Not quite. Nobody ever assumed every kid will do well in school. NCLB was an attempt to introduce accountability and standards.
Where do you get the impression that people think every kid is going to do well in school? More importantly, NCLB has largely failed due to reasons of implementation, and misaligned incentives as opposed to the supposed genetic inferiority of minorities.
I hesitate to respond to this because of the poisoned-well OP and the fact that the conversation has already taken the expected turn. However, here are my thoughts on the matter:
As frequently as race and racism is encountered in America, the discussions about it are extremely shallow. The main problem is that a racism is defined as membership in the KKK, or nothing at all. There is no room for the more common, and insidious, subconscious racism that is the major effect of centuries of racist propaganda against blacks (there has been racism against other racial/ethnic groups too, but nothing so pervasive or ubiquitous). Thus, to be considered a racist under this framework, one would have to literally say, “I hate [group X].”
Meanwhile, the very real problems of disparate impacts, unequal enforcement, job discrimination (whether intended, subconscious, or merely system-induced), economic discrimination (that manifests itself as racial discrimination, through the intersection of race and class), drug policy, the lasting cultural effects of racism, etc., remain forever unaddressed.
The increasing economic inequality in America frustrates poor whites, and when they see race-based affirmative action programs they attribute their losses to the supposed gains made by blacks. But the real problem, of course, is one of an economic policy that favors the rich while thrashing the poor. These poor whites, aware of racism being anathema, are afraid of expressing their feelings openly; perhaps they even convince themselves that they are not racist. But they then vote in ways that undermine blacks, guided by code words and dog whistles. But, in doing so, they are also usually undermining their own positions. Poor whites are right to feel aggrieved–they just misattribute responsibility for their misery.
The great irony is that the bulwark of political correctness in regard to racism, which had previously been fairly useful in defending society against its cruder forms, now serves as an impediment to racial progress. We would actually be better off if people–black and white–were allowed to openly voice their suspicions and reservations about the other group. Then, a real dialogue could emerge, and these lingering tensions could be addressed.
No Child Left Behind punishes school districts that have social problems. However well intentioned, it was flawed from the beginning, but its failure has nothing to do with the pseudoscience of The Bell Curve.
The Bell Curve was debunked, (and again with more and more and more), within months of it being published (as the authors carefully avoided peer review).
Yeah I have heard that many times before and it is always a black that says it i.e. let’s have a honest conversation on race.
OK, I do not like blacks. The conversation is over, and yes I’m a racist, and I’m filthy rich to boot. How do you love me now?
I’m white, blue eyed, and a blond male and a member of the best race that ever walked on the face of this earth— you want to fight about it, or just agree?
We are not created equal, no two people are, were are not going to be social friends, you are not welcome to my personal house, you blacks are not welcome in my personal life, I want nothing to do with blacks or other races.
Blacks do NOT want a honest conversation about race because they get their feelings hurt. Oh well too bad, grow up.
My white family has been in the USA since 1732, I never had a slave, my family never took slaves, we fought against slavery and by our family records we greatly protested in every generation that blacks should have never been brought to the USA—it was a horrible crime against nature that never should have happened, in this whites were simply and utterly stupid—but you blacks are here and I have to live with it the best I can. Accordingly behave yourself and try to make something good out of your life (like the rest of us) and take responsibility and stop blaming me for all your stupid problems. I do not blame blacks for my problems I just have to find away to work around you and you can do the same to me—that is legal to do.
Now when it comes to LAW you blacks, and Mexicans, have civil rights the same as I, and the same USA constitution in all of its good words. YOU cannot discriminate in the access to the social goods (jobs, schools, and housing to name a few) by reason of race, national origin, religion, gender, or disability. In all other things we can discriminate all we desire—and that is the LAW, and that is also called freedoms—so YOU blacks live with it.
I have hired many blacks, Cubans, and legal Mexicans over my long business life. For the most part they seem to work out OK, I pay the same as I would to any white man (or white woman) — and you do not get a dime more because of your color or racial history—that is the law and I abide by it. I have give pay raises and promotions based on capability and how much money you make for me, as cash is the name of the game and I’m a good player. And I do not care where your mama came from or for what reason.
In my public life I abide by the law in full, to the letter, and in public I try to be courteous and friendly and not rude, but my private life is different— I do not like other races. I rather have my own white country to live in or at least my own white neighborhood. So I bought up all the land around me just make sure there is great distance between us. There will never be acceptance but there can be tolerance, and that is as good as it gets; and stay LAW abiding.
NOW you want me to go into great detail, and make argument, on why I do not like blacks? So you want to be offended? I will just say you are ugly to look at and be done with this talk. I’m not running for public office.
Thank you for the time and space, and the lovely “honest” conversation.
And by the way you are a racist also or you would have married the woman (or man as the case may be) of the other color, so do not be shaking your finger at me. Every one is a racist so get over yourself.
Don
Bye, Don. I would say it was nice having you among us…if it was.
You’ve been making a lot of assertions without backing them up. I’m not interested in your specualtion presented as facts. If you have data to show then show it. If not your drivel isn’t worth the effort of argument.
What matters is you are making assumptions without any data to back them up. Then you come here with your assumptions and lack of any data and make assertions as if your opinions are facts. They aren’t.
Here are my assertions and my data.
In the United States, blacks have a murder rate that is seven times the white rate.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/race.cfm
The murder rate is a good way of measuring the entire crime rate, because murders are more likely to come to the attention of the police than other crimes.
Internationally, countries with high black populations always have high murder rates.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita
In predominately white countries, blacks have higher crime rates. I am not going to cite every white majority country, but I do ask you to read this:
"Mr Blair is clearly correct when he says that most teenagers are not members of armed gangs, and that the majority of young people in Britain are not even involved in low-level anti-social behaviour. The problem of gun crime is, as he says, almost entirely limited to what he calls a specific small sub-culture…
The sub-culture to which Mr Blair alludes in his coded way is that of black delinquency.
Look at my comment #268. The relationship between race and crime is so obvious it requires no substantiation, but it can easily be documented.
As is the relationship between crime and economic conditions, and between race and economic conditions in America.
The problem for your hypothesis and agenda is that when you account for all three together, economic conditions and not race explain crime.
I promised myself I wouldn’t waste too much time finding and summarizing the actual empirical literature on the topic, since invariably that doesn’t make any differences in discussions here, but I couldn’t leave my summary statements completely devoid of reference to the literature.
Here’s a small snippet from a relatively recent review article on the topic. Again, the term “structural” refers to socio-economic conditions, which is contrasted with the cultural explanations (e.g. African Americans are inherently disposed to violent crime due to genetic differences or cultural values). Find any summary on the topic, and it will be very similar to the following – structural differences explain criminal variation across communities, race does not.
http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.soc.31.041304.122308
Also, although not a review article, one really interesting study is:
Cohort differences in the progression of developmental pathways: Evidence for period effects on secular trends of violence in males.
Author: Fabio. Published in: Injury Prevention, v. 14 no. 5, pp. 311-318 Date: 2008
This study used data from a sample of boys in an urban community setting. The interesting thing is that they collected data in three cohorts, the oldest of which was 13 and the youngest was 7. They started in 1987 and collected data during the spike in crime that occurred nationally in the early 1990’s. What they observed was that there were differences in the rates of criminal behavior and progression along a developmental pathway of criminal behavior between the cohorts, especially the oldest and youngest cohorts. They found that it wasn’t that the cohorts themselves were somehow different, but it was macrolevel contextual (especially economic) changes that occurred during that time that explained the differences between the cohorts. Race, by the way, had no explanatory power.
What that means is that people growing up in the same physical or geographic area, but separated by 6 years, show differences in the development of criminal behavior that are explained by changes in primarily economic factors over the course of time.
Following on from the first reply, there’s no such thing as Australian-Italians or Australian-Chinese.
I think there may be a hidden lesson for the Yanks in this somewhere… :rolleyes:
I’ll throw out a few cites for New Deal Democrat. Not that I expect it to make a difference, but still:
This is precisely why blacks and whites will never sit at the table of brotherhood. You can’t expect us to have a conversation on race when you’re calling us stupid, or worse, intrinsically stupid. Who do you think you are?
What? That we should have set up a rabbit proof fence somewhere?
Hey Dinsdale, I know this happened 6 pages ago, but I wanted to take a crack at it. As part of my current program I was required to take a year-long course sequence studying race relations and the history of racism in America. I was always a super pro-diversity, ‘‘racism is bad’’ sort of person, but this sequence blew my fucking mind.
I think one byproduct of racism in America is we have a tendency to view minority cultures through our own paradigm of what’s best for our culture. There is a lot of emphasis, for example, on the ‘‘problem’’ of out-of-wedlock births among minority mothers. But very few researchers have actually taken the time to consider whether that’s actually a bad thing within the context of the culture in question.
One study suggests that it’s not. In the study, unwed minority teen mothers were compared with teens who were pregnant but miscarried. What they found is that the outcome in terms of quality of life for the mother was the same as for the teen who miscarried. The study also found, that, contrary to popular belief, unwed teen mothers actually cost the government less in terms of welfare/support than those teens who had miscarried.
Furthermore, as you may be aware, the infant mortality rate for blacks is twice the rate rate of that for whites. The study found that children born out of wedlock to young minorities had significantly lower mortality rates than children born to older parents within the same communities. That study found, that is, babies born out of wedlock to teen mothers in the inner city are healthier than babies born to older parents. This is probably because younger babies have access to healthier relatives. The health conditions of minorities in these situations are often so poor that the earlier children are brought into the community, the better.
Cite.
When we talk about a frank discussion on race, I personally feel that includes the reality of white privilege. Shodan nailed it when he said a frank discussion on race can’t happen until white people stop being afraid of being labeled ‘‘racist’’ – though I doubt he’d agree with me on much else. White privilege is the ability to project your own values onto a culture with entirely different social conditions, to call it immoral or lazy or whatever for having children out of wedlock without stopping to consider whether that behavior is a cause or an adaptive byproduct of those social conditions that most white Americans do not have to face.
If an upper middle class white kid doesn’t finish high school, sure, maybe he’s irresponsible and lazy. We can at least reliably say he’s making a poor choice, because education is really important for success in white America. But what if you live in an environment where you can obviously see from those around you that graduating high school will not have any significant effect on your life prospects? That the unemployment rate is the same in your neighborhood regardless of whether you graduate or not? (There are also studies that indicate this is the reality of inner cities, though I can’t find them on the internet.) Is dropping out such a poor choice in that context?
If we were to have a frank dialog on race, it would involve the acknowledgment that white values and white culture shape the way we look at the ‘‘social problems’’ of other races. It would involve acknowledging that slavery was only the tragic beginning of systemic racial discrimination in America – race has played a role in major social policy actions throughout history including the implementation of the GI Bill in WWII, which is arguably one of the most influential policies on the development of the modern middle class. All those chances that white America had to grow its wealth and get out of poverty, blacks were systemically denied, which is probably why the average white American is 11x more wealthy than the average black American today. And the gap between blacks and whites is wider than ever before in modern history. It’s getting worse, not better.
A ‘‘frank discussion’’ on race means all of us well-meaning white folks having the guts to say, ‘‘Yeah, I mean it wasn’t intentional or anything on my part, but we really have collectively been pretty fucking racist.’’ We have to stop fearing that word and accepting that racism is not an anomaly, but rather a reality endemic to our culture, a reality that has shaped our history, our economy, and our (mis)understanding of racial conflict today.
Pure inbred? Nice to meet you! extends hand 
I have documented that blacks in the United States have a murder rate that is seven times the white murder rate.
When income is held constant, how do white and black crime rates compare? It’s an honest question. I do not know the answer. I would like for the answer to be documented by a credible source, however.
Depends on how you mean that. It is possible that there are no persons of Australian descent living in China. It is impossible that there are no persons of Chinese descent living in Australia.
Already done. Please read all posts.
Further, feel free to look at the empirical literature yourself. Any review article within the past 15 to 20 years will be pretty consistent, but the more recent the better. Even if you cannot get the full articles, Google Scholar will allow you to see abstracts.