From the NYT:
By Christina Caron
Aug. 30, 2018
An Ohio school superintendent has apologized for a class exercise that asked middle school students to choose from a list of racially, ethnically and religiously diverse candidates to save or leave behind if Earth were “doomed for destruction.” …
The intent was to “promote tolerance and break down stereotypes,” he said, and help fulfill the district’s goal of engaging in conversations about “diversity awareness and social justice.”
The group exercise, which was given to four seventh- and eighth-grade classes at Roberts Middle School, was not the teacher’s invention and had been used at this and other schools for some years.
Dr. Nichols said the assignment was retrieved from the Center for Diversity and Inclusion at the University of Houston, which posts diversity activities online that are geared toward college students, faculty and staff.
Niya N. Blair, the center’s director, said on Wednesday that the exercise could help students understand their biases, both conscious and unconscious, but that it required proper guidance. Her team receives months of training before administering such exercises, she said.
In other words, Cuyahoga Falls school district didn’t pay the Center for Diversity and Inclusion enough money.
Here’s the exercise:
Instructions: The twelve persons listed below have been selected as passengers on a space ship for a flight to another planet because tomorrow the planet Earth is doomed for destruction. Due to changes in space limitations, it has now been determined that only eight persons may go. …
Your task is to select the Eight (8) passengers who will make the trip. On your own, take approximately 5 minutes and rank order of the passengers from one to twelve based on those who you feel are most deserving to make the trip with one being most deserving and twelve being least deserving.
Why is “deserving” the only criterion? Shouldn’t the highest priority be those who are most likely to help the group survive and reproduce?
Next, the entire group will come together and decides [sic] as a group the eight (8) passengers who will make the trip. PLEASE NOTE: When you make your decision as a group EVERYONE must agree on the final eight passengers and come to a consensus. You are NOT allowed to vote or take a ‘majority rules’ decision.
As we’ve all been informed over and over recently, voting and “majority rules” are anti-democratic.
Original passenger list:
____an accountant with a substance abuse problem
____a militant African-American medical student
____a 33 year old female Native American manager who does not speak English
____the accountant’s pregnant wife
____a famous novelist with a physical disability
____a 21-year old, female, Muslim international student
____a Hispanic clergyman who is against homosexuality
____a female move star who was recently the victim of a sexual assault
____a racist armed police officer who has been accused of using excessive force
____a homosexual male, professional athlete
____an Asian, orphaned 12-year old boy
____60-year old Jewish university administrator
All I can say is: We’re doomed.
The human race wouldn’t last three weeks in outer space with any possible combination of these dozen on board.
It would be interesting to construct an End-of-the-World experiment like this in which one possible outcome is the utter elimination of the white race from humanity’s survivors. In the Current Year, how many students would choose that outcome? How many administrators would?
This reminds me that back in 2013 I wrote about how a few brave researchers have adopted the classic trolley problem in ethics to measure just how bloodthirsty liberals are in principle toward whites:
If a runaway trolley were about to smash into a bus containing 100 trapped members of the Harlem Jazz Orchestra, would you push a wholly innocent man named Chip Ellsworth III onto the tracks to stop the accident? What if the bus held 100 members of the New York Philharmonic and the guilt-free man’s name was Tyrone Payton?
Would your politics have any relevance to whether you’d prefer to kill the white man to save the black musicians or to kill the black man to save the white musicians?
In a fascinating 2009 academic paper by four social psychologists, “The motivated use of moral principles,” UC Irvine students who identified as politically conservative were found to be racially evenhanded. When given the scenario about killing Chip to save 100 Harlemites, conservatives were no more or less likely to agree it’s the right thing to do than when told to ponder killing the man with the cornerback’s name to save 100 classical musicians.
In striking contrast, liberal students displayed greater bloodthirstiness when presented with the scenario that gave them an opportunity to kill the WASP to help the blacks. This liberal desire to shove a white man to his death to salvage blacks rather than a black man to salvage whites was extremely statistically significant (p = .002).