![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I just read this op-ed piece from the New York Times, "Don't Mourn Brown v. Board of Education" which...doesn't make any sense to me? I mean, literally, as a persuasive piece of writing, appears to be saying something like, "In conclusion, turtles! And socks that surf blossoming in the refrigerator!"
So basically his premise is that Brown v. Board of Ed was all right back then and all, but it's a relic of the past and we don't need to worry to much that it's been overturned. In fact he says, "...Brown's time has passed. It is worthy of a send-off with fanfare for setting off the civil rights movement and inspiring social progress for women, gays, and the poor. But the decision in Brown v. Board of Education that focused on outlawing segregated schools as unconstitutional is now out of step with American political and social realities." Which is the point where you go...okay, tell me why I should think that this is so. Where has desegregation let us down in such a way that segregation is the more in-step solution? This is where you work your op-ed magic.
But then what he really says is that A) black and Latino kids get a shitty education, AND THEN B) that, also, our schools aren't even integrated anyway. So...is it not, then, still a perfectly reasonable hypothesis that segregated schools like the ones we still have STILL DON'T provide equal educations for non-white students, just like they didn't in 1954? Why is *integration* the thing we need to get rid of, when even according to him, our crappy non-integrated schools don't work?
The only thing that would make this make sense to me is if he were saying that primarily white schools failed just as often as primarily black or fully integrated schools...but I can't see where in the article he makes that claim. In fact, he mentions Washington D.C. in 1990 and describes its school system as "failing" and "hypersegregated, with more than 90 percent of its students black and Latino. Schools in the surrounding suburbs, meanwhile, were mostly white and producing some of the top students in the nation." So...explain again how the existence of a "hypersegregated" system that funnels children of color into failing urban schools and white children into top-ranked suburban schools is evidence that segregation isn't the issue here?
At the conclusion, this guy says, "And today the argument that school reform should provide equal opportunity for children or prepare them to live in a pluralistic society, is spent. The winning argument is that better schools are needed for all children -- black, white, brown, and every other hue -- in order to foster a competitive workforce in a global economy."
He doesn't bother to tell us why the idea that schools should provide equal opportunity or prepare kids to function in the real world are So Last Century, just that they are. Personally, I thought those were two of the leading reasons we have free public education, but apparently I'm fifty years behind the times, here. And while better schools for everyone might be the "winning argument," he's already said that lots of our schools are doing pretty darn well -- lots of our white schools, anyway. While twenty miles down the road, where no white parent will consent to have their children enrolled, the education sucks.
To those of us with linear brains, integrating the well-supported white school districts and the desperately poor and under-serviced non-white school districts could seem like a very fair solution. Juan Williams is here to tell us that WE ARE WRONG. The only right answer is...just make everything better!
Okay! Let me just jot that down. "Teach...better." Got it.
So basically his premise is that Brown v. Board of Ed was all right back then and all, but it's a relic of the past and we don't need to worry to much that it's been overturned. In fact he says, "...Brown's time has passed. It is worthy of a send-off with fanfare for setting off the civil rights movement and inspiring social progress for women, gays, and the poor. But the decision in Brown v. Board of Education that focused on outlawing segregated schools as unconstitutional is now out of step with American political and social realities." Which is the point where you go...okay, tell me why I should think that this is so. Where has desegregation let us down in such a way that segregation is the more in-step solution? This is where you work your op-ed magic.
But then what he really says is that A) black and Latino kids get a shitty education, AND THEN B) that, also, our schools aren't even integrated anyway. So...is it not, then, still a perfectly reasonable hypothesis that segregated schools like the ones we still have STILL DON'T provide equal educations for non-white students, just like they didn't in 1954? Why is *integration* the thing we need to get rid of, when even according to him, our crappy non-integrated schools don't work?
The only thing that would make this make sense to me is if he were saying that primarily white schools failed just as often as primarily black or fully integrated schools...but I can't see where in the article he makes that claim. In fact, he mentions Washington D.C. in 1990 and describes its school system as "failing" and "hypersegregated, with more than 90 percent of its students black and Latino. Schools in the surrounding suburbs, meanwhile, were mostly white and producing some of the top students in the nation." So...explain again how the existence of a "hypersegregated" system that funnels children of color into failing urban schools and white children into top-ranked suburban schools is evidence that segregation isn't the issue here?
At the conclusion, this guy says, "And today the argument that school reform should provide equal opportunity for children or prepare them to live in a pluralistic society, is spent. The winning argument is that better schools are needed for all children -- black, white, brown, and every other hue -- in order to foster a competitive workforce in a global economy."
He doesn't bother to tell us why the idea that schools should provide equal opportunity or prepare kids to function in the real world are So Last Century, just that they are. Personally, I thought those were two of the leading reasons we have free public education, but apparently I'm fifty years behind the times, here. And while better schools for everyone might be the "winning argument," he's already said that lots of our schools are doing pretty darn well -- lots of our white schools, anyway. While twenty miles down the road, where no white parent will consent to have their children enrolled, the education sucks.
To those of us with linear brains, integrating the well-supported white school districts and the desperately poor and under-serviced non-white school districts could seem like a very fair solution. Juan Williams is here to tell us that WE ARE WRONG. The only right answer is...just make everything better!
Okay! Let me just jot that down. "Teach...better." Got it.
