Immigration and Determinism in America

[deception]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/opinion/07kristof.html?em

 

[Denny Crane]

Nice detailed explanation of why meritocracy is evil.

The people who work hardest do best. That's not surprising.

 

[deception]

Nice detailed explanation of why meritocracy is evil.

The people who work hardest do best. That's not surprising.

u kinda missed the point, i.e. my inclusion of "determinism" in the title should have given u a clue. read the last paragraph about children under three from white professional parents being exposed to 30, 000, 000 words ,while kids under 3 belonging to black welfare moms are exposed to a meager 10, 000, 000. hence, the accident of birth eclipses all

 

[Chutney]

Absolutely. No matter the political philosophy endorsed, I think people need to discard this myth of "absolute autonomy." IQ may not be genetically hardwired, but there's no denying that we all feel differing social forces that push us towards or away from success. That's not meant to minimize the power of the individual, but we absolutely need some sort of social assistance to ensure a level playing field.

 

[Denny Crane]

u kinda missed the point, i.e. my inclusion of "determinism" in the title should have given u a clue. read the last paragraph about children under three from white professional parents being exposed to 30, 000, 000 words ,while kids under 3 belonging to black welfare moms are exposed to a meager 10, 000, 000. hence, the accident of birth eclipses all

I didn't miss the point. The article states:

"One large study followed a group of Chinese-Americans who initially did slightly worse on the verbal portion of I.Q. tests than other Americans and the same on math portions. But beginning in grade school, the Chinese outperformed their peers, apparently because they worked harder."

Meaning any exposure to more words or less is meaningless by the time the kids start grade school.

 

[deception]

I didn't miss the point. The article states:

"One large study followed a group of Chinese-Americans who initially did slightly worse on the verbal portion of I.Q. tests than other Americans and the same on math portions. But beginning in grade school, the Chinese outperformed their peers, apparently because they worked harder."

Meaning any exposure to more words or less is meaningless by the time the kids start grade school.

problem with your deduction is that analysis is way too linear. race is like a marathon race and some groups have been given a head start like kids who have white professional parents, i.e. being exposed to 30, 000, 000 words, while their poorer black counterparts are only exposed to 10, 000,00. however, some groups or more appropriately "individuals" simply work harder and make up the difference. the chinese are a very unique group because as the article suggests- the chinese have been culturally endowed as a nation of exam takers through the confucian legacy which still permeates in communist/neo-liberal china today. it still doesnt refute my contention of determinism, although, transcending determinism can be done though hard work, intelligence and luck.

and fyi- the only thing resembling a meritocracy is sports

 

[Denny Crane]

problem with your deduction is that analysis is way too linear. race is like a marathon race and some groups have been given a head start like kids who have white professional parents, i.e. being exposed to 30, 000, 000 words, while their poorer black counterparts are only exposed to 10, 000,00. however, some groups or more appropriately "individuals" simply work harder and make up the difference. the chinese are a very unique group because as the article suggests- the chinese have been culturally endowed as a nation of exam takers through the confucian legacy which still permeates in communist/neo-liberal china today. it still doesnt refute my contention of determinism, although, transcending determinism can be done though hard work, intelligence and luck.

and fyi- the only thing resembling a meritocracy is sports

Any job that requires a college degree is a meritocracy. College itself is meritocracy. The govt. is meritocracy. The guys who run wall street are there because of meritocracy. The supreme court is meritocracy. The Bush administration was mostly guys from Yale, the Clinton administration was mostly guys from Harvard. That's our two most elite schools, basically.

Need I go on?

Study after study show that any benefits from early education, like Head Start, are a wash by the early years in school.

Your article does talk about how environment affects peoples' development... The lesson to be learned from that is that we need to provide a better environment for kids of any race to learn and thus succeed.

 

[deception]

Any job that requires a college degree is a meritocracy. College itself is meritocracy. The govt. is meritocracy. The guys who run wall street are there because of meritocracy. The supreme court is meritocracy. The Bush administration was mostly guys from Yale, the Clinton administration was mostly guys from Harvard. That's our two most elite schools, basically.

what u said was pure conjecture. u could have added on that the twin towers were brought down in a controlled explosion and that the world was flat because all three are matters of opinion not hinged on empirical realities. then u throw dynamite on your own argument by comparing the bush and clinton admin choice to staff on the basis of ideological grounds, e.g. according to u- the bush went with his alma mater yale (and its pompous, rich kids) while clinton settled with harvard (and its elitist spirit). so according to u- arguably the most important employer in the world, i.e. the executive branch of the US government is hiring on the basis of ideology and nepotism; thats brazenly discriminatory. if u had said for example that the bush admin choose to staff on the basis of grades as well as experiences pertinent to the position, irrespective of ideology or college affiliation- then u would have an argument

 

[Denny Crane]

what u said was pure conjecture. u could have added on that the twin towers were brought down in a controlled explosion and that the world was flat because all three are matters of opinion not hinged on empirical realities. then u throw dynamite on your own argument by comparing the bush and clinton admin choice to staff on the basis of ideological grounds, e.g. according to u- the bush went with his alma mater yale (and its pompous, rich kids) while clinton settled with harvard (and its elitist spirit). so according to u- arguably the most important employer in the world, i.e. the executive branch of the US government is hiring on the basis of ideology and nepotism; thats brazenly discriminatory. if u had said for example that the bush admin choose to staff on the basis of grades as well as experiences pertinent to the position, irrespective of ideology or college affiliation- then u would have an argument

It is empirical studies that show that any benefits of early learning are lost within the first few years of grade school. It is part of the political debate over the Head Start program.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-head-start.htm

A 2004 study concurs with previous studies that children are more academically prepared for kindergarten as the result of Head Start preschools. However, these same children seemed less socially prepared to be in kindergarten and more behavior problems were noted among the kids who came from Head Start preschools.


Others have questioned the IQ benefits of Head Start. Some cite that most children who do not participate in Head Start quickly catch up with peers in IQ level and academic readiness. Long-term effects may not be as beneficial as stated according to some studies. The 2004 study also showed that behavior problems tended to linger after kindergarten in students who had attended Head Start preschools.

Meritocracy is a very different issue. By definition, it is the lords of society using IQ tests and aptitude tests to direct children on one of two academic paths: the leaders of society, business and govt. vs. the skilled/unskilled labor class. The word "Meritocracy" made it into the dictionary in the 1950s. The concept was hatched by the president of Harvard, based upon similar programs used in the military to determine officer material vs. foot soldiers.

Pertinent Harvard grads include: Al Gore, Henry Kissinger, Arthur Schlessinger, GW Bush, JFK, Obama, both Roosevelts, current or recent Supreme Court Justices Steven Bryer, Anthony Kennedy, William Rehnquist, John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, and David Souter, and current or recent cabinet members Spencer Abraham, Bruce Babbit, William Bennett, Nicholas Brady, Joseph Califano, Elaine Chao, Michael Chertoff, Henry Cisneros, Alberto Gonzales, RFK, Henry Paulson, Donald Regan, Elliot Richardson, Tom Ridge, Robert Rubin, James Schlesinger, and Cap Weinberger.

The list of presidents or heads of states of foreign nations that are Harvard alums is equally long.

Pertinent Yale grads include: Paul Krugman, Bob Woodward, Alan Derschowitz, GHW Bush, GW Bush, Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Gerald Ford, John Kerry, Joe Lieberman, supreme court justice Samuel Alito, recnet/former cabinet members John Ashcroft, Hillary Clinton, Les Aspin, John Chafee, Porter Goss, Stephen Hadley, John Negroponte, Robert Rubin, Strobe Talbott, Cyrus Vance, L Paul Bremer, David Gergen.

And I've probably missed a few.

 

[deception]

It is empirical studies that show that any benefits of early learning are lost within the first few years of grade school. It is part of the political debate over the Head Start program.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-head-start.htm



Meritocracy is a very different issue. By definition, it is the lords of society using IQ tests and aptitude tests to direct children on one of two academic paths: the leaders of society, business and govt. vs. the skilled/unskilled labor class. The word "Meritocracy" made it into the dictionary in the 1950s. The concept was hatched by the president of Harvard, based upon similar programs used in the military to determine officer material vs. foot soldiers.

Pertinent Harvard grads include: Al Gore, Henry Kissinger, Arthur Schlessinger, GW Bush, JFK, Obama, both Roosevelts, current or recent Supreme Court Justices Steven Bryer, Anthony Kennedy, William Rehnquist, John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, and David Souter, and current or recent cabinet members Spencer Abraham, Bruce Babbit, William Bennett, Nicholas Brady, Joseph Califano, Elaine Chao, Michael Chertoff, Henry Cisneros, Alberto Gonzales, RFK, Henry Paulson, Donald Regan, Elliot Richardson, Tom Ridge, Robert Rubin, James Schlesinger, and Cap Weinberger.

The list of presidents or heads of states of foreign nations that are Harvard alums is equally long.

Pertinent Yale grads include: Paul Krugman, Bob Woodward, Alan Derschowitz, GHW Bush, GW Bush, Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Gerald Ford, John Kerry, Joe Lieberman, supreme court justice Samuel Alito, recnet/former cabinet members John Ashcroft, Hillary Clinton, Les Aspin, John Chafee, Porter Goss, Stephen Hadley, John Negroponte, Robert Rubin, Strobe Talbott, Cyrus Vance, L Paul Bremer, David Gergen.

And I've probably missed a few.

head start is a government sponsored program with ambivalent results (e.g. ppl on the right think its been disastrous whereas those on the left believe it possess many redeeming qualities like lower crimes rates and better test scores). however, for the purpose of debate lets assume your neo-con counterparts are right- all it does is disqualify a government program not determinism. and in case u werent aware- american students as a whole languish behind students from all over the world, particularly in relation to math scores. u need to look at your government not race on this issue.

there have been several studies published which lays credance to the idea of a "cultural inheritance" trasmitted from parent to child. there are obvious and less obvious ways to demonstrate this- a parent could pass on their love for classical music which has been correlated to an increase in artithemetic aptiude and less obviously a parent of great means could effectively lobby school administrators and teachers to place their child in advanced programs even if their child isnt deserving of such a privilege.

as for the immigration and determinism linkage- the ny times op-ed writer doesnt really try to assemble a link between the two and he hopes we make the logical deduction between the two. although, if u read enough literature on the issue, it would be made abundantly clear to u that such a link exists. the best way to identify such a link is to examine america's selective immigration policy. before i negotiate this- let me make a distinction between legal immigration (e.g. the indians, chinese) and refugees (mexicans, haitians, cubans, etc). the ones who entered legally have been accepted on the basis of a vigorous selection process. which brings us to a book called "the karma of brown folks" which is vijay persaud's (the author's) homage to dubois' "the souls of black folks". dubois introduced us to the "colour line" which he thought would demarcate the twentieth century. dubois's colour line was breakaway from the marxist tagline of "class conflict". clearly dubois was right as witnessed by the armenian, jewish, bosnian and tutsi genocide. nevertheless, persaud took dubois's "colour line" and applied it the intriguing dynamics of the indian community in america. one of the most quoted stat in the book is that 83% of the indian-american immigrants are "professionals", i.e. doctors, engineers, professors, scientists. thats why their children win spelling bees and they assimilated easily. to that end, reagan and other right wing ideologues thought of the indians as "model minorities"- a community to be replicated by other minorities. here selective immigration and cultural/ professional inheritance transmits success.

as for your regurgitation of the internet write ups on meritocracy and the immense list u provided of yale/harvard grads does nothing to undermine my argument. i'll now defer to my colleague chris rock:
[video=youtube;YrF6mG6Mx_8]

 

[Denny Crane]

I don't think Head Start is disastrous, but I do think the studies do show that it has no long lasting benefit to the children. It is meant to supplement or replace the things you claim are missing from some situations.

I also think that black parents love their children as much as any other people love theirs, as do any "brown" skinned people. The key difference for black people being they didn't immigrate here voluntarily and were heavily abused and discriminated against all along.

The rather scholarly studies I've done into Meritocracy aren't internet mumbo jumbo. There's a considerable argument made by black folk that tests like the SAT are discriminatory for cultural and other reasons. Turns out those IQ tests Conant (the president of Harvard I mentioned) preferred originated in the early 1900s as a means to "prove" that black people are inferior to white people. Literally.

The moral of the article you posted is that children benefit from working hard at scholastics, period. Sure, there may be some nations or ethnic groups that value scholastics higher than others, but that's no excuse.

As for the math thing, it's true for ALL americans, but it's not true for white americans or asian americans or many other groups of americans. Our mix of immigrants from all over the world as well as those mistreated black folks I mentioned do drag down the overall averages.

We do agree on one thing, it's on govt. to educate our children as they are the future and govt. mandates they go to school. It's also on them that they divert funds from the schools who need it to the schools where campaign donors send their children. And worse.

Chris Rock is a funny guy, but hardly an authority on anything but comedy and the sophistication that success and money bring him.

 

[deception]

I don't think Head Start is disastrous, but I do think the studies do show that it has no long lasting benefit to the children. It is meant to supplement or replace the things you claim are missing from some situations.

I also think that black parents love their children as much as any other people love theirs, as do any "brown" skinned people. The key difference for black people being they didn't immigrate here voluntarily and were heavily abused and discriminated against all along.

The rather scholarly studies I've done into Meritocracy aren't internet mumbo jumbo. There's a considerable argument made by black folk that tests like the SAT are discriminatory for cultural and other reasons. Turns out those IQ tests Conant (the president of Harvard I mentioned) preferred originated in the early 1900s as a means to "prove" that black people are inferior to white people. Literally.

The moral of the article you posted is that children benefit from working hard at scholastics, period. Sure, there may be some nations or ethnic groups that value scholastics higher than others, but that's no excuse.

As for the math thing, it's true for ALL americans, but it's not true for white americans or asian americans or many other groups of americans. Our mix of immigrants from all over the world as well as those mistreated black folks I mentioned do drag down the overall averages.

i never asserted that immigrant parents loved their children more than black parents. if u think that- you're missing the point. in basketball terms- certain immigrant groups and upper class white parents are putting out all star teams onto the playing field. that all star team isnt necessarily buttressed by innate talent but by better coaches (teachers, tutors, cultural inheritance, etc.) and placed in a system unfettered (nothing to worry about except excelling in the classroom) by hindrances. ppl from poorer backgrounds are often curtailed by circumstance, e.g. having to get a job while studying to help out at home and living in a broken home and all its deleterious ramifications.

 

[Chutney]

I think you need to qualify "working harder," too. As our theories of education become more nuanced, I think we're realizing that catching up isn't as simple as plopping in front of a book reading/practicing over and over. The evaluation and detection of different learning styles (or even deficiencies) leads to better and more appropriate teaching/studying techniques. For a significant number of people (usually in lower income brackets), those evaluations never occur and teachers are stuck trying to stick a square peg into a round hole. In that sense, I don't think academic success is solely within the realm of the individual.

 

[Denny Crane]

i never asserted that immigrant parents loved their children more than black parents. if u think that- you're missing the point. in basketball terms- certain immigrant groups and upper class white parents are putting out all star teams onto the playing field. that all star team isnt necessarily buttressed by innate talent but by better coaches (teachers, tutors, cultural inheritance, etc.) and placed in a system unfettered (nothing to worry about except excelling in the classroom) by hindrances. ppl from poorer backgrounds are often curtailed by circumstance, e.g. having to get a job while studying to help out at home and living in a broken home and all its deleterious ramifications.

As I pointed out, the all start team is being sent to the court where the campaign donors are.

And there surely are racist politicians who divert funding anywhere but where it's needed to keep the people down.

 

[Denny Crane]

I think you need to qualify "working harder," too. As our theories of education become more nuanced, I think we're realizing that catching up isn't as simple as plopping in front of a book reading/practicing over and over. The evaluation and detection of different learning styles (or even deficiencies) leads to better and more appropriate teaching/studying techniques. For a significant number of people (usually in lower income brackets), those evaluations never occur and teachers are stuck trying to stick a square peg into a round hole. In that sense, I don't think academic success is solely within the realm of the individual.

"working harder" means cracking the books instead of blowing time on GTA IV.

 

[deception]

As I pointed out, the all start team is being sent to the court where the campaign donors are.

And there surely are racist politicians who divert funding anywhere but where it's needed to keep the people down.

these above statements are not germane to the topic at hand.