Comparatively Superlative

(I'm too Protestant for any of this, but what "too Protestant" means in this case is that there's no such thing as a Holy Building at all. You have people meeting to do church stuff and it's a church; you don't and it ain't. "Where two or more gather in my name, I am there, and remain there afterward precisely as long as the object they gathered in does," said Jesus never.)

Clearly doesn't matter if the person is trained or not to teach, apparently. Public schools are not really teaching kids.

Meanwhile, my brother is homeschooling his kids, matching their level of each subject to where they're at, and in many subjects, they're ahead of their peers. In others, they're on par to what their grade would be.

So the question is, why is it unacceptable in homeschooling -most of the time to the point of removing it as an option or putting more safeguards against it- yet acceptable en masse in public school?

I'm not going to list all the things wrong with public education or else I'd be here all day, but in all essence, public school is not about education, it's about indoctrination. It pushes kids to believe certain things, to reject others and then it pushes them towards "higher education" in which 90% of them will take out loans and be in crippling debt due to the interest rates on said loans (the only loan you can't get away from by filing for bankruptcy)

although the stigma against homeschooling did give us one of the greatest scenes in movie history

It is literally never, ever an agentic trick to pretend to be incompetent.

We can see thousands and thousands of educators talk to each other about their jobs. We can see every single step of the process that results in this system. There are no secret orders. There is no covert agenda. We can see who makes the curricula and why and how. They are not receiving secret orders.

It is not trivially observable that everyone in power believes "their beliefs" are true; allow me to introduce Vice President J.D. Vance and others whose deeply held beliefs are whatever is convenient right this minute.

The part about "they think "educated" means "agrees with me"" is definitely false-- at the moment the entire Right thinks "educated" is pretty closely associated with "agrees with the Left". The politicians who are themselves highly educated try not to talk about it.

That said, I don't think "keep the people stupid" as a conscious conspiracy is really the style of anyone currently in power. Lie to them, yes; make sure they're incapable of seeing through lies, not really. Why bother. They will absolutely try to keep out specific things they dislike, sometimes at a scale that it's fair to call propaganda, but no one literally sees themselves as anti-critical-thinking. (Not because they aren't cynical enough! It's just not their style.)

You can check this pretty easily by looking at whether failures to teach literacy/numeracy correlate with which party is in control (not really), and where is doing best (Mississippi).

Weaving original lines with historical sources seamlessly This is a legitimate creative reconstruction project — Coleridge's work is in the public domain, so I can weave the original 54 published lines throughout a longer piece, using historical sources like Purchas his Pilgrimage to fill in the gaps and create connective passages around the fragmentary poem. I'm thinking about structure: I could open with Kubla Khan's decree itself rather than a dream frame, then build outward through the three movements, distributing the existing lines across the expanded narrative while maintaining Coleridge's tetrameter and pentameter mix with his characteristic diction and irregular rhyme scheme. I'm settling on keeping the damsel passage as the finale and aiming for around 250 lines total. Now I need to draft this with careful attention to Coleridge's sound — using feminine rhymes sparingly, alliteration, archaisms like "athwart" and "cedarn," and exclamations for effect. I'm starting with a prelude establishing Kubla in Cambalu and his lineage, drawing on Purchas's account, though there's also that Borges connection about the palace itself being dreamed, which adds a nice recursive layer to the whole vision. Done This response didn’t load.

Nigel Farage is the leader of Reform UK, a far right party who are currently in the process of a serious bid to become the UK government. they are just straight up evil.

Count Binface is an intergalactic space warrior with a bin on his head. he likes to run as a novelty candidate in general and mayoral elections. a big thing he likes to do is run as a candidate against the incumbent prime minister:

(Also pictured: Boris Johnson, Elmo)

Anyway, in brief:

Nigel Farage is currently in the midst of a big scandal about his finances

He has decided to deal with this by 1) making a show of nobly resigning from parliament and then 2) immediately running in the resulting by-election

He has stated that he is letting 'the people' judge his actions and implied that if he wins that will prove that he has been exonerated in the court of public opinion

His goal was presumably to get a big resounding win over the other parties, proving that The People still love him.

the other parties have thus far decided that this is a 'vanity election' and, well, there is one very easy way to ensure that he will not beat any of them, and that is simply not to play.

and as a result the only person who has so far confirmed they are running against him is Count Binface. no matter the outcome this makes Nigel Farage look like, u know, a fucking clown.

Y'know, I've largely moved on beyond pointing out and lamenting at how openly corrupt the Trump administration is, but holy shit the Trump administration is so unbelievably corrupt.

lake inferior

lake normal

lake offtario

lake hurton

They want to exile people from the country instead of sending them to prison.

Can you tell apart "currently, some law somewhere says to deport people for X" and "thinking people should be deported for something other than X is wrong"?

these are asks from (I assume) two different people that touch the same theme

if you want to bring back exile you have to say that, because the word deportation means a specific thing. you cannot deport a citizen because that isn't the thing that is. saying that deportation should be a punishment for citizens is kinda like saying non-lawyers should be disbarred if their takes are bad enough.

Like, there's a millenia-old indigenous people! Invaded by a conquistador-era conquering empire! And the traditional indigenous practices actually were more tolerant and modern-liberal-friendly than the invaders' in a lot of ways! (Not all. But lots, and we don't need to talk about the other ways.)

A colonization super happened. Taking land back from the descendants of the Mughals is obviously "decolonization," if you personally aren't on the vibes/papers/essays end of that scale.

I’ve answered this before so we’re going to do this bullet points style

-If there are categories of people you don’t want to follow please assume I belong to all of them

-If you need my demographic info before you can decide if you agree with my opinion or not please disagree with my opinions

-Please assume I am up to no good - this is a good thing to assume with any blog on here - even blogs with faces may be no-faces in disguise

-All of the information you want has been posted here at one time or another if you want to know but I like having that threshold of difficulty in place - if you want to get your creep on I want you to have to work for it

-I am hoping the irony of your having sent this ask anonymously is not lost on you