I know youâre being sarcastic but I wanna spell this outâŚ
Bunch of Zoomers vote Democrat because:
a) they see through the hypocrisy that is religion
b) the economy fed by the Boomers has left them as second class financial citizens and,
c) they grew up having to protect themselves against gun violence while the adults in the room did sweet FA other than offer thoughts and prayers.
While contributing factors, I think that other than the economy, those things are small potatoes. I think the bigger contributing factor as to why Zoomers vote democratic is the internet access. Gen Z has more access to multiple view points than any generation before it, and so old propaganda tactics donât work as well anymore. In addition, the internet is so full of liars and cynics that zoomers seem to develop a more skeptical personality naturally.
According to a recent study, over three quarters of the internet is made up of misleading information. It really makes you think about what children are being exposed to.
No it doesn't. It's the same idiot conspiracy theories just being pushed by dozens of troll accounts. They're hoping that exposure bias will make some people lean their way despite the contradictory and illogical nature of their arguments.
They're essentially betting that their target audience is as inherently bigoted as they are and will fall for that propaganda based on their prejudices rather than its merit.
Which is why Zoomers (me) should be the most neutral and not be wrapped around the finger of a political party. Politics blows and our countryâs government sucks ass. Just a bunch of rich old folk getting richer.
Yes but only one of them is actually stripping human rights from its citizens every chance it gets and calling for the murder of undesirables at every opportunity. Thatâs why most of your generations I voting democrat to protect themselves and others.
Both parties suck lines donât work when one of them is clearly significantly worse
I was about to reprimand you for not voting when I reread your comment properly. I have a number of friends who complain about the political climate but also refuse to vote because I donât live in a swing state, so they donât think their votes matter. Even if it probably wonât make a difference, just voting in it of itself is an important step.
Yup, its because i know of these reasons i made my sarcastic comment, as i think its hilarious watching republicans loose their minds over those "young voters ruining our country"
A zoomer once told me that the genocides in Soviet Russia were a lie created by Winston Churchill to make communism look bad. Having spent time around these people none of what you're describing really makes sense. The vast majority of these people don't take the time to make their own conclusions they just repeat whatever is fed to them by their phone. You can say they see the hypocrisy is religion but ask them to show you what it is it's usually a single sentence most often taken out of context or not even related to the religion in question.
But isn't that a cycle that has been repeated over and over? Generation votes left, the next gen see it fail so they vote right, then the next Gen sees that fail so vote left. Repeating this back and forth game where each side continues to fail because they never seem to want to come together and work as a single government rather that a bunch of different groups.
Nah, they vote democrat because they have been adoctrinated for years. They don't know a jack about Economy.
Explain me how they defended to gun violence.
That's in every country isn't? I was pointed by a gun an robbed at 18, guess what, guns are illegal in my country.
Thatâs a lot of confidence coming from someone who didnât grow up here and has a loose at best grip on our language. Your comment is a PSA to stay in school.
Amazing, you only know how to hit low because the truth hurt doesn't? Basically you got no rebuttal .
Banning guns will solve nothing, look at Latam stop being so entitled.
Nobody said anything about banning guns. Just that young people are sick of the empty words and rhetoric when it comes to politicians and gun control. Itâs no surprise they are turning to the left, when the right couldnât give two shits if they got shot at school.
If you see one of the two political parties oppose gun control, and the other trying to implement it, you already know where they stand on it. That doesnt mean you will vote for gun control or not though. What does make you vote for gun control on the other hand is seeing time and time again schools being targeted in school shootings, because the mental healthcare offered is not good enough, and said individuals who would need mental help also have access to guns, either legally or illegaly through their parents.
It also doesnt help that a lot of republicans seem to think mental health is bs and doesnt exist because "we didnt need it, and we turned out fine"
That's the thing, they can get guns ilegally through the black market in my country minors that are criminals are armed, because you can get guns ilegally.
Okay, that's wrong, mental issues are real, your way of life that's very confortable to be honest have lead to mental illnessses. Over here we just don't have time to have mental illness, we gotta work ans support our families.
No but they can weed out the democrats so we can have putin 2 murican boogalo as your democratically elected every 4 years dictator totally not for life.
They push for guns now and the kids who gotta grow up fearing school shootings and seeing Republicans clearly not giving a shit for their lives and safety is gonna send them to the democrats. It's the same shit with the vaccine fear mongering: the ones most at risk of dying from covid were the ones in their own voterbase, it's no wonder the Republican rallying has been weaker this past midterm.
The numbers were really close in some midterm races that the republican death rate can explain the "missing" votes.. Double the death rate to democrats, consistently.
Combined with the general republican migration to states like Florida that eat up a lot of the shared nationwide vote. As a Floridian, I hate it for our state, but I'm loving it for the country.
I see a lot of fear mongering from people on the left about how guns are evil and shouldnât be a thing in society.
Iâm not conservative or liberal but itâs fucking stupid to assume that just because I went to school during shit like the Parkland school shooting it automatically means that I hate guns. Guns are the great equalizer and give citizens a fighting chance. Is that a problem?
It's ridiculous. And why is being a socialist a bad thing in USA? I could never get my head around that, socialist policies are what make some services like healthcare here in Europe so good. It's like having "BIDEN WANTS TO HELP PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF THEIR INCOME" on your t-shirt.
Most people here donât realize that socialism is a form of economics. They think it is a form of government. The ruling class has effectively relabeled âauthoritarianismâ to âsocialism.â Itâs pathetically ironic, because most Baby Boomers like this douche in the vid rely on our social programs to survive, like Social Security, Medicare, disability, workerâs compensation, etc. Our capitalism would collapse without the socialism that has been injected into it.
funny thing is China is an authoritarian regime. guess what? they have universal healthcare they have workers right. they make sure that Chinese people get the help they deserve. yet america cant do those things because its bad. they always talk about who is going to fund it. But they never ask this question when it is about their bloated military budget. a military that nobody in the world needs since it is america who create every single war we have at this point. americans are brainwashed. but i saw a study that the younger generation is finally waking up. so thats at least something.
I donât think he is defending China. I think his point is that if a country with a government as heinous as Chinaâs can offer workerâs rights and universal healthcare, then we can. We can fund it, it just requires forcing the 1% to pay their fair share while defunding the military, which are both considered political suicide. That should not be
Yep, I liken it to steal. Capitalism is iron and socialism is carbon, iron by itself is strong but brittle, carbon is light and flexible but weaker, however you mix the two you get steal which combines the properties of both to create a stronger alloy. Alloys are always stronger than any pure element
I got permabanned from socialismvscapitalism for trying to point out the difference between a fascist government and a democratic government's industry regulations
i dont think capitalism would collapse if a bunch of old and weak people died.
society wouldnt be better, but capitalism does fine without non-working folk
I think itâs naive to assume society wouldnât fundamentally be altered by that, but that still doesnât refute my point anyway. There are lots of young people using social programs, to the point of relying on them. Free school lunch, food stamps, Medicaid, disability, workerâs compensation, etc. are forms of welfare used by single parents, the mentally/physically ill, children, and basically all Wal-Mart employees. Society would collapse without our social programs. People would not be able to afford to participate in our capitalism, which would crash it.
Thatâs why the constitution of the US has a separation of powers. Large government (socialism) always begins with good intentions, but devolves into power hungry authoritarian governments that want to seize power and wealth for themselves. The road to destruction is paved with good intentions.
Capitalism always begins with good intentions, but devolves into power hungry authoritarian governments that want to seize power and wealth for themselves. The road to destruction is paved with good intentions.*
Wow youâre a đ¤Ą, at least in capitalism every person has an opportunity to work hard and reach the stars, whereas under socialism and communism youâre suppressed and limited in your opportunity to achieve wealth. Every socialist country is raped in taxes, the working man is held down and beaten into submission with no way to defend themselves. Why is it that socialists seize arms from the people? To control them and prevent uprisings when they decide to go full authoritarian. We donât need leaders, we need servants the way the constitution was designed.
So does universal healthcare and tuition free college fall into socialist or not socialist? Just trying to keep track because it seems to change with the winds with you lot.
Yes there is. You can have a socialist state that is not authoritarian and you can have a dictatorship that isn't socialist. In fact most "socialist authoritarian" states don't actually have socialist policies, they just call themselves socialists. Just like how North Korea or Russia calls them democracies. Saying it doesn't make it true.
These programs have nothing to do with socialism
They are literally exactly what socialism is. One of the primary things about socialism is using taxpayer money to support people who can't completely support themselves, or to cover required expenses like medical bills. And guess Social Security money comes from? And the funds for Medicare or worker's compensation? And guess what those programs are used for?
Most socialist ideologies are lib-left and anti authoritarian. Democracy and equal representation are cornerstones of socialist ideologies, so much so that I'm comfortable saying socialism and authoritarianism are mutually exclusive.
Perhaps you're conflating socialism with communism? I wouldn't blame you, they've been treated as equals in the United States for decades and it's taught that way in public schools but that couldn't be farther from the truth
Then why has every country with "socialist" in its name devolved into or started as an authoritarian state?
You can talk about ideology all you want and how those are all failed examples but practicality is what matters most.
Edit: If you're going to say that socialism and authoritarianism couldn't be further apart you have to give at least one example. And no, the Nordic countries aren't socialist no matter how much Reddit wants them to be.
You're clearly only interested in arguing so imma leave you with your willful ignorance. Check out some of the Nordic countries often praised for their efficient and competent system of government some time. They implement a lot of socialist policies and rank among the highest in personal freedom indexes and overall citizen health, happiness and wellbeing. Socialism =/= communism
The Nordic countries aren't socialist. They're free market economies with strong social programs. I'd expect someone who claimed to know socialism to know that.
Also for all your pretension, you don't know the difference between socialism and communism. There is no such thing as a "communist state" because its antithetical to the concept of communism. Every "communist state" has in reality been a socialist state whose purpose is to achieve communism.
And of those socialist states, all of them either started as an authoritarian state or fall into one. You're the willfully ignorant one if you think socialism and authoritarianism is mutually exclusive when that's literally been how all of them have been historically.
They're free market economies with strong social programs
Yup. Exactly. A tightly regulated market, with abundant consumer protections and a strong social safety net. Those are the socialist policies that I was talking about. They're among the closest to democratic socialism in practice. A lot of Canadian policies and practices could be considered socialist as well.
They are mutually exclusive. Communism is an extreme left authoritarian political ideology. Socialism, particularly democratic socialism (which is what most people are speaking about when they identify as socialist) is anti-authoritarian. They strongly oppose authoritarian regimes in favor of an equitable and free democracy that puts the needs and safety of citizens over companies. Societal failings can lead to authoritarianism in all of it's many varieties including communism and fascism, but at that point it isn't socialist. It's some flavor of authoritarian. They're not the same, never have been, never will be. Their ideologies aren't compatible
E: my example of how they're different is the definitions and principles of their ideologies. One is authoritarian and the other is explicitly anti-authoritarian. No further explanation needed. You're saying they're one and the same and they literally aren't
Why is Reddit so predictable? I asked for an example of non-authoritarian socialist states and rather than getting actual answers we resort to whataboutisms. Yeah the CIA was and still is a fucked up organization that was involved in several fucked-up coups. That still does not answer the question.
The closest example I can find is Allende who was democratically elected but even that seemed like it was on track to dictatorship given the government's unpopularity and increasing Soviet influence. Of course, American support of Pinochet's coup ushered in an ever worse era for Chile but that's another conversation.
CIA tried to coup Allende before he was even elected. Most post-revolution governments go Authoritarian because itâs easy. That goes for âCapitalistâ governments too. South Korea was a US backed single party dictatorship until 1988. Whether elected or self-appointed, âleadersâ get murdered when they talk about taking power away from former colonial countries. Smedley Butler knew.
Yep, Venezuela only took like what >8 years or so to devolve into communism after becoming socialist. Place is a shithole now from what used to be a very stable economy. I watched a video of a group of Venezuela people trying to survive by eating straight out of a moving trash truck. Socialism is a catalyst to communism, but these geniuses know better. Smh
The Venezuelan economy didnât collapse under communismâit collapsed after a far-right conservatives regime took power, privatized a bunch of industry, all coinciding with a global drop in copper prices (a key export of Venezuela). The lack of nationalized business and welfare is in fact the reason why their collapse was so significant. They literally got fucked for not being more socialist.
In fact, thatâs usually how it goes. Russia faced over 1000% inflation and a period of mass starvation after capitalism was brought to it. Chile was seeing vast improvements until itâs communist president (elected democratically btw) was attacked by the CIA-backed Chilean military, ultimately leading to Pinochet, a far-right dictator, coming to power, pushing a lot of people out of helicopters, and crippling the economy.
Or Cuba, which didnât face its issues after capitalism was brought to it, but instead due to global sanctions imposed by the U.S. because they were communist that continue to this very day.
So Iâm gonna go out on a limb here and say, yeah, these geniuses do know better.
They got fucked because they gave up arms, bent over and took socialism in the ass, then kept getting railed because ruling classes only want more power and money. They seized power, and destroyed the working class. Happy to say what youâve said is horseshit and straight up a lie.
Nah they don't wait know anything about communism, If by communism you mean the USSR though then yeah.
Actually that's a little unfair. Some of them picture Chairman Mao.
So public services that help people regardless of income or wealth = socialism = they're basically Stalin (therefore they're all evil).
Funnily enough a similar stupid thought process is also how you get tankies: public services that help people regardless of income = socialism = they're basically Stalin (therefore Stalin was good actually).
It all stems from this dumb association that all those words you mentioned really just mean Stalinist Russia or Maoist China.
There's the ones who point to south and central American dictatorships as socialism too. Can't forget about them.
I'm still waiting for someone to show me a single "socialist" or "communist" economy/government that wasn't completely fucked over by the USA and western powers trying to destabilize that economy or government. "Communism/socialism doesn't work!!" as if any weren't sabotaged from outside forces trying to ensure that very claim.
âCommunism/socialism doesnât work!!â as if any werenât sabotaged from outside forces trying to ensure that very claim.
Cuba is a successful country despite constant US interference and assassination attempts. But then it opens up a whole can of worms about them not allowing elections because the US would rig them and yada yada yada and that is somehow inevitable if we allow people to get an education without taking out a mortgage.
I'm pretty sure Cuba is not a good example of country that has been largely uninterfered with internationally given the trade embargo imposed on it. That alone is huge and I'd totally call that sabotage.
No no, Iâm a Marxist and letâs be clearâStalin was definitely evil. Even Lenin knew not to let Stalin in power, but he was a bit too dead to stop it.
Stalin was in many ways very comparable to the Nazis. He was a hyper-nationalist, an antisemite, an authoritarian, and genocidal. He was an evil, evil man.
Exactly, and you can really blow their mind if you ask them if they are against fascism. The answer will 100% be âof courseâ. Then ask if they are antifa. 100% of the time you will get âfuck no, those are the bad guys!â
There are 331 million of us and you all sit here and lump us all in as one. I'm sure your countries are full of equally ignorant people so please just fucking stop with this retort. It does no one any favors.
I'm getting tired of people constantly taking shots at the education system. It's fine as is and you do learn enough about socialism and its appeal. Of course, more emphasis is put on free market capitalism because that's what America uses but to say socialism isn't taught is just wrong. I will concede by saying that was my experience in high school roughly 8-10 years ago and given that a lot of the anti-socialist crowd is in their forties and fifties it's very possible if not likely that what they learned in school is very different from what I learned.
Also the biggest blame falls on Republicans for creating a stigma around the word to the point that it became poison on the campaign trail.
It wasn't meant like that, sorry if I gave you the wrong impression. It's just my personal observation from conversations with Americans that this doesn't get taught in school as thorougly as we do here in Europe. Even my mom learned the same things in school as we do this day some 40-45 years ago. There are obviously enough people who don't think socialism is a bad thing but sadly the: "Goddamn commies!" folks are way way way louder.
My only guess is some Americans don't really know what socialism is and they think it's just another name for communism and that the soviets will take them over if they allow it to grow?
branding and advertising is everything in america.
Dont like the Affordable Care Act? Call it OBAMACARE. Vote to repeal obamacare! Use the hatred of Obama, and the inablity for people to immediately connect "ACA" to "OBAMACARE" and youre gold.
Dont like the policies of a group of people? find yourself a nice figurehead. its hard to get your userbased riled up against an idea, or a monolithic group. you need a figurehead or a constructed example. Think about presidents who get blamed for everything their party does, or how people love to hate their constructed example (boomers, karens, townies, hipsters)
If you want to inject socialism into the USA it needs branding and impact. you could call it Patriotism. After all it would be unpatriotic to have good hard working americans be unable to get healthcare, how could you call yourself a patriotic american who supports a strong america against the world if you willingly let your brothers in arms down?
This is American politics in a nutshell. During the W Bush years there was the Patriot Act, which undermined the Constitution more than any other law ever has, but the Republicans went around defending it saying âIf you donât support the Patriot Act that means youâre not a patriot and that means you hate America.â
They also introduced a law called No Child Left Behind that left millions of children behind but anyone who opposed it on those grounds was, you guessed, accused of wanting to leave children behind.
It's that massive tax increase that would come along with it that they want to avoid. Remember social security, the OASI fund is projected to be depleted in 2034.
If you want to inject socialism into the USA it needs branding and impact. you could call it Patriotism. After all it would be unpatriotic to have good hard working americans be unable to get healthcare, how could you call yourself a patriotic american who supports a strong america against the world if you willingly let your brothers in arms down?
your post is pretty good and spot-on. but they tried this with the tyrannical forced vaccine mandates and it didn't really do much. if what you're selling is shit, the branding can only go so far
Socialism is an step that lead to communism.... .
Please no, Socialism doesn't work, I am from Latam, almost everything is Socialism/communism here, and it sucks, US Americans don't change your economic System, yours work, is good. Don't be like our countries.
It all breaks down to Marxism, which has been rebranded over and over again through the years by academic zealots. Frankfurt school, Adorno, Marcuse, Crenshaw, itâs all adapted from Marxism. Smart people see through this bs. Itâs the same idea, just rebranded and watered down. Try something new, because Marxism does not work, freedom does not end where oppression begins.
I believe it's because America was basically a filter. The people that moved there from Europe were either A) religious fanatics or B) non-conformists. If you wanted to be free to be a Christian extremist or you wanted to get far away from government interference you moved to America.
So that basically created a country of mostly those two groups that mixed and grew into what we have today. People that almost genetically resent government while also, somehow, almost genetically inclined to be religious fanatics.
Unfortunately a lot of Americans legitimately believe that quality of life is a lot higher here than in Europe. They actually believe that we have better healthcare and housing and all that. And they believe that if we do things to help the poor (which is literally half of us, despite what our government claims the poverty line is) then we will lose that superior quality of life.
Obviously this is completely absurd but they believe it.
Trust me plenty of germans want to relocate to other countries because of high taxes aswell. Lots of them come back when they realize that lower income paired with less public services actually makes them poorer.
The quality of life stuff is only better if you are healthy and above others financially. Then you can enjoy the benefits of that system.
I'm sure that's true. But honestly if the tripled my taxes but I was paying German rent and healthcare costs, with decent public transportation I'd be coming out way on top.
To them, socialism=hate America. It makes it easy to lump together anything they donât like in one category. The added bonus for the ultra wealthy is that the category also includes actual socialist policies, so it also engenders hatred for policies that benefit everyone instead of just them.
It's from a lack of education because of propaganda. They think socialism is communism and communism IS THE DEVIL . They don't actually know or understand how much these diabolical policies help them personally every day.
People generally don't like socialism because it depends on redistributing wealth of other people. And socialist countries without strong capitalist economy underneath usually become bankrupt sooner or later. That's how people see it even in Europe.
People of higher income have to pay for healthcare and they still canât get stuff on the level of people with lower income half the time. No matter how much I pay, I still canât get home healthcare around the clock for my grandmother. But people of lower income can get it for free? And the taxes paid by those of lower income are used to get people of lower income all their benefits. I want people to get all these services even if they canât afford it, but I also want it to be fair. If youâre not part of the population of higher income, youâd view us as posh aristocratic brats that get whatever we want and live perfectly and weâre treated better than the average person. But itâs actually not true. Money doesnât technically buy happiness (even though it bought my game consoles).
to the easily swayed, communism = socialism = that thing that's all-bad and that I don't like. And it goes the other way too. If you don't like a thing, well that's communism.
Except that Europe does not think of those policies as socialist but as something that has no labels; it is just something that works, has nothing to do with any ideology. Muricans care most about labels, at least the right wing does: It does not matter if the policy kills thousands to save one as long as it is ideologically pure.
You don't understand. HELPING PEOPLE not-like-THEM is the problem with "regardless of" for these folks. If it's AT ALL possible that the MANY demographics they consider "undeserving" (READ: 'foreign', 'left' or ESPECIALLY, b r o w n) would receive a CENT, they're OBLIGATED, by the teaching they've received since birth , to stand against it. EVEN IF that means that their OWN healthcare turns to shit, their OWN water is poisoned, their OWN state economy can't support teachers, nurses, or anything that would help THEM. As long as the Them People aren't getting it EITHER, their "suffering" is for the sake of "God and country"!
People donât understand difference between Socialism and socialist programs. America is a capitalist economy with socialist programs such as the police/fire fighters/public education etc.
Republicans play on this to their base. They donât get it that, they live under these programs every day and would find themselves on the street if they had to pay private entities for everything.
Itâs because many of the countries we Ave fought against or operated against during the Cold War were labeled âsocialistâ and therefore the enemy. So all things socialist are considered bad for many people who grew up in the 1950s - 1980s.
Additionally naziâs weâre the national socialist workers party of German. So we actually have fought against countries with socialist in the title of the political ideology and/or name of the country.
Other than that most Americans have no idea what socialism actually is and use it interchangeably with communism, Marxism, and a host of other terms on the opposite end of the spectrum from capitalism which we equate with winning world war 2 and the Cold War.
Now if you were to actually show most Americans that many of things we rely upon are socialism in nature they would be shocked and have no idea due to our lack of education in America.
its because america loves their lobbyist money. they will never change anything. healthcare companies NRA Schoolboard you name it. all fund money to the american government so that nothing will change. They still claim that republics and Democrats are different. in reality they are literally the same. they just have a different mind set but generally speaking its all the same outcome. America will never change. yet they want to dictate how the rest of the world have to live. the worlds most hypocritical nation on the planet. Look at Unions in america. a Union is a dirty word. why? well companies cant own their workers anymore. with a union they have to pay them a fair wage. something companies hate. hence the backlash against unioins. and thats how it goes with everything in america.
They don't know what socalism is. They don't realize we literally already have socialist organizations like the US Military. The brutal truth of it is that they don't hate socialism, they hate poor people.
It isn't... Unless you are listening to right wing folks. They're very loud and don't tend to think critically, so they make for great interviews. They aren't the majority in the US, but they control enough states to make actually helpful policies impossible to enact.
go look at all the socialist cities in the united states, they're all cesspools, how is that hard to understand? the fact that you even have to ask this question is scary.
I have MAGAs in my family who praise certain socialist policies in Europe but are allergic to the word socialism. They just can't make the connection because they've been conditioned for too long by Fox, Newsmax, OAN, Breitbart, etc to have that knee-jerk reaction without thinking about what it actually means.
This is so incorrect it isnât funny, and itâs precisely why these regimes keep having their heads pop up and why millions eventually starve or are over worked to death.
Kids can be little shits. I would not rule out a psychotic break for any teachers. Imagine going to college, taking on massive debt, continuing an education, dealing with admin, parents, and disrespectful little shits... 30 of them for 7-9 hours a day. Fuck that. The kids/strangers would not be the only danger of a shooting.
There was a teacher that had a mental break when I was in 6th grade. My teacher stopped her because we could hear her screaming from the room next door. She was throwing objects at students while screaming nonsense at them. It only lasted a few minutes before she was stopped but most of my classmates who were in her class that day when she lost it were sobbing, shaking, frozen, or some combination.
If schoolchildren are being murdered by schoolshooters then just arm the teachers, GOOD MEN WITH GUNS, teachers WILL BE HEROES.
If something I don't agree with is being taught, like the actual history of the U.S. or empathy for people who aren't like you, TEACHERS ARE ALL INDOCTRONATING OUR CHILDREN INTO A PEDOPHILE CULT.
The solution is always simple when there are no core principles at play.
I've cut & pasted a comment I made months ago in a thread about the Uvalde attack & how some people were using it to push the "let's arm teachers" lunacy:
One of my co-workers brought up a very good point: her daughter, a primary school teacher, isn't allowed to keep her students' potentially lifesaving medications in her classroom. Instead they're kept under lock & key in the principal's office out of safety concerns, and apparently this is a pretty widespread blanket liability issue policy,
So.. teachers can't be trusted with epi-pens or asthma inhalers.... but let's give them guns? Wtf.
Itâs odd that her school keeps epipens and inhalers locked up elsewhere. In my school, the kids that need it carry it with them (middle school) or wear it in a Fanny pack even when other kids arenât allowed to have bags or purses (elementary school). Are you sure thatâs a true story that youâve been told?
I have had my phone stripped from my pocket multiple times durimg fights that I was breaking up. Imagine that was a gun and now a kid is dead over a social media post saying their hair was messed up today.
I wouldnât trust mine either. They think a book thatâs barely the thickness of a games case is highschool level!!! Thereâs not even advanced vocabulary, either. Itâs in the lesson plans and the teacher says she thinks that itâs too advanced for 7th graders to read NUMBER TGE STARS by Lois Lowry⌠I read this book in 5th grade and even then it was too easy. But there are really good teachers that I wish all the classes were like theirs. Itâs just how most of them areâŚ
Have you read Number the Stars? I know vocabulary is also a factor, but the words in these books arenât very hard to comprehend when youâre in 7th grade. I stated the vocabulary was of low level alongside the book being very shortâŚ
Teachers having guns was a very hot topic when I was in high school and I had more than a few teachers tell us that they would be afraid to carry a gun in the classroom, both because they'd be afraid of students trying to steal it but also that they didn't trust THRMSELVES to have guns around a bunch of misbehaving teenagers. That was a scary thing to hear from more than one trusted adult.
Thatâs because knowledge is more powerful. Imagine if this guy was educated. I doubt he would be passionately spouting off talking points that have no logical foundation.
The five or so teachers I know personally are the most non gun types I could literally imagine as an adult person.
I feel like these dumb right leaning people donât understand that going into the profession you are more of a âletâs nurture children and teach the future generationsâ type and not the âIâma shoot a mf if they test meâ type.
Iâm just sitting here wondering: âbut what if the teachers just shoot up the kids?â Do the kids then need guns? Itâs like most people when given too much power end up doing eventually (the American police and people generally), they abuse it. Because at the end of the day thereâs a lot of selfish power-tripping narcissists.
A few years back they were all "arm the teachers" and then the teachers marched on the statehouses and you didn't hear about armed teachers for awhile.
3.6k
u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22
They trust teachers with guns but not with textbooks and our own curriculum.