This post is a comprehensive review of the education priorities of the Walton Family Foundation.
The Walton family has made many billions of dollars from the Walmart stores.
Walmart comes into a region and undersells every local retail store. In time, the mom-and-pop stores-beloved community institutions handed down in some cases from generation to generation- close their doors, and mom and pop become low-wage greeters at Walmart. The giant Walmart causes an implosion of Main Streets across the region where they are located, as working people shop for bargains and bypass their own community.
If the Walmart head office decides that the store is not making a big enough profit, the Walmart closes and goes elsewhere. It leaves behind dead small towns, towns without a local economy, because the local economy was sucked dry by the big Walmart. Whether the Walmart stays or goes, Main Street dies.
In education, the Walmart agenda is not dissimilar. The foundation supports charters and vouchers, though it prefers vouchers. It seeks to create schools that are non-union and that are able to skim off students from the local public schools. In time, the local public schools will die, just as the Main Street stores died.
They give generously to create an education marketplace of choices; the one “choice” they do not favor is the neighborhood public school. They underwrite major education media to be sure that their agenda gets favorable attention. They fund compatible researchers. They are strategic in their funding.
The Waltons and the Walton Family Foundation have gargantuan financial resources and can exert undue influence on politicians and public policy issues of their choosing. No matter where people come down on the issues of education reform or school choice, we can all agree it is unfair that the Walton family gets to dictate the future of public education because of the amount of money at its disposal, and to do so in a way that is unaccountable to the public.
In their marketplace of choices, the voucher schools and charters compete to get the “best” students.
The public schools take those rejected, excluded, or dumped by the charter and vouchers schools.
The end result: a dual system of schools, all publicly funded. One for the haves, another for the have-nots.
Could have put this under “Wingnuts,” but this happened awhile ago, so I thought “History” was more fitting. Anyone on the right who wants to claim Republicans or conservatives never supported the Apartheid regime, here’s something else you can use to debunk them. This was also motivated by profit, so whoever says greed is good, has been proven wrong in this case as well. That also argues against these people simply being Wingnuts. It sounds like the folks at ALEC were motivated more by the fear of the lose of profits than ideology.
As the movement for public and private divestment from apartheid South Africa grew throughout the United States in the 1980s, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) aggressively mobilized against South African divestment, stymying state and federal efforts to sanction, isolate, and divest from the Pretorian regime, according to documents newly uncovered by People For the American Way and the Center For Media and Democracy.
ALEC used state and federal policy papers, monthly newsletters, “fact-finding” missions, panel discussions led by lobbyists on the payroll of the South African apartheid regime, and other means to pursue an anti-divestment agenda, one that relied solely on “corporate beneficence” to pressure the country to reform. This effort, in turn, was funded by corporations that were heavily invested in South Africa and had the most to lose from divestment.
We all know about the importance of context in understanding and judging the actions of others. If the person who stole a loaf of bread was starving, and trying to feed her starving child, we judge the theft differently from the way we judge an equivalent theft carried out by some opportunistically looting hooligans. So what would you think of someone who told you about the horrifying details of a wife’s premeditated murder of her husband, but completely omitted to mention the fact that he’d been abusing her terribly, physically and mentally, for 20 years? What would you think of someone who told you of the appalling punishment of ‘necklacing’ carried out by some members of the ANC in the 1980s and early 1990s in South Africa, without ever mentioning the brutalising facts of apartheid in that country at that time? What would you think of someone who described black American criminality without ever so much as mentioning racism or slavery? You might, at the very least, raise an eyebrow and murmur the word ‘context’. Even though each of these cases involve wrongful, sometimes horribly wrongful, actions, you might think that the context is important in judging those who carried out the actions. (And of course context is just as important in judging rightful action too). You might also think that the people who so ignored the context in these cases had rather poor and blinkered moral and political judgment. And if you wanted to explain this lack of judgement, these blinkers, you might in some cases make reference to the persistence of longstanding prejudices against women or Africans or American people of colour.
Now considerthis article in openDemocracy, about ‘the Israel Lobby’. The article walks us through the development of Zionist sympathies among British Jews and others in the UK.
Five true tales of internet stupidity brought to us by XJ Selman
Despite the fact that we are nearly done with the year 2013, there are still some companies that A) think that social media is a thing very few people pay attention to and B) are content to hire teenage interns and/or burgeoning sociopaths to maintain their online presence.
Larry Elder promotes “black mob violence” meme with quotes from frequent guest on white nationalist radio show
Look at the credible sources he cites to make his case:
The “knockout game” — and the media underreporting of it — combines the breakdown of the family with the media’s condescending determination to serve as a public relations bureau for blacks. The “game” is a dare in which a young man — all the perps appear to be male people of color, mostly blacks — tries to literally knock out an innocent bystander with one blow. Both National Public Radio and The New York Times say these reports of the “knockout game” being widespread are overblown and do not represent a trend. Really?
According to Colin Flaherty, author of “White Girl Bleed A Lot: The Return of Racial Violence to America and How the Media Ignore It…”
I’ll stop right there because Colin Flaherty is a regular guest on The Political Cesspool, where white nationalist host James Edwards gives him a regular platform to spew his propaganda, as well has plug his book.
And Elder gives Flaherty a hand by making the same bogus argument about the “media blackout” on “black mob violence.”
Shame, meet my good friend, less.
This was posted on Right Wing Watch awhile back. It Looks like we have a modern day slavery apologist on our hands. Judging by this, I think John Derbyshire would be at home in the KKK.
No, former National Review columnist John Derbyshire hasn’t seen 12 Years a Slave, but he knows it is a bad movie because it is unfair to the poor, persecuted and maligned slave-owners of the antebellum South. In his latest racist column, Derbyshire calls 12 Years a Slave “Abolitionist Porn” and chides the film for not including what he sees as the happier instances of slavery, such as one slaveholder who only doled out beatings “once in a while.”
“Plainly there was more to American race slavery that white masters brutalizing resentful Negroes,” Derbyshire writes. “Slavery is more irksome to some than to others; and freedom can be irksome, too.”
Derbyshire compares slavery in the US to the communist system in China, saying that “while there was much grumbling, and some scattered seething rebelliousness, most Chinese got along with the system. A lot of people were very happy with it.”
“In the matter of slavery, though, I already feel sure that the shallow good North, bad South simplicities of Abolitionist Porn and popular perception bear little relation to the thorny tangles of reality,”
I think if he lived during the civil war, its safe to say we know which side he would have taken. There was no “thorny tangles of reality” that contradict the idea that slavery was an abomination that violated the very principals we claimed to stand for.
Anyone here still have any respect for Rush Limbaugh? This is kind of extreme even for him, mocking women who get raped. He is truly a sick person. Looking back on things now, I can’t believe I ever admired this guy. Man I was young and stupid.
Rush Limbaugh took material for his radio program from “satire” blog Diversity Chronicles, a website with strong undertones of white supremacy and misogyny which Rush described as “a website that does satire on how white men are blamed for everything.”
On the November 25 edition of his show, Limbaugh highlighted a story about a controversial professor who allegedly advised his white, male students to commit suicide. After returning from a commercial break, Rush clarified that the story was a satire piece from the website Diversity Chronicle, a satirical blog which, according to Limbaugh, is “actually pretty funny.” He then began to read from another Diversity Chronicle post mocking the notion of marital rape:
LIMBAUGH: That’s why this outfit called Diversity Chronicle — which is a satire website. They’re actually very funny — That’s why they created the satire about the guy. Because there’s a basis — you know all good comedy has truth in it. That’s what makes great comedy funny, is that there’re elements of truth in it.
For example, this Diversity Chronicle website right now is running a piece, ‘Brave Woman Comes Forward To Denounce Former Husband’s Repeated Rapes.’ ‘After several years of silence a brave and heroic thirty eight year old woman has come forward to denounce her former husband’s repeated rapes over the course of their marriage. Despite her numerous appeals, local law enforcement however refuses to treat her allegations seriously. These sexist, male-chauvinist, largely white male officers actually state that by her own account she was not ‘legally raped.’”
Update 11/26/13 9:00 PM
You know I just forgot, to say this, but I’m wondering if Rush actually doesn’t know that that’s a white supremacist site, or if he knows and just doesn’t care. Wouldn’t be surprised if it was the latter at this point.