←back to thread

412 points tafda | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.202s | source
Show context
csa ◴[] No.42247695[source]
It’s not just California, but California may be one of the more egregious state neglecters.

The push at the state level for policies that focus on equality of outcomes over equality of opportunities will not end well for the gifted and talented communities.

Whenever I hear these people talk about their policies, I can’t help but recall Harrison Bergeron.

Focusing on equality of outcomes in a society that structurally does not afford equality of opportunities is a fool’s game that ends with Bergeron-esque levels of absurdity.

Imho, the only viable/main solution is to acknowledge that we all aren’t equal, we don’t all have access to the same opportunities, but as a country we can implement policies that lessen the imbalance.

Head Start is a good example.

Well-run gifted and talented programs in schools are also good examples.

Killing truly progressive programs for the purpose of virtue signaling is a loss for society.

replies(20): >>42247806 #>>42247816 #>>42247846 #>>42247879 #>>42247950 #>>42247987 #>>42248015 #>>42248175 #>>42248677 #>>42248849 #>>42249074 #>>42249151 #>>42249205 #>>42249364 #>>42250032 #>>42250676 #>>42250718 #>>42250987 #>>42252785 #>>42258523 #
philipov ◴[] No.42247806[source]
While I may have sympathy for your more substantive points, anytime I hear someone mention virtue signalling, it makes it sound like they're virtue signalling. Better to just not bring up that dog whistle.
replies(2): >>42247920 #>>42247941 #
exe34 ◴[] No.42247920[source]
it's a perfectly good phrase to describe what it says. if that bothers you, maybe you need to ask yourself why.
replies(2): >>42247978 #>>42248789 #
1. standardUser ◴[] No.42248789[source]
> if that bothers you, maybe you need to ask yourself why.

That's even vaguer and less compelling rhetoric than "virtue signaling".