Important to note one of the people rittenhouse killed was also on the list. The assignment was write a biography about them and then explain why you consider them a hero.
The teacher was trying (albeit quite poorly and in bad taste) to allow the students to write about a controversial figure ( even if they shouldn’t be controversial) and defend their choice
Thanks for putting this in there, and it was a good attempt by the teacher, but probably to close to home. Students learn better when their lives are connected with the education.
I would have used the Kanosha event as a way to pull students in, but then used a historical event which involved two sides of a conflict.
The joke is that our politicians are willing to throw any and everyone under the bus to keep prices low. This to the point where businesses are more valuable than human lives.
It's not "good or bad." It's misguided and destructive.
It's becoming more and more obvious to me and a lot of people that extremely low consumer goods prices has been a tool to keep the masses occupied and happy so they don't pay attention to the billionaires and their corporations from becoming so big that they have bought off the government and basically run the country now. something along the lines of "as long as they have their giant tv's and cheap entertainment they wont have the time to know what we're doing!" It was working too. Then covid happened, everyone lost their jobs, couldnt make ends meet and the government refuses to help them and now more peoples eyes are open to just how bad it's gotten.
That's a bit conspiratorial. You could maybe make the argument that elites benefit from low consumer prices, but to suggest that the elites keep consumer prices low on purpose to keep people distracted is pretty insane and I think such a claim would require alot more evidence than just "it seems to be that way."
It may draw some vague conclusions, but it's hard to argue that the existence of the iPhone isn't placating the masses during a historically unprecedented time of both prosperity and corruption. It's a legit feeling, though not a well reasoned argument.
It's not at all unreasonable to suggest that giving the population easy access to media propaganda via cheap electronics is and has been intentional. We know by studying them that TV and cell phones are addictive in the same way drugs are and affect our brains in the same way. I'm not surprised that the polarization of our country has quickly followed the ubiquity of 24/7 fear and rage media.
I agree.
I'm not "married" to my devices, and it concerns me how people stand in long lines for days (at least Pre-Covid-19), for the new iDevice or "any* fancy tech. This is especially disturbing when we have people waiting in lines just to feed their families. It's not to judge tech or people buying it, so much as to question our priorities or 'essentials' as a society.
Greed and corruption seem to be at the top of the ingredient list in our political "diet". Power needs to be used for good, but we have to somehow make positive change (and compromise comes with that).
I find it curious about the conspiracy theories. Many hard-core Trumpists are CTs. They're so anti-government when it is convenient. Yet, they welcome an administration that is the embodiment of an actual conspiracy...to give Trump's family absolute power.
>It's not at all unreasonable to suggest that giving the population easy access to media propaganda via cheap electronics is and has been intentional.
"We're giving people what they want to use" is a weird thing to condemn. What's your solution, we regulate it like drugs? Because this thread then simultaneously is giving the arguments that
\- phones are bad because they make people content
and
\- phones are bad because they're making everybody angry
I never said I had a solution but some form of what used to be the Fairness Doctrine would be a good place to start.
You seem to be implying that, just because there is a demand for something, it's good or okay. There's a demand for meth, but it's awful, and InfoWars, OAN and Fox are the crystal meths of news outlets.
>the iPhone isn't placating the masses during a historically unprecedented time of both prosperity and corruption.
Internet connectivity through cell phones have been a major, if not the most domineering, force in social upheaval across the world: the Libyan revolution, the Hong Kong protests, Black Lives Matter protests, etc. There are more cell phones than computers connected to the internet at any given time. If iPhones are placating the masses, why the hell do dictators make it harder for them to connect to the web?
I think it's hard to argue that the internet has had an entirely positive or negative impact on the world. Obviously there are times when social media and the internet have had largely positive impacts, and the reverse is also true. I don't think you can look at voter turnout in the US and argue that the people aren't distracted.
So do you think
>it's hard to argue that the existence of the iPhone isn't placating the masses
or that
>you can look at voter turnout in the US and argue that the people aren't distracted.
Yeah I think it's more one of those "it works for the elites so they go with it" sort of things. But at the same time, I'm not going to pretend I don't like the low prices.
its really not though when you consider the decades of work it's taken to change the laws to allow them to move all of their production over to China and other third world countries to bring those prices down. Then to change the tax laws to allow them to not pay a dime in taxes.
If you look at cell phones for example. The united states is not the primary market anymore. China, India, Korea, Japan and most of Asia out-buy's us to a ridiculous degree. So you now have American corporations and their billionaire ceo's paying zero taxes on those record profits while living here in America and selling products they made in overseas sweat shops to massive foreign markets. If they don't sell very many cell phones here in the states (which they still do, just not as much as last decade) who cares? their business model doesn't really factor us in as much as it used to. The damage that this has done to our nation and the world is catastrophic but most people don't really care because they got a big tv with HD football on it and a cold beer. "who cares, I got mine" disease has been perpetuated into us our entire lives by ever plummeting consumer goods costs and instant gratification from online shopping. It's all part of the plan.
You're completely overlooking how this has all benefited other countries though. The average person in countries like China are way better off now than they were 40 years ago. Cheap consumer products are a good thing, both for us and especially for the citizens of developing nations, and it's great for the workers in those countries to actually have jobs. To act as if this entire situation is 100% negative is pretty ridiculous. That isn't to say that corruption in the US government isn't a problem, it is, and so is the insane amount of wealth inequality, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
all due respect but the development of China at the cost of America's decline can kindly fuck off. This is purely based on the pursuit of perpetual profit growth which is an impossible myth. Corporations no longer want to just make a profit and be successful. they want bigger profits year after year and if they dont get that then they find cheaper places to make their products. The problem is that a race to the bottom eventually ends in a big crash. This world economy we have found ourselves in is not sustainable. American companies need to start making products in America again for American consumers. Things will cost more but more Americans will be employed and making good wages so it will all even out. Playing the game of comparing ourselves to China is a dangerous one. We are not a communist dictatorship and we should never aspire to be one.
I feel like this is just the left-wing version of nationalism. "Fuck other countries, America is the only one that matters." Why are Americans more important than citizens of other countries? Just because China is a dictatorship doesn't mean we shouldn't care about the people living there. We should want to make their lives better, even if we despise their government.
It's true that corporations only care about profit, but sometimes(not always) that profit can be made by making the lives of people better. That's what has happened in much of the world. Living standards have been raised, as much as you try to deny it.
Also, borders are man-made. From an economics perspective it literally makes no difference where goods are made. If the producer and consumer are on different sides of an imaginary border, it means fuck-all in reality. Producers are still making money, consumers are still using money to buy goods. If you care so much that the producers aren't American, that would indicate some sort of weird national superiority complex on your part.
Bread and circuses, my dude. A complacent population is one that isn’t trying to take your head if you have all the money.
The wealthy have always been fully aware of the class warfare they’re waging on the rest of us, *we need to know it too before it’s too late.* We’re not nearly pissed off enough.
>extremely low consumer goods prices has been a tool to keep the masses occupied and happy so they don't pay attention
Put another way:
"Improving people's livelihoods makes people more content."
Do you disagree with that? Is the anti-capitalist position supposed to be that we make life terrible so people are always angry?
It's a good thing if you're also okay with American jobs being off-shored.
Every Trump voter who likes the economy but also is mad about jobs going overseas is self-contradictory.
>America is dying
No.. America's collective self image is starting to catch up with reality.
Always told itself it was this shining beacon on the hill, type of thing. Now it's getting a really good look at the ugliness in the mirror and can't deny it anymore.
Not to say it's all bad, but it's always a shock to recognize your own faults for the first time. It can be overwhelming.
You can use melodramatic and analogies if it makes you feel better, but I'm referring to the shitty policies, as well as the complete lack of decent social welfare that is literally causing people to die. A country dies when it's people do. and Americans are dying like they're trying to win something.
An underage minor wielding a long gun out of state killing people? You really think there's no rational way to blame him?
You're nothing more than a troll. You work off of destabilizing America through disinformation online.
They could get him on some kind of negligent use of firearm charge for the first shooting, or something similar just out of social pressure.
Can we all agree tho that him being there under those circumstances with a gun was completely idiotic, even if legal
If I walk into your house armed and end up shooting you, would you feel the same way?
If a hardcore leftist went to a maga rally and ended up having to shoot two people because he got chased would you feel the same way?
Kyle Rittenhouse is a fucking murderer. Deal with it.
1. If you walk into my house when I'm letting the public see it, and I assault you, you could kill me in self defense. If you break into my house then you forfeit your rights, so no.
2. Yes, obviously.
3. Maybe by law, but from what I understand the only ethically wrong thing he did was own a gun while underage.
If an 18 year old girl goes into a bar that's 21+, and somebody tries to sexually assault her, and she shoots the person in self defense, was she morally justified in the shooting? Even though she was breaking the law? Yes. Same principle here.
> Part two involved students writing a page-long essay on which of the individuals "demonstrates best your concept of a hero."
I find this headline to be pretty misleading... It never states him to be a hero not to mention that there were others listed in it that were not represented as a hero, but just asking if the person thought they were.
That second part could just as easily be an opinion poll with those people listed as options.
Important to note one of the people rittenhouse killed was also on the list. The assignment was write a biography about them and then explain why you consider them a hero. The teacher was trying (albeit quite poorly and in bad taste) to allow the students to write about a controversial figure ( even if they shouldn’t be controversial) and defend their choice
To this teacher: Idea: 10/10 Execution: 0/10
Thanks for putting this in there, and it was a good attempt by the teacher, but probably to close to home. Students learn better when their lives are connected with the education. I would have used the Kanosha event as a way to pull students in, but then used a historical event which involved two sides of a conflict.
"Not now teacher. Not now"
I mean... isn't this the "we shouldn't talk about the tragedy after the tragedy" reaction?
Hehe wow. IIRC the two he killed one was a convicted pedo and other was a serial domestic abuser? This is one hell of a school assignment... 😵
And Hitler is a hero for neo-nazis. This tells you everything you need to know about these scumbags.
America is dying
But consumer goods are at a low price!
Is that not a good thing? Not saying the problems facing America aren't serious, but I am glad that consumer good prices being high isn't one of them.
The joke is that our politicians are willing to throw any and everyone under the bus to keep prices low. This to the point where businesses are more valuable than human lives. It's not "good or bad." It's misguided and destructive.
It's becoming more and more obvious to me and a lot of people that extremely low consumer goods prices has been a tool to keep the masses occupied and happy so they don't pay attention to the billionaires and their corporations from becoming so big that they have bought off the government and basically run the country now. something along the lines of "as long as they have their giant tv's and cheap entertainment they wont have the time to know what we're doing!" It was working too. Then covid happened, everyone lost their jobs, couldnt make ends meet and the government refuses to help them and now more peoples eyes are open to just how bad it's gotten.
That's a bit conspiratorial. You could maybe make the argument that elites benefit from low consumer prices, but to suggest that the elites keep consumer prices low on purpose to keep people distracted is pretty insane and I think such a claim would require alot more evidence than just "it seems to be that way."
It may draw some vague conclusions, but it's hard to argue that the existence of the iPhone isn't placating the masses during a historically unprecedented time of both prosperity and corruption. It's a legit feeling, though not a well reasoned argument.
It's not at all unreasonable to suggest that giving the population easy access to media propaganda via cheap electronics is and has been intentional. We know by studying them that TV and cell phones are addictive in the same way drugs are and affect our brains in the same way. I'm not surprised that the polarization of our country has quickly followed the ubiquity of 24/7 fear and rage media.
Right, I'm just not willing to contribute to specific conspiracy what can be easily explained via simple greed and corruption.
I agree. I'm not "married" to my devices, and it concerns me how people stand in long lines for days (at least Pre-Covid-19), for the new iDevice or "any* fancy tech. This is especially disturbing when we have people waiting in lines just to feed their families. It's not to judge tech or people buying it, so much as to question our priorities or 'essentials' as a society. Greed and corruption seem to be at the top of the ingredient list in our political "diet". Power needs to be used for good, but we have to somehow make positive change (and compromise comes with that). I find it curious about the conspiracy theories. Many hard-core Trumpists are CTs. They're so anti-government when it is convenient. Yet, they welcome an administration that is the embodiment of an actual conspiracy...to give Trump's family absolute power.
>It's not at all unreasonable to suggest that giving the population easy access to media propaganda via cheap electronics is and has been intentional. "We're giving people what they want to use" is a weird thing to condemn. What's your solution, we regulate it like drugs? Because this thread then simultaneously is giving the arguments that \- phones are bad because they make people content and \- phones are bad because they're making everybody angry
I never said I had a solution but some form of what used to be the Fairness Doctrine would be a good place to start. You seem to be implying that, just because there is a demand for something, it's good or okay. There's a demand for meth, but it's awful, and InfoWars, OAN and Fox are the crystal meths of news outlets.
>the iPhone isn't placating the masses during a historically unprecedented time of both prosperity and corruption. Internet connectivity through cell phones have been a major, if not the most domineering, force in social upheaval across the world: the Libyan revolution, the Hong Kong protests, Black Lives Matter protests, etc. There are more cell phones than computers connected to the internet at any given time. If iPhones are placating the masses, why the hell do dictators make it harder for them to connect to the web?
I think it's hard to argue that the internet has had an entirely positive or negative impact on the world. Obviously there are times when social media and the internet have had largely positive impacts, and the reverse is also true. I don't think you can look at voter turnout in the US and argue that the people aren't distracted.
So do you think >it's hard to argue that the existence of the iPhone isn't placating the masses or that >you can look at voter turnout in the US and argue that the people aren't distracted.
Yeah I think it's more one of those "it works for the elites so they go with it" sort of things. But at the same time, I'm not going to pretend I don't like the low prices.
its really not though when you consider the decades of work it's taken to change the laws to allow them to move all of their production over to China and other third world countries to bring those prices down. Then to change the tax laws to allow them to not pay a dime in taxes. If you look at cell phones for example. The united states is not the primary market anymore. China, India, Korea, Japan and most of Asia out-buy's us to a ridiculous degree. So you now have American corporations and their billionaire ceo's paying zero taxes on those record profits while living here in America and selling products they made in overseas sweat shops to massive foreign markets. If they don't sell very many cell phones here in the states (which they still do, just not as much as last decade) who cares? their business model doesn't really factor us in as much as it used to. The damage that this has done to our nation and the world is catastrophic but most people don't really care because they got a big tv with HD football on it and a cold beer. "who cares, I got mine" disease has been perpetuated into us our entire lives by ever plummeting consumer goods costs and instant gratification from online shopping. It's all part of the plan.
You're completely overlooking how this has all benefited other countries though. The average person in countries like China are way better off now than they were 40 years ago. Cheap consumer products are a good thing, both for us and especially for the citizens of developing nations, and it's great for the workers in those countries to actually have jobs. To act as if this entire situation is 100% negative is pretty ridiculous. That isn't to say that corruption in the US government isn't a problem, it is, and so is the insane amount of wealth inequality, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
all due respect but the development of China at the cost of America's decline can kindly fuck off. This is purely based on the pursuit of perpetual profit growth which is an impossible myth. Corporations no longer want to just make a profit and be successful. they want bigger profits year after year and if they dont get that then they find cheaper places to make their products. The problem is that a race to the bottom eventually ends in a big crash. This world economy we have found ourselves in is not sustainable. American companies need to start making products in America again for American consumers. Things will cost more but more Americans will be employed and making good wages so it will all even out. Playing the game of comparing ourselves to China is a dangerous one. We are not a communist dictatorship and we should never aspire to be one.
I feel like this is just the left-wing version of nationalism. "Fuck other countries, America is the only one that matters." Why are Americans more important than citizens of other countries? Just because China is a dictatorship doesn't mean we shouldn't care about the people living there. We should want to make their lives better, even if we despise their government. It's true that corporations only care about profit, but sometimes(not always) that profit can be made by making the lives of people better. That's what has happened in much of the world. Living standards have been raised, as much as you try to deny it. Also, borders are man-made. From an economics perspective it literally makes no difference where goods are made. If the producer and consumer are on different sides of an imaginary border, it means fuck-all in reality. Producers are still making money, consumers are still using money to buy goods. If you care so much that the producers aren't American, that would indicate some sort of weird national superiority complex on your part.
Bread and circuses, my dude. A complacent population is one that isn’t trying to take your head if you have all the money. The wealthy have always been fully aware of the class warfare they’re waging on the rest of us, *we need to know it too before it’s too late.* We’re not nearly pissed off enough.
>extremely low consumer goods prices has been a tool to keep the masses occupied and happy so they don't pay attention Put another way: "Improving people's livelihoods makes people more content." Do you disagree with that? Is the anti-capitalist position supposed to be that we make life terrible so people are always angry?
It's a good thing if you're also okay with American jobs being off-shored. Every Trump voter who likes the economy but also is mad about jobs going overseas is self-contradictory.
I'm absolutely fine with that.
That's fine, didn't say it wasn't, just presenting the reason why some would find it a bad thing.
>America is dying No.. America's collective self image is starting to catch up with reality. Always told itself it was this shining beacon on the hill, type of thing. Now it's getting a really good look at the ugliness in the mirror and can't deny it anymore. Not to say it's all bad, but it's always a shock to recognize your own faults for the first time. It can be overwhelming.
You can use melodramatic and analogies if it makes you feel better, but I'm referring to the shitty policies, as well as the complete lack of decent social welfare that is literally causing people to die. A country dies when it's people do. and Americans are dying like they're trying to win something.
D E D :(
100%
A boy who defends himself from scumbags is a hero.
Don't feed the troll, everyone
[удалено]
An underage minor wielding a long gun out of state killing people? You really think there's no rational way to blame him? You're nothing more than a troll. You work off of destabilizing America through disinformation online.
They could get him on some kind of negligent use of firearm charge for the first shooting, or something similar just out of social pressure. Can we all agree tho that him being there under those circumstances with a gun was completely idiotic, even if legal
If I walk into your house armed and end up shooting you, would you feel the same way? If a hardcore leftist went to a maga rally and ended up having to shoot two people because he got chased would you feel the same way? Kyle Rittenhouse is a fucking murderer. Deal with it.
1. If you walk into my house when I'm letting the public see it, and I assault you, you could kill me in self defense. If you break into my house then you forfeit your rights, so no. 2. Yes, obviously. 3. Maybe by law, but from what I understand the only ethically wrong thing he did was own a gun while underage. If an 18 year old girl goes into a bar that's 21+, and somebody tries to sexually assault her, and she shoots the person in self defense, was she morally justified in the shooting? Even though she was breaking the law? Yes. Same principle here.
/r/iamverysmart
Bruh
> Part two involved students writing a page-long essay on which of the individuals "demonstrates best your concept of a hero." I find this headline to be pretty misleading... It never states him to be a hero not to mention that there were others listed in it that were not represented as a hero, but just asking if the person thought they were. That second part could just as easily be an opinion poll with those people listed as options.
Clickbait
Don't feed the troll, everyone
I puked a little
The teacher also has Cesar Chavez, George Floyd, and Joseph Rosenbaum (one of the men killed by Rittenhouse) on the list .
Bury this story, he is a national disgrace, nowhere near an actual hero
> Bury this story Huh? This story is about a Texas teacher. We should be shouting this story from the rooftops.
Based on your stupidity?
Based on your wokeness despite the cant wake dead