"White privilege": the latest problem that liberals have created to bash white people with

[TyroneSlothrop]

In 2010, the Virginia public school system introduced a 4th grade textbook with bogus claims about thousands of loyal slaves fighting on the side of the Confederacy. The source? The Sons of Confederate Veterans.

Such disinformation is part of a broader neo-Confederate movement to deny that slavery was a major factor in the conflict—and to bury the history of African-Americans’ active role in their own emancipation.
How the Civil War Never Ended for Black America Alternet

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Read "The Bell Curve" by Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein.

Leon Kamin of Scientific American Debunks The Bell Curve

An extensive review of the book. "At long last, Herrnstein and Murray let it all hang out: "Affirmative action, in education and the workplace alike, is leaking a poison into the American soul." Having examined the American condition at the close of the 20th century, these two philosopher-kings conclude, "It is time for America once again to try living with inequality, as life is lived...." This kind of sentiment, I imagine, is what led "New York Times" columnist Bob Herbert to the conclusion that "The Bell Curve" "is just a genteel way of calling somebody a ni**er." Herbert is right. The book has nothing to do with science."

 

[RandallFlagg]

'"White privilege": the latest problem that liberals have created to bash white people with'

Another ridiculous lie from the right.

Another stupid reply by a hypocrite.

Check this stupid broad out.

NAACP Issues Statement on Local Chapter President Outed as White TheBlaze.com

I mean C'Mon!! I've been black all my life. The last time someone did this was AL Jolson and his "minstrel show" in the 30s or the "Amos and Andy" show. The NAACP doesn't have a problem with her "pretending" to be black.

This world has gone completely insane.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

This world has gone completely insane.

"we didn't start the fire it was always burning since the world was turning"

 

[Steinlight]

Read "The Bell Curve" by Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein.

Leon Kamin of Scientific American Debunks The Bell Curve

An extensive review of the book. "At long last, Herrnstein and Murray let it all hang out: "Affirmative action, in education and the workplace alike, is leaking a poison into the American soul." Having examined the American condition at the close of the 20th century, these two philosopher-kings conclude, "It is time for America once again to try living with inequality, as life is lived...." This kind of sentiment, I imagine, is what led "New York Times" columnist Bob Herbert to the conclusion that "The Bell Curve" "is just a genteel way of calling somebody a ni**er." Herbert is right. The book has nothing to do with science."

LOL, you call that a "debunking"? All he said was, "that's racist".

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Read "The Bell Curve" by Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein.

Leon Kamin of Scientific American Debunks The Bell Curve

An extensive review of the book. "At long last, Herrnstein and Murray let it all hang out: "Affirmative action, in education and the workplace alike, is leaking a poison into the American soul." Having examined the American condition at the close of the 20th century, these two philosopher-kings conclude, "It is time for America once again to try living with inequality, as life is lived...." This kind of sentiment, I imagine, is what led "New York Times" columnist Bob Herbert to the conclusion that "The Bell Curve" "is just a genteel way of calling somebody a ni**er." Herbert is right. The book has nothing to do with science."

LOL, you call that a "debunking"? All he said was, "that's racist".

If you read careful with your "superior" LOL Intelligence you will note the its New York Time columnist Bob Herbert who made what you are whining as amounting to a "that's racist" commentary ...read the gosh dang article get informed instead of being opinionated and stupid ....

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Yesterday's Prejudice, Today's Science

It is not enough to call Herrnstein and Murray racists because they would think we have been goaded into fearing the power of their Truth. If we resist their racism, then we must prove them wrong.

[ read the article]

 

[toxicmedia]

Yes, we are privileged with our higher IQs. Except it isn't really privilege, it is a product of biology, of nature, of evolution. This is nothing new, losers always resent winners and their success. We have built the greatest civilization on Earth so of course we will have targets on our back from those with inferiority complexes.

Wow......I have never seen so many pseudo scientific unsupported conclusions packed quite so densely before.

You are a miracle of evolution, and you post is probably an undiscovered element

No, the difference in IQ between the races on average is amply supported. What is not supported is claims by those who call themselves liberal that different racial groups on the aggregate are "equal", whatever the hell that means.

You're a consistent performer. Gotta hand it to you.

Do continue......

Claims of "equality" in a metaphysical sense between the races sound nice on their face, but have no scientific foundation.

Read "The Bell Curve" by Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein.

Sure, but I have to look up "metaphysical" first

 

[Steinlight]

Read "The Bell Curve" by Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein.

Leon Kamin of Scientific American Debunks The Bell Curve

An extensive review of the book. "At long last, Herrnstein and Murray let it all hang out: "Affirmative action, in education and the workplace alike, is leaking a poison into the American soul." Having examined the American condition at the close of the 20th century, these two philosopher-kings conclude, "It is time for America once again to try living with inequality, as life is lived...." This kind of sentiment, I imagine, is what led "New York Times" columnist Bob Herbert to the conclusion that "The Bell Curve" "is just a genteel way of calling somebody a ni**er." Herbert is right. The book has nothing to do with science."

LOL, you call that a "debunking"? All he said was, "that's racist".

If you read careful with your "superior" LOL Intelligence you will note the its New York Time columnist Bob Herbert who made what you are whining as amounting to a "that's racist" commentary ...read the gosh dang article get informed instead of being opinionated and stupid ....

I was responding to your comment in bold about calling blacks n-iggers for saying they have lower IQs. His argument there basically equates to "that's racist". As for his article. He claims IQ differences between the races, that low IQ for blacks in America is the result of slavery or discrimination, and in Africa is the result of Colonialism, though this is speculation with no evidence. The funny thing is, you didn't even read your own article, you just mindlessly linked to something you think "disproved" what is a scientific fact, by throwing out some puffed up opinion piece.

The fact is, the idea that under an environment where all else being equal, IQ differences between the races would cease to exist, has no merit. This has been debunked by the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. Where White, Mulatto, and African-American children adopted by upper middle class white parents had the same IQ disparities that existed in prior studies.

 

[EverCurious]

Who gives a shit if white vs black IQ's are equal? I can tell you for damn sure that not all white IQ's are equal.

Are people really wanting to further divide the country with IQ classes as well as everything else? That's not just racist, but down-right stupid heh

 

[MaryL]

I feel like one of the WHO in Who Ville, those little tiny invisible people that live on the head of a dandelion. I am white, lost my job of 25 years, and I see the rot in America in it's values and identity. Only the rich have privilege here, I am white, and poor, I am curious to what white privilege people are alluding too. because it just isn't there, not anymore. Poor blacks just have to get off their duff and work harder, blame less. That is my 2 cents worth. Have a nice day.

 

[Steinlight]

Who gives a shit if white vs black IQ's are equal? I can tell you for damn sure that not all white IQ's are equal.

Are people really wanting to further divide the country with IQ classes as well as everything else? That's not just racist, but down-right stupid heh

Well, because IQ directly correlates with the wealth of a nation for one. A low IQ nation will not be as productive or successful in the long run.

The Smart Fraction Theory of IQ and the Wealth of Nations

Why is this important on a racial level? Well because the Left always speaks of an "achievement gap" between whites and blacks. They suggest this gap is in part explained by a lack of spending in education, and that african americans specifically don't receive adequate funding(though on average they receive more than White Americans in all regions of the country). Whereas IQ hereditarians like myself are saying this gap between the races is easily explained by differences in IQ. And that these differences will persist since IQ is largely heritable(varying from 0.5 to 0.85 depending on the study you read). However new studies suggest that environmental variation has little to no impact on IQ.
IQ is in the genes Science News for Students

So basically in trying to achieve equality and eliminate the gap, we are throwing taxpayer money down a sinkhole.

 

[Flopper]

Yes, we are privileged with our higher IQs. Except it isn't really privilege, it is a product of biology, of nature, of evolution. This is nothing new, losers always resent winners and their success. We have built the greatest civilization on Earth so of course we will have targets on our back from those with inferiority complexes.

Talk to us when you return to reality.

You are in a fantasy world where you think all races are "equal", lol. Which has no scientific basis whatsoever.

You tell yourself such things because of your insecurity.

No, it is just reality in part proven by measured IQ differences between the races. No matter what your feelings tell you otherwise. Just as all individuals aren't equal in cognitive ability, nor are different races on average equal in cognitive ability.

Equality is not about making unequal things equal but rather insuring equal treatment under the law and equal opportunity.

 

[Flopper]

Read "The Bell Curve" by Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein.

Leon Kamin of Scientific American Debunks The Bell Curve

An extensive review of the book. "At long last, Herrnstein and Murray let it all hang out: "Affirmative action, in education and the workplace alike, is leaking a poison into the American soul." Having examined the American condition at the close of the 20th century, these two philosopher-kings conclude, "It is time for America once again to try living with inequality, as life is lived...." This kind of sentiment, I imagine, is what led "New York Times" columnist Bob Herbert to the conclusion that "The Bell Curve" "is just a genteel way of calling somebody a ni**er." Herbert is right. The book has nothing to do with science."

LOL, you call that a "debunking"? All he said was, "that's racist".

If you read careful with your "superior" LOL Intelligence you will note the its New York Time columnist Bob Herbert who made what you are whining as amounting to a "that's racist" commentary ...read the gosh dang article get informed instead of being opinionated and stupid ....

I was responding to your comment in bold about calling blacks n-iggers for saying they have lower IQs. His argument there basically equates to "that's racist". As for his article. He claims IQ differences between the races, that low IQ for blacks in America is the result of slavery or discrimination, and in Africa is the result of Colonialism, though this is speculation with no evidence. The funny thing is, you didn't even read your own article, you just mindlessly linked to something you think "disproved" what is a scientific fact, by throwing out some puffed up opinion piece.

The fact is, the idea that under an environment where all else being equal, IQ differences between the races would cease to exist, has no merit. This has been debunked by the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. Where White, Mulatto, and African-American children adopted by upper middle class white parents had the same IQ disparities that existed in prior studies.

Read "The Bell Curve" by Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein.

Leon Kamin of Scientific American Debunks The Bell Curve

An extensive review of the book. "At long last, Herrnstein and Murray let it all hang out: "Affirmative action, in education and the workplace alike, is leaking a poison into the American soul." Having examined the American condition at the close of the 20th century, these two philosopher-kings conclude, "It is time for America once again to try living with inequality, as life is lived...." This kind of sentiment, I imagine, is what led "New York Times" columnist Bob Herbert to the conclusion that "The Bell Curve" "is just a genteel way of calling somebody a ni**er." Herbert is right. The book has nothing to do with science."

LOL, you call that a "debunking"? All he said was, "that's racist".

If you read careful with your "superior" LOL Intelligence you will note the its New York Time columnist Bob Herbert who made what you are whining as amounting to a "that's racist" commentary ...read the gosh dang article get informed instead of being opinionated and stupid ....

I was responding to your comment in bold about calling blacks n-iggers for saying they have lower IQs. His argument there basically equates to "that's racist". As for his article. He claims IQ differences between the races, that low IQ for blacks in America is the result of slavery or discrimination, and in Africa is the result of Colonialism, though this is speculation with no evidence. The funny thing is, you didn't even read your own article, you just mindlessly linked to something you think "disproved" what is a scientific fact, by throwing out some puffed up opinion piece.

The fact is, the idea that under an environment where all else being equal, IQ differences between the races would cease to exist, has no merit. This has been debunked by the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. Where White, Mulatto, and African-American children adopted by upper middle class white parents had the same IQ disparities that existed in prior studies.

One of the studies' findings was that the IQs of transracially adopted black children did not differ significantly from that of children raised by their biological parents in the same area. Due to confounding of social and biological factors, it was inconclusive in terms of determining relative environmental or biological contributions to racial differences in IQ - as the study's result could be interpreted as supporting either hypothesis.

Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Steinlight]

Read "The Bell Curve" by Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein.

Leon Kamin of Scientific American Debunks The Bell Curve

An extensive review of the book. "At long last, Herrnstein and Murray let it all hang out: "Affirmative action, in education and the workplace alike, is leaking a poison into the American soul." Having examined the American condition at the close of the 20th century, these two philosopher-kings conclude, "It is time for America once again to try living with inequality, as life is lived...." This kind of sentiment, I imagine, is what led "New York Times" columnist Bob Herbert to the conclusion that "The Bell Curve" "is just a genteel way of calling somebody a ni**er." Herbert is right. The book has nothing to do with science."

LOL, you call that a "debunking"? All he said was, "that's racist".

If you read careful with your "superior" LOL Intelligence you will note the its New York Time columnist Bob Herbert who made what you are whining as amounting to a "that's racist" commentary ...read the gosh dang article get informed instead of being opinionated and stupid ....

I was responding to your comment in bold about calling blacks n-iggers for saying they have lower IQs. His argument there basically equates to "that's racist". As for his article. He claims IQ differences between the races, that low IQ for blacks in America is the result of slavery or discrimination, and in Africa is the result of Colonialism, though this is speculation with no evidence. The funny thing is, you didn't even read your own article, you just mindlessly linked to something you think "disproved" what is a scientific fact, by throwing out some puffed up opinion piece.

The fact is, the idea that under an environment where all else being equal, IQ differences between the races would cease to exist, has no merit. This has been debunked by the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. Where White, Mulatto, and African-American children adopted by upper middle class white parents had the same IQ disparities that existed in prior studies.

Read "The Bell Curve" by Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein.

Leon Kamin of Scientific American Debunks The Bell Curve

An extensive review of the book. "At long last, Herrnstein and Murray let it all hang out: "Affirmative action, in education and the workplace alike, is leaking a poison into the American soul." Having examined the American condition at the close of the 20th century, these two philosopher-kings conclude, "It is time for America once again to try living with inequality, as life is lived...." This kind of sentiment, I imagine, is what led "New York Times" columnist Bob Herbert to the conclusion that "The Bell Curve" "is just a genteel way of calling somebody a ni**er." Herbert is right. The book has nothing to do with science."

LOL, you call that a "debunking"? All he said was, "that's racist".

If you read careful with your "superior" LOL Intelligence you will note the its New York Time columnist Bob Herbert who made what you are whining as amounting to a "that's racist" commentary ...read the gosh dang article get informed instead of being opinionated and stupid ....

I was responding to your comment in bold about calling blacks n-iggers for saying they have lower IQs. His argument there basically equates to "that's racist". As for his article. He claims IQ differences between the races, that low IQ for blacks in America is the result of slavery or discrimination, and in Africa is the result of Colonialism, though this is speculation with no evidence. The funny thing is, you didn't even read your own article, you just mindlessly linked to something you think "disproved" what is a scientific fact, by throwing out some puffed up opinion piece.

The fact is, the idea that under an environment where all else being equal, IQ differences between the races would cease to exist, has no merit. This has been debunked by the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. Where White, Mulatto, and African-American children adopted by upper middle class white parents had the same IQ disparities that existed in prior studies.

One of the studies' findings was that the IQs of transracially adopted black children did not differ significantly from that of children raised by their biological parents in the same area. Due to confounding of social and biological factors, it was inconclusive in terms of determining relative environmental or biological contributions to racial differences in IQ - as the study's result could be interpreted as supporting either hypothesis.

Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The results show environmental variation doesn't account for the difference in IQ. How is it inconclusive?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

In 2010, the Virginia public school system introduced a 4th grade textbook with bogus claims about thousands of loyal slaves fighting on the side of the Confederacy. The source? The Sons of Confederate Veterans.

Such disinformation is part of a broader neo-Confederate movement to deny that slavery was a major factor in the conflict—and to bury the history of African-Americans’ active role in their own emancipation.
How the Civil War Never Ended for Black America Alternet

There were black slave owners in the South.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

Explaining White Privilege to a Broke White Person... OCCUPY WALL STREET

I'm not sure where liberals are going with this, but we can sure it will be an unpleasant ride, and the destination will not be good.

and wasnt it "White People" who pretty much invented everything we own/indulge? like the toilet? electricity, and AIR FORCE ONE !!!!

 

[EverCurious]

The biggest flaw in the race/IQ connection theory presented is that no genetic factor has been conclusively shown to have a causal relation with group difference in intelligence test scores. Thus to argue that race alone is the cause of differences is an unsound analysis; based entirely on circumstantial evidence by the way.

A series of studies by Fagan and Holland, measured the effect of prior exposure to the kind of cognitive tasks posed in IQ tests on test performance. Assuming that the IQ gap was the result of lower exposure to tasks using the cognitive functions usually found in IQ tests among African American test takes, they prepared a group of African Americans in this type of tasks before taking an IQ test. The researchers found that there was no subsequent difference in performance between the African-Americans and White test takers. Daley and Onwugbuezie conclude that Fagan and Holland demonstrate that differences in knowledge between Blacks and Whites for intelligence test items can be erased when equal opportunity is provided for exposure to the information to be tested.

A similar argument is made by David Marks who argues that IQ differences correlate well with differences in literacy suggesting that developing literacy skills through education causes an increase in IQ test performance.

Geneticist, Alan R. Templeton argues that the question about the possible genetic effects on the test score gap is muddled by the general focus on "race" rather than on populations defined by gene frequency or by geographical proximity, and by the general insistence on phrasing the question in terms of heritability.[105] Templeton points out that racial groups neither represent sub-species nor distinct evolutionary lineages, and that therefore there is no basis for making claims about the general intelligence of races.[105] From this point of view the search for possible genetic influences on the black-white test score gap is a priori flawed, because there is no genetic material shared by all Africans or by all Europeans.

A 2005 literature review article by Sternberg, Grigorenko and Kidd stated that no gene has been shown to be linked to intelligence, "so attempts to provide a compelling genetic link of race to intelligence are not feasible at this time". Hunt (2010, p. 447) and Mackintosh (2011, p. 344) concurred, both scholars noting that while several environmental factors have been shown to influence the IQ gap, the evidence for a genetic influence has been circumstantial, and according to Mackintosh negligible. Mackintosh however suggests that it may never become possible to account satisfyingly for the relative contributions of genetic and environmental factors.

The 2012 review by the Nisbett et al. (2012) concluded that "Almost no genetic polymorphisms have been discovered that are consistently associated with variation in IQ in the normal range". Hunt and several other researchers however maintain that genetic causes cannot be ruled out and that new evidence may yet show a genetic contribution to the gap. Hunt concurs with Rushton and Jensen who considered the 100% environmental hypothesis to be impossible. Nonetheless, Nisbett and colleagues (2012) consider the entire IQ gap to be explained by the environmental factors that have thus far been demonstrated to influence it, and Mackintosh does not find this view to be unreasonable.

Another flaw in that reasoning is that while survey's and averages are alright for some things, they are not really adequate for "scientific" findings of IQ measurements across neither a racial, national, nor global span because IQ is a mostly individual thing. We can only just barely make any kind of IQ heredity claim between parents and children, due to the likely effect of shared environment. Even then, the same cannot necessarily connect grandparents to grandchildren because they may not necessarily live together, and the parents of the child may not raise the children as their grandparents raised the parents. There is also the educational discrepancies that occur over that time span; aka back when someone's grandparents went to school, the technology and science breakthroughs of today were not taught nor "accessible", therefore it is expected that their grandchildren would be more intelligent than they were.

IQ is not a set thing, the brain, regardless of race, has the ability to build the connections that facilitate higher IQ throughout human lifespan. There is no known, nor set "IQ limit" for humans, much less for any race – IQ is a very fluid measurement. My IQ in high school was 125, my last test, age 40ish, was 165. I have had a personal goal of learning something new every day pretty much my entire life, when the internet came out I have no excuse /not/ to learn something new every day. Over time, my personal desire to learn has increased my IQ substantially.

It is fairly common knowledge that there is a consistently marked and proven rise in IQ scores over time. Perhaps it is not understood that every time we re-standardize IQ tests, we have to change what will equate to the 100 “average”? To establish the “standard” for IQ tests they grab a random sample of peeps, give them the test, and standardize those test takers results at 100. If we give those same peeps an older standardized IQ test, they consistently score over 100, usually by quite a bit too. Therefore, we re-standardize IQ tests on a regular basis. The WISC (IQ scale for children,) for example, was re-standardized most recently in 2003 and had been standardized at least 4 times (*at least as far as my near photo memory can recall) it was developed in 1950-something.

~ Which leads to my complimentary “The more you know!” factoid of the day; IQ scores for most of the population in the world have been increasing at around 3 IQ points per decade. Which means, that you are likely at least 18 IQ points smarter than your grandparents were


In any event, throwing more money at the /right/ education would help increase IQ in all races, thus it stands to reason that [even if one were to prove a racial connection to IQ,] throwing ‘extra’ education money at specific races would eliminate said gap. Though I personally believe we should throw money at /every child/ who has a lower than average IQ, because I agree that being “smart” is a key factor in success and I would like /everyone/ to have the ability to be successful.




The thread has officially opened up the “education” can of worms, so everyone gets a second wall-of-text:

The biggest hurdle for America as far as IQ goes is getting the kids engaged enough in the "learning" experience that facilitates making those connections necessary for a higher IQ. /THAT/ is why Asians are smarter than Americans, not because of their race, but because their culture is big on learning and very competitive about "doing their best" - being raised in that environment they tend to take school more seriously, and thus are more engaged, and as a result create more of those connections.

Unfortunately in America "educational homogenization" /has/ led to serious flaws in teaching, I have to agree. However it is not due to race, after all people of all colors are getting stupider by the day in the US; which is just pathetic given that we literally have nearly the entire world's worth of /global/ knowledge at our fingertips. I blame politicians (on both sides) who do not /want/ educated voters, so they dumb us down and pull the wool over the less educated eyes. A similar comparison can be made in the difference between teaching a dog to herd sheep (which takes a surprising amount of intelligence) vs merely teaching them to follow basic commands; most people just want a dog who lays around and does nothing until they call upon them to play or w/e, therefore teaching them to herd sheep, while it would clearly make them smarter, serves no purpose. And in the case of politicians, increasing IQ for the general public would actually be anti-productive to their needs...

So they put out survey's like your example there, to try to fool everyone into thinking it's a waste of time and money to educate "some" people. Put the pieces together, though. Given our pattern of "educational homogenization" following their suggested path would lead to /all/ children being taught less, not just “blacks”. Ultimately this would result in stupider voters who wouldn't question nor research what they are voting on, which is quite productive to politicians.

This is also why our educational system is so repetitive, because it makes it /boring/ and therefore the majority of children never develop any actual desire to learn in their adult lives, this means they tend to take the easy path of simply "believing" what their politicians tell them is best for them, with little questioning, and almost zero research on their own. Both parties do it to us, have been doing it, and they have led to the destruction of both education and IQ in this country. The media knows how to use and abuse this uneducated "belief" as well, so do religions. It has always been harder to control "smart" people, that's why things like printing the bible for the masses was banned, and education for the masses withheld in pre-modern era history.

When America was young we needed "smarter than a farmer" workers so we started educating them to do the jobs we needed done. Then we started getting too many workers and "unemployment problems" which made politicians look bad, and worse the "smart" workers felt that jobs like burger flipping were "beneath" them, they also started unions and shit - which made both businesses and unions (and the public opinion associated with unions) a bit of a "problem" for politicians, so they subtly cut off "public" education at high school to limit voter intelligence. The media started becoming a serious threat to their power when it became nationally accessible, so they began these "educational homogenization" efforts to limit what the public learned in K-12. Liberals have managed to get the media securely in their pocket now, which is likely the only reason you even hear about "public" college now a days.

~~ I am going to preface the following by saying, I admit that there is a bit of paranoia on my part in here. I simply do not trust the Gov after what they’ve done to K-12 education and their pretty much unquestionable desire for uninformed voters...

If you were paying attention, you'd notice that there is a government “seizure" of higher level education going on; most recently a major push via the GAO to connect accreditation specifically with [Gov acceptable] curriculum as well as to extend the legal authority/power of accreditation [past what the HEA currently allows]* – they’re setting up to take full control of US post-secondary education before they make it “free” to the masses in a political bid for votes – but first they need to remove the clauses that say gov. can’t dictate non-government owned education curriculum in order to homogenize them, before they bring in the gov controlled schools who’s curriculum will be directly determined by the gov. If they didn’t take this step then the non-gov run schools would always win in IQ output and the “free” schools would fail. This also includes a push for /direct/ government regulation of “distance learning” [aka online schooling]**. I personally believe they are also pushing to make it even harder for people to get student loans for non Gov run colleges.***

* Of relevance, the GAO most recently said that “academic quality is a key accreditor responsibility under the Higher Education Act [1965, altered in 2008], and student aid funds may be at risk when schools that do not provide a quality education have access to these funds. The act prohibits Education from specifying the specific content of accreditor standards. However, Education must determine that these accreditor standards are effective in ensuring educational quality. GAO's analysis raises questions about whether the standards accreditors use ensure that schools provide a quality education, and whether Education is effectively determining if these standards ensure educational quality.”

They then recommended to the US DOE, “GAO recommends that Education consider ways to better assess whether accreditor standards effectively address academic quality; and systematically use available accreditor sanction information to better oversee schools and accreditors. Education generally agreed with the report's recommendations, and noted plans to address them.” […] “To strengthen Education's oversight of accreditors through the recognition review process, the Secretary of Education should draw upon accreditor data to determine whether accreditors are consistently applying and enforcing their standards to ensure that the education offered by schools is of sufficient quality. For example, Education could systematically use available information related to the frequency of accreditor sanctions or could do additional analyses, such as comparing accreditor sanction data with Education's information on student outcomes, to inform its recognition reviews.” ~ http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-15-59

** “Promoting choice and innovation while protecting the federal investment. While substantial growth in distance education may support postsecondary access, it also presents oversight challenges for the federal government. For example, concerns have been raised about the ability of schools to verify the identity and attendance of students enrolled in distance education programs.” ~ http://www.gao.gov/key_issues/postsecondary_education_access_affordability/issue_summary#t=0

*** “To provide federal policymakers information on the relative effectiveness of Title IV programs and higher education tax expenditures, the Secretary of Education should take advantage of opportunities presented by recent and anticipated substantive program changes to sponsor and conduct evaluative research into the effectiveness of Title IV programs and higher education tax expenditures at improving student outcomes.” ~ http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-560

Which they could then use for public support of dismantling US accreditation acceptance in addition to withholding funding for any school they felt wasn’t “teaching the right shit” – this could also include Christian schools by the way so I’m hoping religious institutions are watching this, but given that they’re religious they’re likely too busy monitoring LGBT bedrooms to pay attention. *sigh*

When you look at your cited report, make a comparison of the highest IQ levels to the amount of direct control the government has over its people. I do not believe the IQ connection there is race, but rather the taught desire for learning by their respective governments and culture. For example, South Africa makes a shit ton of money off mining, but miners are not exactly known for their IQs, so there’s no /need/ for the government to desire their education levels to be higher. In the case of most Asian communities, their government is actively competing with the US for global dominance, therefore it behooves them to have smarter people, and their lockdown on government pretty much eliminates any “fear” of the people becoming “too smart,” they also do not have "dueling" religious nor political parties who want “stupid” voters.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

So no one saw the story about the white privilege fighting in Walmart?

 

[AntiParty]

Explaining White Privilege to a Broke White Person... OCCUPY WALL STREET

I'm not sure where liberals are going with this, but we can sure it will be an unpleasant ride, and the destination will not be good.

Are you stating a "Liberal" amount of White people" created a "Liberal Amount" of white people problems? Or are you stating it wouldn't be a problem if a Liberal Amount of white people had the power?

Or are you stating you don't know what "Liberal" means?