Good Schools, Andrew, Richard Dawkins, Darwin and Evolution

SELECTED
CONTENTS:

"...every group that wishes to see conflicting interests resolved reasonably, or is wise about the conditions under which it enjoys its own freedom, must be profoundly concerned with the state of freedom of speech and assembly, freedom of inquiry and teaching, freedom of press and other forms of communication, freedom of cultural opportunity and development. For in large measure intelligent moral choice depends upon them."
--Sidney Hook (1902-1988), disciple of John Dewey, and champion of pragmatism and democracy

Andrew is a Typical Darwinist, I Believe

Andrew is not unhappy with my demonstration of Darwin's racist predisposition. In fact, I think he is quite happy with Darwin's hatred of the African peoples.

Andrew, I believe, represents a very large segment of the population; that is, those trained under the heavy hand of Darwinian "educators." Andrew is an honest young man, and I respect him for that attribute. He and I would agree about very little, I suspect. But we do have one thing in common -- he honestly represents what the Darwinian doctrine is all about, just as I honestly represent what it is not. Andrew is, in my opinion, the archetypical twentieth-century young Darwinist. He represents everything good and honest about this group. I want to thank Andrew for candidly expressing his views.

While I do intend to revisit (with commentary) Andrew's letter at a later time, I will now simply publish his entire letter verbatim. If you are an honest Darwinist, I am sure you will identify with Andrew's words.

(Note: I have received criticism for printing Andrew's letter, in that some believe that it does not meet academic standards. I would agree that the writer is not a scholar. That is fine, because he does not pretend to be a scholar. He is of high school age, and in his very earthy way I believe he represents his generation well. I make no apologies for publishing Andrew's letter on Goodschools.)

Andrew Writes:

[Dear Goodschools:]

Hello, Im a 17 y/o white/mexican male from california and i stumbled
into your sight kind of by accident but one i looked around i noticed
the pro-black theme and the attack of everything that could send a
racist message. Now what im wondering is how can you attack racism with
a pro-black theme? I think what you say when you lets fix schools, is
really lets fix schools so african americans (i hate that term) dont
look so bad in the stats. Thats rascist, be honest with me, you support
the black cause for black people, theres nothing wrong with that of
course but still, its what you do. But while were on the subject, whats
with the term african - american anyway? Nobody calls me a european
american, or mexican american, so why do we have to abide by silly
terms, im not even sure most black youth these days would even agree
with it, once your american your american and if your african your
african until you become an american, and also, using this term is only
going to stereotype africa as full of blacks, is that what you want? If
you have any non racist intentions youd refer to yourself as a "person"
and as the people in your papers "persons or people". And on another
note, do you understand Hitler at all, a simple racist does not go that
far, hitler was there because of destiny and he knew it, and using
common sense, looked at Africa and its productivity full of black
people, looked at Europe and its productivity full of more or less,
white people, and compared the two and made a simple generalization on
race, and incase you didnt know theres 3 basic types. Caucasian, Black,
and Asian, and the Jews, are not black or asian, but yes, caucasian,
just like him. So his motives for targeting the jews were not racist,
but more vengeful, or economical. Anyway you get what im saying, the
pro-black stuff is getting old, this stuff isnt going to fly in another
20 years, so why dont you be the first to stop dividing us into
unnessecary groups like black and white, and be fair with your analysis
of history and times, nobody in school is reading darwin and thinking
blacks are subhuman, and if they are thats because it might make sense
to them just like it did to darwin, and oh well people are people. The
world is 2000 years in the making and outside of africa the blacks have
not played a big part except in roles of all work and no influence
(slavery) so dont expect it to suddenly revolve around your group, your
time will come, but if you rush it your only going to run into a wall we
put up to slow you down.

My response:

Come back at a later time for my comments. For now, simply let Andrew's honest words sink in -- it will help you to understand better what our public school system is all about.

Please let me know what you think about Andrew's letter.

Would you like to see related letters and my comments?

--Mike Carrier (MA, NYU--Graduate School of Arts and Science)

This site features a frank presentation of issues facing parents, taxpayers and schools in reforming schools in the twenty-first century. Good Schools promotes good schools, and explains what is necessary to achieve good schools. We are convinced that good schools can be obtained only with sound curriculum, which does not include the teaching of Darwin's theory of origin, or Darwin's theory of evolution. We believe that local school boards need to be empowered, and the influence of teachers' unions ought to be limited to labor-related issues. Teachers' unions should have no say in curriculum.

We are convinced that the teachings of Darwin, particularly Darwin's teachings on evolution, and Darwin's theories on origins, ought not be taught as fact. Darwin and Darwin's theories are not generally accepted by contemporary physicists and cosmologists, and, therefore, Darwin and Darwin's theories ought not be accepted whole-cloth by our schools of education, and ought not be presented as fact in public schools.

Because Richard Dawkins has set himself up as the number one defender of Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, we will go to some length explaining Dawkins' Darwin defenses, and we will do our best to explode Dawkins' Darwin defenses.

We seek to show from Darwin's own hand that Darwin, and Darwin's theory of evolution, are racist at the core. Darwin was a racist, Darwin's theory of evolution is racist, and Darwin's theory of origins is racist.

We further seek to show that Darwin's theory of evolution is not scientific. We show that racism, more than science, was behind Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, and Darwin's theory of origins.

Some of the terms commonly used on this site are: Darwin, Dawkins, schools, public schools, education, gun control, teachers, John Dewey, Littleton, racist, racism , school choice, African American, Sidney Hook, evolution, and Mike Carrier.

Bottom line--good schools require work. Good schools do not just happen. We need good schools, if we are to have a good nation.