US Politician - “We can't make African-Americans white”

MakeEmLaugh

A politician in Michigan, USA has been criticised for a statement he made relating to underachieving schools in his district. Senator Marty Knollenberg made a comment after seeing state data breaking down academic performance among different demographic groups. The data indicated that most students struggling were students of colour.

“You mention why these schools districts fail, and you mention economically disadvantaged and non-white population are contributors to that. And we can’t fix that. We can’t make an African-American white. That's just, it is what it is.”

The American Federation of Teachers quickly responded to Knollenberg's remarks:

“What Sen. Knollenberg said about struggling kids in schools is racist and a major step backwards in improving education for our children. If a child is struggling academically, it is not because of a problem inherent to their race or ethnicity”.

What do you think? Was Knollenberg suggesting that African-American students are inherently going to do worse than white students? Or have his comments been deliberately misinterpreted?

I wonder should I just start reading boards.com altogether

fleet_admiral

Its 2015. Saying hello to someone now can be seen as offensive

Satriale

fleet_admiral wrote: »

Its 2015. Saying hello to someone now can be seen as offensive

What do you mean by "hello"? :mad:

Omackeral

In before Rachel Dolzeal/Caitlyn Jenner comparisons. God I f*cking hate 2015.

Omackeral

fleet_admiral wrote: »

Its 2015. Saying hello to someone now can be seen as offensive

That poxy Adele singing it has me feeling violently offended.

One eyed Jack

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

A politician in Michigan, USA has been criticised for a statement he made relating to underachieving schools in his district. Senator Marty Knollenberg made a comment after seeing state data breaking down academic performance among different demographic groups. The data indicated that most students struggling were students of colour.

“You mention why these schools districts fail, and you mention economically disadvantaged and non-white population are contributors to that. And we can’t fix that. We can’t make an African-American white. That's just, it is what it is.”

The American Federation of Teachers quickly responded to Knollenberg's remarks:

“What Sen. Knollenberg said about struggling kids in schools is racist and a major step backwards in improving education for our children. If a child is struggling academically, it is not because of a problem inherent to their race or ethnicity”.

What do you think? Was Knollenberg suggesting that African-American students are inherently going to do worse than white students? Or have his comments been deliberately misinterpreted?

I think he was stating a fact after examining the data, and clearly there is a problem in relation to students of african-american ethnicity. I think his comments are being deliberately misinterpreted to try and make out that what he said was motivated by racism. It doesn't appear to me to have been said with any racist intentions.

The Sidewards Man

Satriale wrote: »

What do you mean by "hello"? :mad:

Can you hear me?

The Randy Riverbeast

I doubt he meant it as racist but it does make him look a bit dim. Cant say I'm surprised that it wasn't a (D) or (I) after his name.

Satriale

The Sidewards Man wrote: »

Can you hear me?

Have you got something against deaf people, bud?

The Sidewards Man

Satriale wrote: »

Have you got something against deaf people, bud?

No m8.

The problem is socioeconomic status, not race. Poorly funded schools in poor districts, attended by disadvantaged kids, are going to see poorer results regardless of the race or ethnicity of the students. There just happens to be a much greater proportion of people of colour with lower socioeconomic status for a multitude of cultural and economic reasons, and those are the issues he should be talking about, not crap about not being able to make African-Americans white.

Even if he's not a racist, he's still a moron for how he put it.

RedemptionZ

First of all I'd need that clip in proper context. Taking 50 seconds from what was probably at least a 30 minute discussion can make it easy for someone with an agenda to manipulate it.

Taking that short clip it does seem he's misunderstanding the data, socio-economic background would be the factor as opposed to inherent racial characteristics. But with that said a stupid comment doesn't mean he's a racist and he shouldn't have to resign for it, which no doubt people will call for.

Herb Powell

Racist bolloccks, and I'm sadly not even surprised to it being so quickly defended on here.

RedemptionZ

Herb Powell wrote: »

Racist bolloccks, and I'm sadly not even surprised to it being so quickly defended on here.

I did a quick five minutes reading on it,

Natasha Baker said this

"What we know about priority schools," she said, "is that most of the students are economically disadvantaged or black/African American or Hispanic/non-white and unlikely to be college ready."

This is the full Knollenberg quote:

"And you mentioned why these schools fail and you mentioned the economically disadvantaged and the non-white population are contributors to that. And we can’t fix that. We can’t make an African American white. It is what it is. So we can’t fix that. But we have this situation and we find our schools serving these children faced with those factors. And there should be no failing schools."

It's pretty clear there was no racist malice in his statement. He could have worded it a lot better. He is saying they can't change these circumstances, they can't change the economic disadvantage of their students, they can't change the race of their students, they have to work with the current circumstances and stop the school's failing the best they can.

Definitely badly worded, but 'racist bollox' I think not. Of course people love to jump to conclusions after an out of context quote. He issued an apology for what it's worth.

One eyed Jack

Herb Powell wrote: »

Racist bolloccks, and I'm sadly not even surprised to it being so quickly defended on here.

If he had directly said that the reason these students were failing was because of their race, or because of their ethnicity, then you would have legitimate grounds to claim his comments were racist, but he didn't.

I don't think anyone here is defending racism, they're saying that what he said was dumb, or could have been worded better, but it wasn't racist.

How is anyone supposed to address a problem if they cannot identify who are the students experiencing the problems and find out why those students are experiencing problems?

Xeyn

You identify the students for the problem they have which is poor socio economic status, not race. By identifying race he is equating race as a factor in under achievement which no matter how you spin it, is racist. You can defend him claiming you interpret his statement as non malevolent but how it is worded is clearly racist.

tritium

RedemptionZ wrote: »

I did a quick five minutes reading on it,

Natasha Baker said this




This is the full Knollenberg quote:


It's pretty clear there was no racist malice in his statement. He could have worded it a lot better. He is saying they can't change these circumstances, they can't change the economic disadvantage of their students, they can't change the race of their students, they have to work with the current circumstances and stop the school's failing the best they can.

Definitely badly worded, but 'racist bollox' I think not. Of course people love to jump to conclusions after an out of context quote. He issued an apology for what it's worth.

From reading that it appears he wasn't actually the one who brought up race.his sin was not bringing it up in a context where non whites are painted as victims like the previous speaker implied

saintsaltynuts

There's a difference between being a racist and being ignorant.

suicide_circus

http://www.hark.com/clips/zqqkpfpylh-think-white-and-get-serious

thee glitz

Xeyn wrote: »

You can defend him claiming you interpret his statement as non malevolent

That seems sensible.

but how it is worded is clearly racist.

It's not worded well but his (legitimate) point can't have been lost on most people.

tritium

Herb Powell wrote: »

Racist bolloccks, and I'm sadly not even surprised to it being so quickly defended on here.

More like politically motivated bollocks tbh

Amazingfun

"he issued an apology"

Mistake on his part. No amount of groveling can appease the vultures, and it makes him appear weak.

Junkyard Tom

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

Was Knollenberg suggesting that African-American students are inherently going to do worse than white students?

Yes. The answer is in your OP.

The American Federation of Teachers quickly responded to Knollenberg's remarks:

“What Sen. Knollenberg said ... is racist ... If a child is struggling academically, it is not because of a problem inherent to their race or ethnicity”.

Or have his comments been deliberately misinterpreted?

No.

Maybe he's just a thick cunt but being a thick cunt and being a racist aren't mutually exclusive - in fact there is probably a strong corollary.

RDM_83 again

Candie wrote: »

The problem is socioeconomic status, not race. Poorly funded schools in poor districts, attended by disadvantaged kids, are going to see poorer results regardless of the race or ethnicity of the students. There just happens to be a much greater proportion of people of colour with lower socioeconomic status for a multitude of cultural and economic reasons, and those are the issues he should be talking about, not crap about not being able to make African-Americans white.

Even if he's not a racist, he's still a moron for how he put it.

Sounds nice but AFAIK being Afro-American correlates with poorer educational outcomes even with correction for economic factors.
People of Asian origin hardly occupied a wealthy or traditionally privileged position within the usa (consider that in some parts they basically started using Chinese people instead of slaves), they correlate positively when economics is removed.

Race might tend to be #badscience, culture isn't.

bmwguy

Can only whites be racist? Reverse the races here and would there still be outrage?

Cienciano

Omackeral wrote: »

In before Rachel Dolzeal/Caitlyn Jenner comparisons. God I f*cking hate 2015.

Rather than hating the entire year, simply stop clicking into threads like these

Corpus Twisty

It's like yer wan on the telly last night saying "I don't want to criticise anyone" in relation to overweight kids as she couched her blindingly obvious conclusion that parents with obese kids need to cop on, in guff about "needing more education"... Do not ever, never, state facts - no matter how much they are facts - you must dress it up in PC speak. No one is responsible for anything - it is society's fault. Repeat the mantra - "it is society's fault.."

kettlehead

Candie wrote: »

The problem is socioeconomic status, not race. Poorly funded schools in poor districts, attended by disadvantaged kids, are going to see poorer results regardless of the race or ethnicity of the students. There just happens to be a much greater proportion of people of colour with lower socioeconomic status for a multitude of cultural and economic reasons, and those are the issues he should be talking about, not crap about not being able to make African-Americans white.

Even if he's not a racist, he's still a moron for how he put it.

Poor whites still outscore affluent black kids. From the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education:

But income differences explain only part of the racial gap in SAT scores. For black and white students from families with incomes of more than $200,000 in 2008, there still remains a huge 149-point gap in SAT scores. Even more startling is the fact that in 2008 black students from families with incomes of more than $200,000 scored lower on the SAT test than did students from white families with incomes between $20,000 and $40,000.

http://www.jbhe.com/latest/index012209_p.html

Nodin

kettlehead wrote: »

Poor whites still outscore affluent black kids. From the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education:



http://www.jbhe.com/latest/index012209_p.html

And....?

Kev W

bmwguy wrote: »

Can only whites be racist? Reverse the races here and would there still be outrage?

WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE WHITE PEOPLE?

Kev W

Omackeral wrote: »

In before Rachel Dolzeal/Caitlyn Jenner comparisons. God I f*cking hate 2015.

"God I hate when people bring up these things that nobody was going to mention until I did."

Boom_Bap

Thread Closed

There are more suitable places on boards for this type of discussion such as the Politics Cafe. Also, the OP has a habit of opening these type of threads in AH and does an equivilent of a 'dine and dash', opens the thread and doesn't stick around for any discussion.