For The Children

As this is written, the general trend in research indicates that children – under 10-ish – suffer exceptionally mild symptoms of Covid, frequently none at all, and may not even transmit it when infected (which may or may not be related to the observation that asymptomatic people may not spread it, either).

At the same time, the nation’s teachers’ unions are demanding a near-complete lockdown, including another stretch of “distance learning” – which for many children is the worst possible way to learn, amplifying the stultifying effects of sitting in a desk with the boredom of never leaving home at all – even if the home isn’t an unpleasant or cramped place to be, as indeed it is for many, largely inner-urban children. And that’s for kids where learning at home is even an option.

We’ve all heard the stories – children rendered paranoid about germs and masks, terrified about dying hooked up to a ventilator or being left orphaned, kept sometimes literally sequestered away from the world, including the in-person socializing that’s such a vital part of childhood, often by the same parents that are the most obnoxious, hectoring helicopter elders stereotype can muster (I have to figure that yesterday’s “helicopter parent” is todays’ Karen, while we’re on the subject).

So what’s that going to do to kids?

Probably nothing good.

And, given the shadiness and opacity of Governor Klink’s response, I have to wonder – what if, along with a “mail-in” election that could put the DFL’s mass of fraudulent registrations into play, “raising a generation of kids so insecure, damaged and anxious they make millennials seem like John Wayne in comparison” is the actual goal?

Anxious, insecure people who’ve had any notion of self-determination strained out of them are “progressivism’s” farm team.

Psychologically speaking, this quarantine may well be the biggest “grooming” exercise ever attempted.

12 thoughts on “For The Children

  1. I couldn’t help noticing the last bullet point, which seems to contradict the rest:

    “Altruism works better than compulsion. Reminders that a quarantine keeps others safe, and that health officials are grateful to people for quarantining is recommended. It helps to increase adherence and decrease negative mental health effects of the quarantine”.

    This is slightly off topic and a little long, but there is also some humor in it.

  2. Don’t forget about the teachers’ unions that also want to ban in home private tutoring because it will exacerbate the education gap between rich and poor children.

  3. Somebody told me that a large percentage of students simply disappeared, they never showed up for distance learning, never logged in, never participated.

    Like maybe 30%? Can anybody confirm that?

  4. Let me guess, you will nevertheless still be assessed increases in property taxes to pay for more teachers and improved classrooms and more schools and better equipment in the classrooms, etc. Because ItsforthechildrenTM, right? I guess teachers are NOT heros after all, just as they are not essential. The mask is slipping off? Finally? So fucking disgusting! But as long as you have Sgt. Schulz in charge, EdMinn will be fat, happy and grifting, all at the expense of the children they do not give a damn about.

  5. I’m good with just about anything that takes kids out of the direct control of the government education system and the teachers unions.

  6. Yes, the problem is, as was noted earlier, this will SO exacerbate the have vs have not’s divide that feudalism will seem like a more balanced system. But maybe that’s the intended consequence. ProgressTM at work.

  7. JD: what you describe absolutely happened in District 191 (Burnsville/Savage) but we don’t have numbers. I’m thinking how great it will be for an immigrant family with 3+ kids and no high speed internet to handle distance learning. I guess they can take them to the mosque and have the Imam teach them.

  8. I had a lot of fun talking to my socialist cousin who’s a teacher in Bloomington at a family gathering recently.

    Her: “Can you believe that they’re even talking about making teachers go back to the classroom at this point?!”
    Me: “Why is that controversial? All the evidence is that most of the kids stopped learning when they were sent home. Maria remarked that she was glad that they had taught all the stuff that was on the AP Stats exam or she wouldn’t have gotten her 5. Aren’t you concerned for the children? Are you willing to set back them all by a year at a minimum, and the minority students even more since they’re less well equipped and motivated for distance learning? I was told by the teacher’s union that teachers were heroes who were motivated by the needs of their students.”
    Her: “But it’s not safe! Schools are notorious throughout history as spreaders of infection, and students won’t wash their hands or practice good hygiene!”
    Me: “Yes, but this time is different. It doesn’t really affect kids under 18, and the littlest don’t seem affected at all. Are you saying that teachers, who know how to mask, and know how practice good hygiene are willing to steal educational opportunities for the students for the minimal chance that they’ll even be affected, much less have any serious consequences?”

    We went around many times, with her trying to make it seem dangerous, but without any real evidence to back up her position (as usual for the left, it’s about feelings more than reasons). For me, I just enjoyed the “for the children!” making her squirm and try to defend the “heroic” teacher image they love to present.

    On the other hand, my SIL’s school district did it interestingly. 90% of the parents wanted in class education (it’s a reasonably wealthy suburb), and 70% of the teachers wanted distance learning. So the district announced their policy would be that they would offer a hybrid approach, with teachers able to select teaching the (small) number of online classes by seniority. They wouldn’t force the less senior teachers to teach, but they would record it as a refusal to accept a class assignment. That refusal would be reflected in the next year, as the teachers who accepted the in-class assignments, even the newly hired, would have seniority over those who didn’t work. If any of the ones who did work decided not to work, those who declined work could get jobs back by seniority. Naturally the teachers are going nuts, but that’s the standard procedure in their contract for when a teacher declines to teach a class.

  9. in my neck of the woods a little over a 3rd of the students did not have the bandwidth (only 568Kbps via Centurylink) necessary to participate and a few had no Internet access at all. The school district declared the exercise a rousing success. Strange what constitutes success these days.

  10. nerdbert;

    Wow! Coincidentally, I had a very similar conversation with a Bloomington teacher, only I was less tactful than you were. I flat out said to her; “Well, then if you are too scared to go back to class, then you are no longer an essential worker, so let’s cut your pay accordingly. I also submit that during distance learning, you were only doing a part time job, so again, let’s cut teacher’s pay accordingly.” Man! Did she get triggered! I wish that I have brought up Pig’s point about the lower income residents of the city that didn’t have access to the tools for distance learning, like Somalis and Hispanics. Maybe this would have struck a cord with her, because that has been a frequent topic of the local school board meetings for years. After all, she has a BLM sign and a Phillips sign in her yard, so she wouldn’t want to be a hypocrite, would she? Cudos to your SIL’s school district on using the contract. That’s brilliant!

  11. Pingback: In The Mailbox: 07.30.20 : The Other McCain

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.