On July 2, I post my thoughts on the 2007 Supreme Court ruling on schools using quotas to make schools "diverse". I think racial quotas are silly, and that people can figure out on their own how to deal with diversity.
UH history professor Marcus Daniel wrote an editorial criticizing the Supreme Court decision.
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Jul/03/op/FP707030304.html
I sent him my July 2, 2007 post http://pablothemadtiger.blogspot.com/2007_07_01_archive.html (scroll down to July 2, 2007 post)
Here is his silly email to me
---
Hiya Pablo,Thanks for your friendly email! I won't bother to go into all this with you as you clearly have opinions that brook no disagreement. The situation in Hawaii is different, mainly because of a history of US colonial occupation, although the "color-blind" approach of the Supreme Court represents a real threat to Hawaiians as well, hence the Akaka Bill. Unlike you I'm interested less in the issues of abstract principle than I am in the creation of a fair and just society. This is not the same as the "color-blind" legalism which has been used in the past (ie in Plessy) to justify profound racial abuses and the trampling of the 14th Amendment. Democracy and Justice are sometimes uneasy bedfellows, and letting people do what they want does not always produce justice viz, in the Jim Crow south which always had a white majority. According to your political principles, the south should be still be segregated. The assumption that animates the recent court decision, that the courts have nothing to say about the existing, and long-standing patterns of residential and racial segregation in our society, I find repellent. I often wonder whether people like you (and our beloved Supreme Court majority) would have been quite as keen advocates of "equality" for all in the period before Brown v. Board...personally I suspect your strident views would not have propelled you into the front lines of the civil rights movement. In fact, your arguments are exactly the same as those used by segregationists in the South, who always dressed white supremacy up in the garb of "equality" and "democracy." The point of my column was to show how this kind of simple-minded thinking will take us right back to a society of racial division and segregation. And the assumption of your message is that everybody prefers it that way anyway...except apparently the whites families clamoring to knock down the walls of "racial segregation" that keep them out of Kamehameha! If only they were as keen to send their kids to Farrington High or Waipahu (instead of maintaining their own exclusive residential/public school enclaves or sending their kids to Punahou and Iolani or one of the other all too numerous private schools in Hawaii) then none of this would be such a problem. Wonder why they aren't?
Aloha,Marcus
---
Here is my response to that silly e-mail
----
Your debate tactics is just inidirectly stating that "anyone who disagrees with the Radical Left is automatically is a Jim Crow Segregationist" You use those tactics to intimidate those who disagree with you from speaking out! That won't work with me!
The problem with Jim Crow was that Big Government told people where they could live, where they could go to school, where they could sit on the bus, who they could marry, etc. Big Government was interferring with people's choices in the Jim Crow era!
For the Brown vs Board of Ed, the African American family lived closer to the "white school" than the "black school". They argued they had the right to go to the school closer to them. And I agree with them!
And any African-American that wants to live in a mostly European-American suburb in the South should have the right to do that!
If you bothered to read my blogs, I am strong defender of immigration. (risking the strong hatred from the Radical Right) But you'll delibrately ignore that just because I believe government shouldn't chose the race of the school's demographics!
If you really believe I'm a segregationist, then answer the following questions
1) Why is that I (a Mexican/PuertoRican/German/Portuguse) am not living in East LA or South Bronx?
2) Why do I continue to live in areas dominated by Asians and Pacific Islanders?
I like living in Hawaii. If other Latinos want to come, I'll embrace that! If they rather stay in California instead of coming to Hawaii, who am I to tell them no? People have choices!
I've always been a minority in my neighborhood and I dont have any problem with that!
And if an African-American wants to live in Kahala, or a European-American wants to live in Waianae, that's fine with me! If a Guatemalan wants to live in Pearl City, that's fine with me! If a Samoan or a Micronesian wants to move to Hawaii Kai, that's fine with me.People have choices.
If a Filipino CHOOSES to live his whole life in Kalihi with other Filipinos, who is anyone to tell him no? If a Filipino CHOOSES to move to a Manoa or Kahala (areas with mostly Japanese and Euro-Americans) who is anyone to tell him no? (see, I'm being consistent)
You ask why aren't more white families aren't choosing Farrington or Waipahu high schools? Any white family that live in Kalihi or Waipahu would be able to go to those schools! And you will a find a few white kids in those schools. Yes, those families choose to be in a situation where they're a minority, but that's their choice!
Pablo Wegesend
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
I call for security too much?
I've worked at Central Middle School as a substitute teacher starting from Fall 2005 to Fall 2006. During the 2005-2006 school year, the principal was Ms Trew and the VP was Mr Ogawa. I got along with them, and they were very helpful.
However, they got replaced by Brian Mizuguchi and Cindy Yun-Kim, and things went sour in Fall 2006.
Last week, on July 19, 2007, I talked to the Hawaii Board of Education (BOE) about what goes on there. Ms Fisher was also there to talk about the corruption at CMS.
I know there's a risk in putting stuff on the Internet, but since I already testified in front of the BOE, it's already a matter of public record, so I might as well mention it on the blog.
Here's an outline of what I said. It's NOT word-for-word, just an outline
-----------
I am a substitute teacher working in the Honolulu District.
While working at Central Middle School during the fall 2006 semester, the principal told me that I was blocked from working at the school and he claimed that I "call sceurity too much".
Call security too much?
If a student is disruptive, disrespectful, and commiting repeat offenses, I have them sent to the office. (which is what I was told to do by substitute training course, and various school officials) If they refuse to go to the office, what am I supposed to. I can't drag them to the office. So I call security to get them out.
Teachers don't have time to counsel misbehaving students during classtime. We have to help the rest of students understand their lessons.
If an argument breaks out, I call security because it could turn violent. Even if I get the students to settle down temporarily, that won't stop them from retaliation after-school or off-campus. To prevent those things, I call security to get them out of class and send them to the counselor or vice-principal. It's their jobs to settle disputes.
I was told in substitute training course, that if I suspect a fight could occur, (even later in the day), I need to notify the office.
Yet the principal of Central Middle School says I "call security too much." His philosophy is dnagerous, in that it let problems fester until it gets worse.
Even when i question the principal on the issue, his reply was "want me to block you from the district?" That's not his job!
While the complex supervisor listened respectfully when I talked to her, she seemed to indirectly defend the principal's thought process on the security issue, and I should've been more clear on it with her.
The irony of all this was that the former vice-principal of Central Middle School (Mr Ogawa, in 2005-2006 year) told me to call security if a student is defiant. (Ogawa was no longer VP when CMS principal Mizuguchi said I "call security too much")
Other substitutes and former school officials thought what Mizuguchi said was "ridiculous"
I decide to talk the Board of Education, not so much for myself, but for the other teachers, the students and anyone else involved in Hawaii's public school system.
This isn't just about Central Middle School, it's about how all schools deal with student crisis.
----
After me and Ms Fisher testified, BOE member Mr Pennebacker asked DOE superintendent Ms Hamamoto (who was McKinley's principal when I was a student) to investigate this matter.
However, they got replaced by Brian Mizuguchi and Cindy Yun-Kim, and things went sour in Fall 2006.
Last week, on July 19, 2007, I talked to the Hawaii Board of Education (BOE) about what goes on there. Ms Fisher was also there to talk about the corruption at CMS.
I know there's a risk in putting stuff on the Internet, but since I already testified in front of the BOE, it's already a matter of public record, so I might as well mention it on the blog.
Here's an outline of what I said. It's NOT word-for-word, just an outline
-----------
I am a substitute teacher working in the Honolulu District.
While working at Central Middle School during the fall 2006 semester, the principal told me that I was blocked from working at the school and he claimed that I "call sceurity too much".
Call security too much?
If a student is disruptive, disrespectful, and commiting repeat offenses, I have them sent to the office. (which is what I was told to do by substitute training course, and various school officials) If they refuse to go to the office, what am I supposed to. I can't drag them to the office. So I call security to get them out.
Teachers don't have time to counsel misbehaving students during classtime. We have to help the rest of students understand their lessons.
If an argument breaks out, I call security because it could turn violent. Even if I get the students to settle down temporarily, that won't stop them from retaliation after-school or off-campus. To prevent those things, I call security to get them out of class and send them to the counselor or vice-principal. It's their jobs to settle disputes.
I was told in substitute training course, that if I suspect a fight could occur, (even later in the day), I need to notify the office.
Yet the principal of Central Middle School says I "call security too much." His philosophy is dnagerous, in that it let problems fester until it gets worse.
Even when i question the principal on the issue, his reply was "want me to block you from the district?" That's not his job!
While the complex supervisor listened respectfully when I talked to her, she seemed to indirectly defend the principal's thought process on the security issue, and I should've been more clear on it with her.
The irony of all this was that the former vice-principal of Central Middle School (Mr Ogawa, in 2005-2006 year) told me to call security if a student is defiant. (Ogawa was no longer VP when CMS principal Mizuguchi said I "call security too much")
Other substitutes and former school officials thought what Mizuguchi said was "ridiculous"
I decide to talk the Board of Education, not so much for myself, but for the other teachers, the students and anyone else involved in Hawaii's public school system.
This isn't just about Central Middle School, it's about how all schools deal with student crisis.
----
After me and Ms Fisher testified, BOE member Mr Pennebacker asked DOE superintendent Ms Hamamoto (who was McKinley's principal when I was a student) to investigate this matter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)