Minneapolis teachers union contract calls for layoffs of white teachers first

[Edge-]

Why shouldn't white Americans be punished it's not like we don't deserve it at this point.

White people aren't being "punished".

[Canpinter]

White people aren't being "punished".

I know I'm saying we should be.

[Endus]

White people aren't being "punished".

As with the actual text I just posted, over-represented population groups are being prioritized to improve representation among teachers; those over-represented have already enjoyed unwarranted privilege, and this amounts to removing that privilege.

That's not a "punishment", like you said, and white people aren't even being singled out directly.

[BeepBoo]

The point remains you're still talking about a fundamentally subjective preference and trying to pretend it's objective.

I didn't ever say it was objective. It's nearly impossible and means different things to different people. Doesn't mean you can't have oversite for reasoning and actually question people about those reasons.

Negative impacts aren't "punishments", automatically. Again, see Billy.

Your billy example is a false equivalence, so no. I don't think I will.

Also, regardless of whether they actively created those circumstances, they actively benefited from them.

K.

No, I'm saying telling subjugated minority groups to "be patient" is just maintaining the injustice indefinitely; it's an excuse to change nothing and allow them to continue to suffer.

"Indefinitely" nah, and you have no proof of that. Again, there are things that haven't had affirmative action that have had positive change as far as public acceptance, treatment, etc.

It's a position hostile to equity, not a reasonable unbiased position.

No one cares what you consider reasonable. You're king of thinking you're the arbiter of good morality, so I'm not even going to bother. Instead, I'll just say: Nice opinion. I have my own different one.

I actively support that, as I'm doing here. So frankly, stuff your attempt to speak on others' behalf.

You're getting confused that I'm speaking for everyone. I'm drawing attention to the thing you already admitted: that people would take issue. You self-ascribed that they're bigots without giving a reason why, acting like everyone should not only acknowledge injustice, but be willing to shoulder the burden of undoing it themselves and be happy about it at their own expense.

Sorry, no, the problem with addressing systemic injustice is not that white kids are losing their unjust privilege, no matter how much you want to complain about how unfair that is.

I get the feeling that it isn't even just about white people. You hate the existence of any form of privilege. Where is the line drawn between what was provided by privilege and how much they obtained on their own, I wonder? How can you even tell or separate them? I don't think you can.

[PC2]

Why shouldn't white Americans be punished it's not like we don't deserve it at this point.

Because collective punishment doesn't make any sense and it leads to human rights atrocities... Things will be fine though, people are only looking at the bad parts of American history right now, but eventually people will see that all of the positive contributions to civilization far outweigh the negatives.

[Edge-]

but eventually people will see that all of the positive contributions to civilization far outweigh the negatives.

I mean, that's actually just quite literally been how the history of the US has been taught up until recent times as we've decided, "Maybe we should stop ignoring all those bad parts if we want to avoid repeating those mistakes..."

[postman1782]

That sucks, but the solution to me isn't "force diversity with metrics until the diversity fixes the culture." That's just the same problem with a different target in an attempt to get even.

They could be the most qualified candidate they have ever seen, but if their name is Laquisha or Jamal, which is the names they showed in the studies, they get their resumes thrown away before they even get looked at after seeing the names.

- - - Updated - - -

Hard to frame it as anything else.

The people who get unfairly fired because of their ethnicity won't give a shit about your diversity.

Only if you are ignorant.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Because collective punishment doesn't make any sense and it leads to human rights atrocities... Things will be fine though, people are only looking at the bad parts of American history right now, but eventually people will see that all of the positive contributions to civilization far outweigh the negatives.

PC2 teaching history

"America, the great bastion of freedom and democracy was built on Slave labour and the Genocide of the indigenous peoples"

[Endus]

No one cares what you consider reasonable. You're king of thinking you're the arbiter of good morality, so I'm not even going to bother. Instead, I'll just say: Nice opinion. I have my own different one.

And you can go on failing to convince people. Whenever this kind of bullshit gets flung at me, it's when I'm defending a decision like this, which clearly has a lot of support already. I'm not claiming to be any kind of "arbiter", but you can't even explain your position in a way that doesn't boil down to defending a status quo based on petty bigotries.

You're getting confused that I'm speaking for everyone. I'm drawing attention to the thing you already admitted: that people would take issue. You self-ascribed that they're bigots without giving a reason why, acting like everyone should not only acknowledge injustice, but be willing to shoulder the burden of undoing it themselves and be happy about it at their own expense.

I did explain why. You just apparently want to ignore half of what I've said. They're bigots in some sense because they're unable to recognize how much of their own success was due to benefiting from systemic biases; internalizing those successes as if they were "deserved", based on "merit". It's not "shove Jews into ovens" bigotry, sure, but it's still empty prejudice and entitlement.

And if you're unwilling to "shoulder the burden" of addressing injustice, that's a pretty clear statement that your bigotry's intentional and deliberate, not just blind ignorance.

I get the feeling that it isn't even just about white people. You hate the existence of any form of privilege.

Kudos; you've realized my issue is with systemic biases and injustice, rather than some bullshit idea of being racist against myself and people like me.

That's not a secret. You're leveling it like it's an accusation, but congrats, that's been the open narrative the entire time.

Where is the line drawn between what was provided by privilege and how much they obtained on their own, I wonder? How can you even tell or separate them? I don't think you can.

This statement doesn't even make sense, and only demonstrates that you don't even understand what the concept of "privilege" even is.

Here's a tip; you can't earn privilege. Not that various concepts of "earning" aren't themselves inherently sketchy as fuck.

Because collective punishment doesn't make any sense and it leads to human rights atrocities... Things will be fine though, people are only looking at the bad parts of American history right now, but eventually people will see that all of the positive contributions to civilization far outweigh the negatives.

Literally no one was talking about collective punishment until you brought it up right there.

[tehdang]

https://alphanews.org/minneapolis-te...eachers-first/

Yeah, I am not sure about this one

I'm thoroughly skeptical of the single-sourcing for all news articles on the subject. Alpha news has published only a section of the contract. It cites nobody confirming, on the record, that it's in the contract signed. I look forward to further investigation of the contract.

If true, it will likely be part of future lawsuits.

- - - Updated - - -

Why shouldn't white Americans be punished it's not like we don't deserve it at this point.

I don't really trust anyone in this society to decide upon how much present racial discrimination is merited to make up for past racial discrimination. Not that I expect members of one race to universally accept moral culpability for acts made by people whose skin looked like theirs, but lived before them.

[Edge-]

If true, it will likely be part of future lawsuits.

Lawsuits over what?

I don't really trust anyone in this society to decide upon how much present racial discrimination is merited to make up for past racial discrimination.

Again, still not what's happening here.

[Rokom]

The reasons why this was implemented in the first place shows part of why "last in, first out" is a shitty practice to begin with when it comes to layoffs.

[tehdang]

Lawsuits over what?

Public schools are in a tough spot right now. There may be layoffs. The first fired white teacher will likely claim that the contract that governed her layoff unjustly discriminated against her on the basis of race.

Again, still not what's happening here.

The man brought up a perspective, and it's your right to not comment on it. I did.

[Edge-]

The first fired white teacher will likely claim that the contract that governed her layoff unjustly discriminated against her on the basis of race.

I'm not sure if everyone is as litigious as modern conservatives seem to be.

The man brought up a perspective, and it's your right to not comment on it. I did.

You posted an opinion. I simply responded to say your opinion is based on fiction.

[tehdang]

I'm not sure if everyone is as litigious as modern conservatives seem to be.

I think you’re underrating outrage if there’s suspicion that you no longer have a job because of your skin color. But if you think somebody wouldn’t sue, you’re certainly entitled to your opinion.

You posted an opinion. I simply responded to say your opinion is based on fiction.

I was not aware that the poster I responded to no longer thinks white Americans should be punished or deserve it. Please link.

[Edge-]

I think you’re underrating outrage if there’s suspicion that you no longer have a job because of your skin color. But if you think somebody wouldn’t sue, you’re certainly entitled to your opinion.

Not over the color of your skin, but due to budgetary reasons and a shift away from "last hired, first to go" which has no real benefits for students as has been discussed. Especially if the goal is to maximize educational outcomes and that promoting more diversity in teachers achieves that goal which again, has been discussed in this thread.

I mean sure they can sue, but their lawsuit is about as likely to succeed as that Convington lawsuit that just got tossed out.

[tehdang]

Not over the color of your skin, but due to budgetary reasons and a shift away from "last hired, first to go" which has no real benefits for students as has been discussed. Especially if the goal is to maximize educational outcomes and that promoting more diversity in teachers achieves that goal which again, has been discussed in this thread.

I mean sure they can sue, but their lawsuit is about as likely to succeed as that Convington lawsuit that just got tossed out.

I don’t think promoting diversity by selecting a certain race to be laid off first will survive a court challenge. It’s no defense of seniority considerations to say racial discrimination is unlikely to be a net gain over it.

[Endus]

I don’t think promoting diversity by selecting a certain race to be laid off first will survive a court challenge. It’s no defense of seniority considerations to say racial discrimination is unlikely to be a net gain over it.

There is no "selecting a certain race". Stop making up complete horseshit to misrepresent the actual contract text.

[BeepBoo]

but you can't even explain your position in a way that doesn't boil down to defending a status quo based on petty bigotries.

It's pretty simple: people don't want to give up their own lots in life for things they didn't do themselves. Most people don't enjoy the idea of sacrificing any bit of their own lots when forced to. Most people don't like sacrificing more than they're able without any impact to their own social standing. That's nature and that's fair for them to feel that way.

They're bigots in some sense because they're unable to recognize how much of their own success was due to benefiting from systemic biases

That's a stretch at the definition of bigotry. They could entirely harbor no ill-will or ill-thoughts about other people of those identities, which means they aren't bigots.
Your position that "if you're not helping, you're complacent and/or actively harming!" is always bogus.

Kudos; you've realized my issue is with systemic biases and injustice, rather than some bullshit idea of being racist against myself and people like me.

That's not a secret. You're leveling it like it's an accusation, but congrats, that's been the open narrative the entire time.

Ah, see, my entire GOAL in life is to provide my kids with as much privilege as I possibly can, and I'll be capable of quite a lot. The hope is that If they're good, they'll become great, and even if they're mediocre, they'll have so much access to resources that they'll become great versus someone who had squandered potential such that it doesn't matter.

I WANT to be able to use my strength and efforts so my kids can be even happier, richer, and more free (or at least have a better shot at it than I did) in relation to whatever the standard of living is in their time.

Your kumbaya shit where I'm just as invested in other peoples' kids as mine and want to see all of humanity reach their max potential, regardless of how much more effort each individual takes, can kindly stay in your own head.

[Endus]

It's pretty simple: people don't want to give up their own lots in life for things they didn't do themselves. Most people don't enjoy the idea of sacrificing any bit of their own lots when forced to. Most people don't like sacrificing more than they're able without any impact to their own social standing. That's nature and that's fair for them to feel that way.

You're explaining that the unfairly privileged often resist that privilege being denied to them.

Yes, they're entitled to feel that way, but that feeling is predicated on prejudice and entitlement, not reason and empathy.

And that being pointed out to them, and society moving on regardless because they really don't have a defensible, arguable position on this, is not something they have a justifiable argument against it.

Why are you arguing that prejudiced views are justified because those who hold them believe them to be true? The Nazis thought Jews were subhuman, would you give that opinion the same consideration, to protect the feelings and privilege and entitlement of Nazis? Where do you draw the line on this? And the moment you realize you can't identify an objective line, you'll have realized why we don't accept this argument.

That's a stretch at the definition of bigotry. They could entirely harbor no ill-will or ill-thoughts about other people of those identities, which means they aren't bigots.

Bigotry in no way whatsoever requires active ill-will or malice. I have no idea where you got such a ludicrous idea. It's not based on reality, and just comes off as playing defense for bigots.

Your position that "if you're not helping, you're complacent and/or actively harming!" is always bogus.

Didn't say that. In this case, they're contributing to harm, however. Even if only passively. Which is more than enough. Benefiting unequitably from privilege and systemic bias is not a neutral position.

Ah, see, my entire GOAL in life is to provide my kids with as much privilege as I possibly can, and I'll be capable of quite a lot. The hope is that If they're good, they'll become great, and even if they're mediocre, they'll have so much access to resources that they'll become great versus someone who had squandered potential such that it doesn't matter.

You continue to willfully misunderstand the concept of "privilege" in ways that make it clear you're being intentionally dishonest.

Your kumbaya shit where I'm just as invested in other peoples' kids as mine and want to see all of humanity reach their max potential, regardless of how much more effort each individual takes, can kindly stay in your own head.

And also demonstrating a whopping lack of basic human empathy.

I can't explain to you why you should care about people. It would be a waste of time to try. So I'll just underscore it for our audience, because nobody should take misanthropic positions seriously.