• halferect
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    74
    ·
    1 year ago

    Which is weird since conservative politics is all about cutting funds for schools, gutting the department of education completely, no pre k or free lunches for kids, and getting rid of a large portion of our law enforcement. Just doesn’t make sense why any one who cares about education or safety would be conservative

    • FarceMultiplier@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because modern conservatism doesn’t actually care about those things. Their philosophy boils down to:

      • I got mine
      • I hate what I don’t understand
      • I refuse to change
      • I am able to tell myself lies about how good it used to be, because I never really understood how bad it was for others back then
      • Others don’t really matter (see first point)
    • alcoholicorn [comrade/them, doe/deer]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      getting rid of a large portion of our law enforcement

      I’m pretty certain neither party supports this. After 2020, every state and city, including dem-run ones increased police funding.

      If you’re talking about republicans complaining about the FBI because it went after Trump, they’re just as likely to abolish prisons because some jan 6ers got convicted. These people like those institutions too much when they’re doing their primary purpose of neutralizing leftist political movements.

      Also you’re not private property nor do you own significant capital. It’s not your law enforcement.

      • TheForkOfDamocles@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        You should look past the Cato Institute’s analysis of the KC schools situation. For example, the summary and conclusion sections of this article from the University of Michigan law school show that the conservative criticisms are based on myth.

          • TheForkOfDamocles@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You may revise your opinion after reading the summary and conclusion, but maybe you just figure the liberals at Michigan Law can’t possibly understand all the nuances vs someone watching their local news.

            Also, it doesn’t have to be all or nothing. Your skimmed analysis of silly twists of numbers belies the full picture, and in my opinion, total desegregation without changing the major obstacles of the systemic segregation of the city’s real estate, was doomed from the start.

            BTW, I agree with you that merely throwing money at an issue without cause isn’t correct. One might argue against the ridiculous and constant over-budgeting of the military, for example. In KC, I believe it had many successes, though obviously not a complete realization of the goals (that shouldn’t have needed to be implemented in the first place).

              • TheForkOfDamocles@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                The Pentagon asked for less. It most certainly IS over-budget. When I say “the military” I mean the Military Industrial Complex, of course. I’m a supporter of our military, of the people actually in it. With a budget greater than the next ten countries combined, the M-I-C is outlandishly frivolous.

                Regarding this, but more to the KC schools topic, it seems like your philosophy of budgeting is that only 100% = success, and anything less = failure.

                  • TheForkOfDamocles@beehaw.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    1)Zero issue with what was spent. Why does it cost so much?

                    Cognitive dissonance much?

                    2)Almost zero success.

                    I disagree, but it’s way too complicated for you and I to hash out here, especially coming at the issue from opposite ends, you as a perhaps general citizen and me as a teacher. Maybe a long hangout at the corner coffee shop would be in order some day.

      • jennwiththesea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        How would they prove to you that the funding for schools is necessary? What studies do you require? How is the state going to conduct these studies (in your view), in a timely manner that will positively impact this generation?

        There is plenty of research showing, e.g., that fewer kids per teacher provides for better education. Studies that show the benefit of school nurses, counselors, and other wellness experts. All of this costs $$$, often way more money than any given community is willing or even able to put up. This is why strong state funding is so important, rather than relying on levies and bonds. Requiring your specific state to prove the value of teachers, special education, etc is quite an ask. Why isn’t the existing research good enough for you?

      • ZodiacSF1969@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m with you. I’m a conservative who believes we should support families, and that means making public schools a better place for the next generation.

        It’s unfortunate that the cost-cutting, austerity driving, regulatory capture enforcing conservatives are in charge of most right-wing parties at the moment. It doesn’t have to be that way.