> I definitely see your point around a lot of people trying to be so inclusive, they end up being somewhat racist.

But it’s not inclusiveness at all, it’s a caste system. In academic liberal spaces, non-whites are not “included” on the same terms as whites. We are bucketed into a separate caste subject to different standards and expectations. And that caste system plays out in routine social interactions, because white people afraid of being called “racist” will not treat you the same.

Calling it “heritage” instead of identity doesn’t change anything. Your average second-generation non-white American has weak ties to any non-american society. My kids have no meaningful ties to Bangladeshi society, only superficial ones. They can’t, and they wouldn’t even like it if they did. So the only outcome of talking to them about their “heritage” would be to encourage them to see themselves differently from their peers based on connections that are at best superficial.

As to your point about “banning”—we’re not banning the book club. This law is about school libraries. People are voting for what kind of ideas their children are socialized into, which is one of the fundamental rights as a parent.

▲

dctoedt 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

> People are voting for what kind of ideas their children are socialized into, which is one of the fundamental rights as a parent.

Wait, I thought you were all about how Western society has gone too far in the direction of individual rights?

And assuming your "fundamental rights as a parent" premise (purely for the sake of argument): The rest of us have a pretty-compelling interest in how each other's kids — our future fellow adults — are being raised.

▲

rayiner 2 days ago | parent [-]

I agree the community has a strong interest in how children are socialized. That’s exactly what’s happening here: Florida voters have exercised their power over government schools to vindicate the community’s right to decide how children should be socialized.

You’re also proving my point about why it’s so critical to strictly control who is allowed into your community. Once people are allowed into the community, they get to participate in deciding how the community collectively socializes children. That means communities have a strong interest in excluding people who aren’t like minded.

	▲	dctoedt 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		> You’re also proving my point about why it’s so critical to strictly control who is allowed into your community. "Strictly control[led]" is a line-drawing function — and needs to remember that life is a movie, not a snapshot, and so patience is needed. EDIT: Growing a society seems not unlike raising children: Society needs kids to grow into adults, and sometimes that means gritting your teeth and being patient .... Example: Many of my own immigrant ancestors, those on the non-Aryan branches of our family tree, probably wouldn't have been let in under today's MAGA criteria. (Even my German-immigrant ancestors faced hostility from the "real Americans.") Yet each successive generation in this country has done just a bit better, thank you very much. Example: In this morning's home-delivery Times, Cardinal Dolan is quoted as recalling about the decades-long progress of the Irish migration to America — who were definitely considered ubermenschen by many American nativists of the time: <quote> “He [19th-century Archbishop John Hughes] was frustrated about raising money,” remarked [Cardinal] Dolan, who wore Hughes’ pectoral cross on a cord around his neck as he described the new artistic addition. “He said, ‘This cathedral will be built on the pennies of immigrants.’” Dolan noted that by contrast, raising $3 million to underwrite the creation, installation, lighting and conservation of the Cvijanovic mural took less than a day — paid for, he added with a chuckle, by “the big checks of the grandchildren of the immigrants.” </quote> (Emphasis and extra paragraphing added; my first-generation Irish-American grandmother told of seeing signs here and there: No Irish need apply.) https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/14/arts/design/st-patricks-c...

▲

jtanderson 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I can’t quite read this without feeling there some significant over-generalizations and assumptions being made. My experience with people of various races, cultures, and backgrounds has not exhibited any unilateral caste system mentality. I’ve spent plenty of time in academia and, while it certainly has issues, has not been quite so dystopian.

In the end, if we’re just comparing anecdata, this isn’t going to be productive.

	▲	rayiner 3 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		JD Vance had a comment about his Appalachian ancestors who “built this country with their bare hands.” Find a white person to say something similar in one of your liberal places. Then find a black or mexican american person to say something similar. You know what the reaction would be even if you’ve never experienced it first hand. That’s the caste system: among other things, ethnic identity is condemned for one caste, while being lauded in the other caste. There’s dozens of other examples, of course. Admissions, hiring, and promotions are often subject to explicit or implicit racial considerations. It’s naive to believe that the same people who are required by institutional policies to think about your skin color when they hired you or admitted you or when they decided to promote you or give your a research grant aren’t thinking about it in daily interactions as well.
	▲	3 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[deleted]