Equity’s goal is making everyone equally stupid so this checks out.

Oh cool, so not only have we not learned anything from no child left behind, but now we're not even going try to foster academic success - no, we need more dancing on desks! More wig snatching! Progress!

The next generation is going to be a bunch of overglorified google searching mouthpieces with no fucking attention span. True npcs.

Harrison Bergeron is the manual.

“You will each receive the same standard, sub-standard training” - Commander Sark

Something I've been thinking about for a few months, trying to now put it into words.

We see these things and wonder "where and when did liberalism go wrong? Because it wasn't always like this" And a lot of people reply that "this was always its end goal", and I think it's true that this is one possible end state for the ideology but isn't necessarily the only one. Liberalism's principles are vague and quite malleable, and can take many forms.

The liberalism of the past was dominated by masculine traits: the desire to excel, explore, and conquer. Organizations were hierarchical and run by individuals. Liberalism was a tool to those ends but was not an end itself. Which placed a limit on the ideology: if the tool is doing more harm than good for a particular application, you don't use it for that application. This form of liberalism is embodied by someone like Picard in TNG.

Modern liberalism is dominated by feminine traits: the desire to conform and get along. Organizations are flat and run by committee. Liberalism becomes an end unto itself, and as a consequence it has no limit. This is embodied by the HR department and DIE committee. The BAP sphere of the internet calls this the "Longhouse".

When seen though this lens, I believe the question of "where did liberalism go wrong?" becomes quite clear and obvious: when women started getting more involved in politics, and the masculine started to become subordinate to the feminine.

Again, literally degrading the education path for those with the capacity to learn on a greater scale is supposed to be "beneficial."

Honestly, this is undoubtedly going to be worse for equity even as they define it. At least that’s what I’m going to guess what will happen. See what you think, maybe I’m wrong:

Moves like this will largely happen in more diverse schools where administrators notice a discrepancy in the results among races. They aren’t as likely to happen in all-white schools where, hey, race can’t be the reason, some of these kids are just smarter than others. So if you are the parent of a high achiever, no matter the race, and your diverse school cuts honors, are you going to just accept the idea? Fuck no, parents move districts to get their kids a little extra playing time in basketball, of course they’re going to fucking get their kids transferred to a school where honors classes are still a thing. So you’ll end up with, essentially, whole schools that are “honors” schools in all but name, and only the dipshit kids and poor kids who can’t afford to transfer left behind at the schools where honors classes don’t exist. You will all but create an honors system anyway, it’s just that instead of having mixed schools of high achievers and kids that need more help, you’ll have schools that are all one or all the other. Notice I haven’t said that schools will be segregated by race, I’ll let everyone draw their own ideas of what the demographic makeup will be.

Short story long, admins don’t know modern parents in modern times if they think they’ll just chill out idly if they feel their district isn’t offering the options they think their kid needs to succeed. (I’m a parent myself with kids just recently entering school and I’m already blown away by how readily some families will pick up sticks and move just over their kids’ schools). And when you factor in families moving to a new area who may choose a home/neighborhood based on the school their kids would be in, the speed at which districts will become either shittier or better, depending on whether it axed honors programs or kept them, will only increase.

If you wanted to make it more likely that “underserved kids” (to use an SJW term) could overcome their disadvantages and succeed, you’d try to spread honors programs further, to get them into every school, even if some schools might have fewer qualifiers at first. But they don’t really want the disadvantaged to succeed, they want to get rid of advantage. They aren’t into creating opportunities for all to potentially shine, they’re into making sure everyone is the same shade of dull.

"equity" mongers deserve rope

This will cause all the asian and white families to move out to find better schools. This has happened for decades.

I went to a pretty good high school and took mostly honors classes, but a few non-honors. The honors classes were very smooth, serious, there were lulls from time to time but for the most part everyone there wanted to learn and not fuck around.

In one of my regular classes it was a race between a couple of retards to see who could get thrown out of class in the dumbest way, every day. The teacher wished they could just bar the middle easterners flat out but had to let em in every day, even though he knew every day at best he'd have to stop class field brain dead questions and at worse it added more paperwork to explain what happened.

So punish people who value education or who are naturally smart and for those who aren’t eligible for honors classes you don’t have anything for them to strive for

White kids used to have the option to test their way into good career tracks to get ahead, but communists are doing their best to cut that off.

It's always been this way. They don't know how to deal with gifted kids, make programs that sort of work, have parents force their kids into these programs, screw it up for the gifted kids, start calling the gifted kids mentally disabled, get more money for mental disability, and then notice all their numbers dropped.