The Racism of the ‘Anti-Racists’: San Diego’s ‘Educators’

In San Diego Public Schools Will Overhaul Its Grading System To Achieve 'Anti-Racism', Reason’s Robby Soave explains:

District officials evidently believe that the practice of grading students based on their average score is racist, and that an active effort to dismantle racism necessitates a learning environment free of the pressure to turn in assignments on time. As evidence for the urgency of these changes, the district released data showing that minority students received more Ds and Fs than white students: Just 7 percent of whites received failing grades, as opposed to 23 percent of Native Americans, 23 percent of Hispanics, and 20 percent of black students.

Again, statistics -- the last refuge of damned lyers. What do these statistics tell you about any actual, individual student’s learning issues? Absolutely nothing. Soave hits the nail on the head:

In any case, ending these kinds of grades doesn't actually eliminate the underlying inequities that produced the disparate Fs. It may actually cover those inequities up: Given that grades are a tool for evaluating students' progress, the district is essentially announcing that it will no longer gather as much evidence about the negative social phenomena it would probably like to address. Better grades do not mean students will suddenly have a better grasp of the material. They certainly won't be better prepared for college (where traditional grades are very much still a thing).

Indeed, this comes perilously close to addressing poverty by no longer tallying the number of homeless people—or, to use a timely example, President Donald Trump's frustration that increasing COVID-19 testing will make the epidemic look worse. Coronavirus cases exist even if they go undetected; similarly, minority students who are falling behind their classmates will be falling behind even if their teachers aren't giving them Fs.

I hate the term “inequity” as it is used today. Mirriam-Webster defines “inequity” as “an instance of injustice or unfairness.” What instances of injustice or unfairness do these statistics identify? Absolutely none. They identify averages divided by “race”—that is, skin color—or national origin. But since the only human entity that exists is the individual, group averages tell you nothing about individuals. And the individual is who you must focus on if you want to explain statistical differences. Statistics only inform, and as Joel Best explains, more often than not inaccurately. You can learn nothing about individuals by studying groups. You can only understand group statistics by focussing on the individuals that make it up. What can any individual within the group do to improve his/her study habits, etcetera?

Of course, focussing on the individual would require adopting the principle of individualism, the only antipode to racism, because racism is a manifestation of collectivism, individualism’s antipode. The problem is, the San Diego “educators” are collectivists. And collectivism is the most inequitable way to judge people. What can be more unjust or unfair than to judge any individual by the color of his skin, or national origin?

So San Diego’s alleged educators are judging the Native American, Hispanic, and black students who fail according to the current grading standards, as a homogenous group, as inherently incapable of passing objective standards by reason of color and national origin. This, in the name of “anti-racism.” *

Further, students who do pass are being robbed of their success. Is this just ? Is this fair? Is this just and fair to the 77% of Native Americans, the 77% of Hispanics, and the 80% of Blacks who achieve good grades, let alone the 93% of successful white students? Is it just and fair to tear down achievement? How will it help the failing students to better themselves to destroy objective standards of education?

This is not to say that methods of measuring educational achievement and progress can’t be flawed, or in need of improvement.

But these statistical rationalizations have nothing to do with education. They have everything to do with the collectivists worldview, which sees individual identity as having nothing to do with content of character. It is Egalitarianism, the anti-natural idea of universal functional equality--that any difference in achievement is inherently a problem that must be “fixed”. It is collectivism. It is racism. It is evil.

* [John McWhorter, the Columbia University professor and scholar with 1776Unites, identified the nature of this phenomena long before it went “mainstream.” in a 2015 paper McWhorter analyzed “Antiracism, Our Flawed New Religion.” McWhorter observes: “Opposition to racism used to be a political stance. Now it has every marking of a religion, with both good and deleterious effects on American society.”]

Related Reading:

The Racism of the ‘Anti-Racists’

The Racism of the 'Anti-Racists': 'This New America' - Apartheid?

The Racism of the ‘Anti-Racists’: The NJ State Budget

The Racism of the ‘Anti-Racists’: NJ Governor Murphy’s Strange and Discriminatory ‘Baby Bonds’ Scheme

An Anti-Racist Education for Middle Schoolers by ROBBY SOAVE for Reason

Related Viewing:

Insane Leftists Want to CANCEL GRADING in School by Yaron Brook, sectioned from Is Grading Conditioning us to be Capitalist?: A review of the video Grading is Capitalist Conditioning by Ryan Hibbs.