A New York City public school handed out “white identity indicators” to Parents in eight categories ranging from “white supremacist” to “white abolitionist. In a tweet, the user wrote, “This is the new language of public Education. (Screenshot of tweet)
American schools are now becoming bastions of progressive indoctrination. The Oregon Department of Education is urging middle school teachers to use a “new math” curriculum that aims to “eliminate racism in math. The money behind this strategy is the famous Bill Gates Foundation.
At the bottom of A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction’s Home page, the only thank you to the project’s funder is the Bill Gates Foundation. This program has 25 educational partner organizations. Its curriculum statement no longer requires students to find the right answer; instead, teachers are encouraged to have students “come up with at least two answers that solve the problem,” as if 2+2 does not equal 4.
The “culprit” in the racism of mathematics is the objectivity of mathematics, and the left has identified “white supremacy” in the education system as the reason for the poor performance of minority students, pushing for “ethnomathematics ethnomathematics,” in which ethnic math teachers are instructed to “identify and challenge the ways in which math is used to defend capitalist, imperialist, and racist views.”
In fact, New York City is also promoting a “white identity index” that ranges from “white supremacist” (bad) to “white abolitionist” (good), with “There are eight rainbow transition bands, such as “white privileged” and “white sympathizers. A city public school principal handed out the indicator to all parents, asking them to reflect on how “white” they are in order to “work together to achieve equality in our community. Officials from the New York City Department of Education confirmed this, saying that anti-racism and diversity are at the heart of New York City.
Christopher Rufo of the Discovery Institute wrote in a tweet, “This is the new language of public education.”
Gates Foundation Grants $140 Million to Math for Equity
Over the past decade, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has provided $140 million to some of the education groups behind Fair Math, whose anti-racism resources are the source of new materials for the Oregon Department of Education. For example, Teach Plus, an organization dedicated to building a Culture of anti-racism in K-12 schools, has received more than $27 million in funding from the Gates Foundation. The organization’s board of directors includes Obama-era Secretary of Education John King Jr.
UnboundEd, for example, an organization dedicated to helping teachers “eradicate systemic racism in the classroom,” has received nearly $14 million in donations and has been funded by the Gates Foundation since 2015.
A total of 25 education organizations have received grants from the Gates Foundation as their latest attempt to bring critical race theory – the idea that American political and economic institutions are “inherently” racist – to schools.
These grants have a very sophisticated management system that is close to a corporate model. In addition to setting monthly goals, progress reports are reviewed every six months. In November, for example, educators must review the number of minority and multilingual students in math classes, and in May, teachers will assess how they are “dismantling the power structures in their classrooms.
The Bill Gates Foundation did not respond to a request for comment from this reporter, who received only an automated return email and no other response. The foundation’s website says its K-12 education grants “support schools’ efforts to improve student achievement,” especially for minority and low-income students.
According to the Washington Free Beacon, school districts and state education departments across the country have taken steps to incorporate critical race theory into K-12 curricula following the race riots sparked by Floyd’s death last summer.
The North Carolina Board of Education earlier this month approved an updated history curriculum that will teach second-graders “how various native, religious, gender and racial groups advocated for freedom and equality,” and fourth-graders will learn how “revolution, reform and resistance” shaped the state of North Carolina. North Carolina.
Impact investing: Mixing philanthropy and money-making
It’s common to think of investing as making money, and philanthropy as spending money on people in need. More than a decade ago, however, “venture philanthropy,” which “mixes” philanthropy and money-making, became the rage, dramatically changing the way people think about charity.
The Gates Foundation, like most charities, gives 5% of its total assets each year to maintain its status as a charitable foundation, with the benefit of tax deductions and corporate PR, and invests the other 95%. 2005 saw the Gates Foundation give about $1.4 billion, and in 2003 it earned $3.9 billion in investment returns on $26.8 billion in capital, a profit margin of about 15%. This is higher than the profit margins of many publicly announced for-profit companies.
This is where the concept of “impact investing” comes into play. Dissent Magazine published an article entitled “How Billionaires Rule Our Schools” (Winter 2011).
According to the article, the cost of K-12 public schools in the United States exceeds $500 billion annually, and contributions from the Gates Foundation, the Eli and Edith Broad Foundation, and the Walton Family Foundation total nearly $4 billion annually. While $4 billion is less than 1 percent of the $500 billion, the leverage of a few billion dollars can have an absolutely massive impact.
Philanthropic foundations look at philanthropy through the lens of “investment”: donor groups must make predetermined accomplishments, and the foundation conducts periodic evaluations to determine whether to make another donation. As states, desperate for funding, write about the prospects for reform at the foundation’s behest, the article reads, “Who says foundations (especially the Gates Foundation) don’t set government policy?”
While the policy does not allow private foundations to lobby government directly, they can “share their work experience” with lawmakers. The article makes the case that the three foundation giants, led by the Gates Foundation, are also intervening more directly in policy and politics in ways that “apply only to the super-rich.”
This is because donations from these foundations and others are not donations that leave the recipient free to engage in scientific research or education, but rather control over research, education, etc. under the guise of donations that require them to do what they want. The essence of the donation is not charity, but control and domination. And finally, the most worrying thing is that the foundation’s investment program is making a “mess” in public schools, and the damage may be irreparable.
The article concludes by saying that all children should have access to good public schools. Public schools should be run by officials who are accountable to their constituents. Taxpayers still fund more than 99% of the cost of K-12 education. Private foundations should not be setting public policy for them. The operation of the Big Three foundation giants is bound to undermine democracy, just as it undermines public education.
French investigative environmental journalist publishes book questioning
It is no coincidence that French investigative environmental journalist Lionel Astruc’s March 2019 investigative book, “The Bill Gates Foundation, the pinnacle of hypocrisy,” has a similar point of view. The book, co-authored by several investigative journalists, describes how Bill Gates was able to avoid paying billions of dollars in taxes by adopting a massive tax avoidance policy, and also describes The Gates Foundation’s investment program has led to an ultimate goal that not only fails to reduce the gap between rich and poor, but is, on the contrary, widening the gap between rich and poor.
Bill Gates has repeatedly said that there are only two ways to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor, either by increasing government taxes and giving some of the rich’s money to the poor, or by helping the poor through private foundations for the rich, and he personally prefers the second way because he thinks it is more effective. However, Astruc’s book proves that “similar foundations are detrimental to the overall development of society”.
Recent Comments