Adding “the” is worse because it does imply all members of the group. Another reason why the innocuous thread became about “The (evil-money-grubbing-backstabbing) Jews” when that idea was never expressed by anyone and only inferred by those who want to see antisemitism in everything. I won’t bite.
And the OP could have said The Jews or Jewry, but instead just said Jews which in colloquial expression implies a group but not all.
Ah. Here was the false inference that side-trailed this thread.
The school system WAS supporting them. That had been part of the extortion compromise before everything went to hell. They were giving them money for every special education student. But the Hasidim, once they had the numbers to take the board over, then insisted that the special education students get the full funding that a special education student gets in public school in the form of a check that they could apply to private religious schools (religious schools that were not even teaching a secular education), which wasn’t legal. They were insisting on special treatment that would break federal law.
If you haven’t listened to the This American Life, I would implore you to. I have no dog in this fight, but the report was enraging.
I am glad the mods moved this thread to the Pit so I can give this holocaust denier some shit!
(Reads OP)
Never mind!
No one is this fucking stupid. The phrase “The Jews” is inherently antisemitic. It never refers to just a group but not all, any more than “The blacks” means some black people.
The phrase “Jews take over” is also inherently antisemitic, for reasons already stated in this thread. It doesn’t matter what the OP or article said, because we’re discussing the title.
Antisemites are not some poor slighted group that need to be defended. A decent person goes out of their way not to allow for bigoted interpretations of what they say, or at least apologize when they are misunderstood. Martin Hyde doubled down.
If “some Jews” and “Jews” were synonymous, then why does Martin Hyde think it’s wishy-washy to use the other phrasing? He made the title deliberately inflammatory. And so to the Pit it goes.
Which was clearly the intention. He made a provocative title.
So fucking what?
I am sorry, what does the phrase “they were giving them money for every special education student” mean? Was the money given to the public schools to educate Hassidic special ed students? If so, I am a bit surprised how you can’t see that that would be meaningless to the Hasidim. They can’t have their kids educated in public schools. That’s axiomatic for them.
Under current law, children who are identified as having learning disabilities are entitled to services that will allow them to achieve their fullest potential. This can mean therapies for speech or coordination problems; a one-to-one aide; a segregated classroom for those children who aren’t able to keep up in a regular classroom; things like that. The federal and state governments recognize this and give school districts additional money to pay for those services.
If I’m reading this right, the Hasidim wanted that extra money, but they weren’t going to provide the services to those children attending their yeshivot. So they made the compromises they made and eventually took over the local public school district to guarantee that their yeshivot got what the public schools got, knowing that that money wasn’t going to be used for its intended purpose. They hired an expensive attorney who had their interests at heart and who outclassed the local guy to make sure that happened. Essentially, they took over the public schools like a venture capitalist takes over a company: Gut it, keep the good parts for yourself, and leave the rest of it to die. The Hasidim behaved like thugs and bullies, no better and no worse. They shook the local district down for its lunch money.
From the TAL transcript:
***"The Hasidic and the ultra-Orthodox live in closed communities, and the private yeshivas they send their children to are all Hasidic kids. So just picture-- you’re a Hasidic parent with a special-needs kid-- maybe with developmental and emotional issues-- and people are telling you, you want to get your kid the help they need, you gotta yank them out of the environment where they’re the most comfortable, the only environment they’ve ever known, and send them elsewhere.
Yossi Gestetner
The parents just want to make sure that the children go to an environment and in a school, an institution, where the language spoken is the language they understand best, the tradition, the religion, and the culture. The way they see it is the state has an obligation to provide education, and some special-needs students get up to $27,000 in funding. Take this $27,000, put it into a different institution, an institution which works for the parent and for the child. A place where it helps the student and the parents best. Especially if it doesn’t cost an extra nickel for the taxpayers.
Ben Calhoun
In other words, you’re going to spend the money anyways. What do you care if it goes to a yeshiva?
But it’s not that simple. You can’t do that, because of federal education regulations. The government says if it’s going to pay for special-ed students, then they have to be placed in mainstream environments as much as possible. Congress made that the law because, for years, our country had a real problem-- that special-ed kids were being warehoused and isolated. And according to the law, public schools are just considered to be more mainstream than private religious schools.
So in East Ramapo, Hasidic parents would often go to the school district, and they’d ask for their special-ed children to be put in private yeshivas using government money. The school district would say, sorry, we have to follow the law, and the law says no-- "***
They were absolutely willing to treat the Hasidic kids the same as any other kids with regard to special education, but the law doesn’t allow the public school to hand a check over to a private school for each student. Not for secular private schools, Christian private schools or Hasidic private schools.
They wanted special treatment, and when they didn’t get it, I guess they had to option to either petition to change federal law, suck it up and deal like everyone else, or ruin the public schools and take them over as private schools. They went with the latter.
Also from the transcript, the original truce that had been struck included payment from the public schools to the private schools, as much was legally allowed:
***"And as the Hasidic population got bigger and bigger, that became an issue. Because in New York, these suburban school district budgets go up for a public vote. As the Hasids’ numbers increased, there were enough of them that they could conceivably go to the polls and vote down the school budget, force cuts. Though, kind of remarkably, that did not happen. And it didn’t happen because the public schools and the Hasids worked out a deal-- a truce. Steve White is an activist in school board politics in town.
Steve White
The original deal that was made many, many years ago was if we don’t investigate whether or not there’s education going on in the yeshivas, then the rabbis won’t tell their people to vote down our school budget.
Ira Glass
In other words, the school board won’t call in the state to check and see if math and reading and history are being properly taught in the yeshivas, like the state mandates, if the Hasids will just stay away from the polls. Jason Friedman was superintendent for East Ramapo schools for eight years. He says the truce actually even cruder than that. He says that the yeshivas are entitled to money from public school budgets for certain things, like buses and books.
He says the deal was to give the Jewish schools as much money as was legal. Friedman says he would regularly meet with Hasidic rabbis and yeshiva administrators. And his pitch was always, we will give you whatever we can. Just don’t vote down our budgets."***
What a stupid, dishonest, politically correct asshole you are.
Regards,
Shodan
The fact they weren’t separated is partly why so many people objected to your phrasing and why this is now in the pit.
Noted, but this discussion isn’t solely about how YOU feel. Clearly a non trivial number of people do feel that way.
That particular school sale is a settled issue, but the conflict of interest and misappropriation of funds continues. No need to sensationalize this as more than just basic corruption.
Where did you get that? I think they wanted that extra money and would have provided those services using that money to those children attending their yeshivot. The law said that’s not possible. But again, I don’t see why you don’t understand how the Hassidim would not find it acceptable that in order to get the special ed services they had to send their kids to public, non-religious, schools.
True, he forgot that some members of this board really love the idea of sticking it to certain groups.
It would only suggest that to people who jump to conclusions baselessly.
No reason to dumb myself down for stupid people.
Actually I would disagree, under this metric we literally cannot refer to Jews directly as a group in almost any context. Ex: Child to parent, “Who are those people going to that strange looking church every week? [pointing to synagogue]”, “Jews.” Ex: Who are the typical customers for that Kosher butcher? “The Jews.”
I’m reminded of an English course I had where the instructor was Jewish, and he actually made mention once when someone was discussing a paper in which they had repeatedly used the phrase “Jewish people” or “the Jewish people” instead of “Jews” or “the Jews.” His comment was, “Calling Jews Jews isn’t offensive, in fact it’s odd language to refrain from using the standard plural form for them.” I’m not relying on one Jew’s opinion for my argument, and would make the same point regardless if he had said it or not–it cannot be intrinsically offensive simply to refer to a group by the name of their group.
I didn’t double down on anything, all I can guess is people like you who are closet antisemites took a perfectly innocuous thread title and inferred horrible things about all Jews from it. If I was a Jew I’d be extremely upset if society said it was wrong to refer to my group by name. That’s basically saying we’re so horrible that to refer to us collectively is automatically referring to all the collective stereotypes about us. In a sense, if you refer to Jews in the plural form you’re implying things about money-grubbing Shylocks. That’s actually deeply offensive.
Again, only inflammatory to people who wanted to infer bad things about Jews from seeing the plural form of the word Jew, itself an antisemitic mindset.
Clearly according to you? You know my motivations better than I do? What special talent enables you to know my motivations?
I used the term Jews because no other term made more sense.
Imagine the Klan had taken over the school board. Would your topic have been “Whites take over…” or “Fringe white supremacists take over…”? And assuming it’s the latter, why would you avoid “whites” but think “Jews” is totally acceptable?
Too late to edit, but: a more direct analogy would be the Westboro Baptist Church, or various sects of Snake Handlers. “Christians take over…” or “Fringe fundamentalist Christians take over…”?