🇳🇱
Just a reminder. Biden started is wntire career with one purpose in mind... keeping segregation alive. I will never vote for the most racist politician alive today... never.
@freemo@qoto.org @unabomber@social.here.blue
There seems to be some controversy about this article.
The fact-check article linked in another comment states:
Based on our research, the post is PARTLY FALSE. It contains two claims, one true and one false. It's true that Biden said mandatory busing to integrate schools would lead to his children growing up in a "racial jungle." It's false that he said, "I don't want my children to grow up in a jungle, a racial jungle."
And the article you linked about the hearing only states about the busing part being an atom bomb of integration."However, in my opinion, it is an absolute disaster. I once said on the floor of the Senate that busing is the atom bomb of integration."
From those 2 links alone you can determine that Biden is against integration via busing. But he hasn't claimed to be against integration with other means with the resources given.Wait we are talking about two things... 1) what did he say (which is the only thing the fact check article seems to disagree with)... and 2) if we agree about the interpritation about segregation. Lets address each seperately.
> There seems to be some controversy about this article.
The fact-check article linked in another comment states:
>
> Based on our research, the post is PARTLY FALSE. It contains two claims, one true and one false. It's true that Biden said mandatory busing to integrate schools would lead to his children growing up in a "racial jungle." It's false that he said, "I don't want my children to grow up in a jungle, a racial jungle."
Except he did say that, or rather, a quote that is almost identical.
As I recently posted, here is what he actually said, vs what the article said...
What he said (and i proved): "Unless we do something about this, my children are going to grow up in a jungle, the jungle being a racial jungle"
What the article claims he said: "I don't want my children to grow up in a jungle, a racial jungle"
Now ask yourself, do you think it is honest of the article to just say "he didnt say that" and label it as false? Or do you think its misleading not to mention that the quote just was worded very slightly off, and they should have shared the real quote and basically labeled it as true but having a typo? Here is the link tot he transcript:
> From those 2 links alone you can determine that Biden is against integration via busing. But he hasn't claimed to be against integration with other means with the resources given.
What other means or resources are you talking about? Buses are literally the sole way kids get to school aside from mothers driving them, which oddly enough would also have not been allowed due to the same reason as the bussing.
The way it works in the USA is schools have regions and kids in that region will get bussed to school. What was proposed at the time is mixing the regions, half the kids from the black school in the black district during segregation are permitted to go to the white school and vice versa, the districts are combined.
The only other way to integrate a black child to a white school, other than letting them attend the school by overlapping the districts (what we talk about when we saying bussing) is to physically move where they live....
Also lets not forget, this is hardly his only racist position, nor was this hearing a single fleeting moment.
@freemo@qoto.org @unabomber@social.here.blue
It's that article of nyt.com you linked that I took the 2nd quote from, actually.
But this anti-busing thing, reading from
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/1401-school-busing-hearings-1981/720c19a5e1cf89938c57/optimized/full.pdf#page=1
and even
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uiug.30112104078842&view=1up&seq=256
makes me think he's hung up about the technicalities of using the court to enforce busing instead of using other (more proper?) means of eliminating desegregation.
I don't know about claims of him being racistic in other situations, I'm merely focusing on this one particular article, the quote (that might be wrong or merely just a bit off) and the reasoning behind his rationale about busing. He's wording it very long-winded but so far my opinion is that he wants other ways to eliminate desegregation and that busing is kinda 'forced' in a wrong way (according to him).
Okj so we are abanoning the racist comment and sticking to his views, thats fine, and even useful, lets do that.
So your claiming he wants desegregation, but just opposes white people being "forced" to take in the blacks in their school?
I mean ok, that doesnt make much sense to me, but if thats what he is saying, can you remind me what solutions he did propose? Because aside from bussing (which is basically a fancy way of saying a person from a black segregated school is allowed to take the bus to a white school)... what other solution is there? I mean busses are the only way they get to school, so, what alternatives is he even talking about then? It makes no sense.
What it sounds like is you took his very racist politicial position, listen to his political nonsense that rteally was saying nothing and you ran with it... like ok he said "I am all for desegregation, I just opposse every law that has been brought up to allow desegregation and proposed no alternatives myself".... okkkkkkkkkk... and how is bussing specifically a racial jungle? What?
@freemo@qoto.org @unabomber@social.here.blue
He doesn't want it court-ordered, but also doesn't want to stop desegregation looks like:
"It is difficult for two reasons. First, we want to stop court-ordered busing, but at the same time not undo the basic ruling in Brown. Nor do we want to prevent the alternative things that can be done to end segregation."
And from this paragraph onwards he gives his reasoning why busing wasn't a good idea (and I'm not going to copy and paste all that as that pdf is atrocious to copy from):"It is a failure for several reasons. First, it is a failure because it does not achieve its purpose. It has resulted in dismantling many good black schools as well as white schools. It has not generally benefited black or white students."
...
"... I think pushing busing in a way in which it goes beyond the constitutional mandates is like throwing a bus through the civil rights window. I think it has repercussions that are extensive in terms of the ultimate objective of seeing that we get integrated neighborhoods, of seeing that we eventually eliminate job discrimination, of seeing that we change housing patterns, of seeing alteration of the tax structure."
I did encounter an opinion piece from 2020 of somebody who describes this busing issue like I kind of suspected is the case going on:https://medium.com/view-from-space/school-integration-and-joe-biden-1f58fe4a1eb3
You may or may not agree with it, but I found him wording this issue in such a way that aligns with how I feel about it after reading the aforementioned articles.
I have to disengage now as real life is calling me. My resources are depleted at this point anyway.
> He doesn't want it court-ordered, but also doesn't want to stop desegregation looks like:
>
> "It is difficult for two reasons. First, we want to stop court-ordered busing, but at the same time not undo the basic ruling in Brown."
When he says he doesnt want it court ordered, he isnt talking about forcing a black kid who doesnt want to go to a white school to go. He is talking about ordering schools to pick up black children who are within the radius to go to the school.... in other words "I love desegregation its great, so long as school principles can choose to desegregate if they want and as long as courts wont force a school to accept or pick up a black student, then yea I support it".... come on now, if you dont support **requiring** schools to let in black people, and to pick them up on your bus... then doesnt it sound a little silly to say he isnt against desegregation? Seriously, you cant see the political double speak here?
> Nor do we want to prevent the alternative things that can be done to end segregation.
Soooo... he wants to desegregate, he is just against forcing all-white schools to allow black people to go to the school by requiring them to pick them up on their busses?
What!?
It doesnt even make sense.., but ok those alternatives.... I mean none exist I know of... Like what other alternatives to desegregation is there?
> It is a failure for several reasons. First, it is a failure because it does not achieve its purpose.
More nonsense... it didnt achieve its purpose? The purpose was to allow blacks to go to white schools if they wanted... Sounds like it exactly achieved its purpose.
> It has resulted in dismantling many good black schools as well as white schools. It has not generally benefited black or white students.
No, it hasnt.. and again nonsensical racist mumbojumbo... How does bussing a black kid to the white school "dismantle" the school Either it was a shithole and all the blackkids wanted out, in which case the school was shit and should be dismantled. Or it was a great school so the kids/parents would be happy to keep their kids in it.
What he really meant to say is "While black kids could now go to my expensive well funded white kid school, that might mean my white kid winds up at a shitty black school. I dont want that for my kid so im gonna pretend im not racist and try to stop this"
I am kinda shocked you bought the whole "mixing white and black kids in the same school is the same thing as dismantling the school" and are selling that as a reasonable perspective.
> It has not generally benefited black or white students.
You think this is a reasonable statement. To say that letting a black kid choose if they want to go to the white-only school or black-only school should not be allowed by the courts because it wont
benefit anyone? Can you really say that with a straight face.
> With the resources given (those links and articles) I cannot determine what his actual proposed solution would've been. But he did mention:
>
> ... I think pushing busing in a way in which it goes beyond the constitutional mandates is like throwing a bus through the civil rights window. I think it has repercussions that are extensive in terms of the ultimate objective of seeing that we get integrated neighborhoods, of seeing that we eventually eliminate job discrimination, of seeing that we change housing patterns, of seeing alteration of the tax structure.
Not sure that is even a hint of a solution for desegregating schools in that statement.
Remember its important to note busing means "Forcing the school to pick up black kids that are nearby and giving them the same resources (access to transportation to school) the white kids have in their area"... really important to keep that in mind when we see the word "bussing" as it was an intentionally manipulative term Biden and his supporters used at the time.
So he is saying what exactly here..."Letting black kids have exactly the same access to educational resources as whites by being allowed to take the same bus and attend the same school is wrong, and i will not support that..." then he goes on to list why basically saying how there is still racism in workplaces and neighboorhoods.
Again amazed you dont see the idiocy in this sort of backpeddling... so integrating schools doesnt help with racism int he workplace, therefore you dont support that solution... ok so does he also oppose integrating whites and blacks int he workd place because doing so wont solve the problem of segragation in our schools... The logic is at best a thin veil to hide some pretty clear racism.
The more quotes you dig up the more it shows he was motivated by racism and just polticking some responses that make it sounds like he isnt an asshole.. thats it.. and its pretty transparent.
> I did encounter an opinion piece from 2020 of somebody who describes this busing issue like I kind of suspected is the case going on:
https://medium.com/view-from-space/school-integration-and-joe-biden-1f58fe4a1eb3
I will give it a read. But a quick scan notices not a single source linked in the post other than the congressional transcript itself... a bit worried how valuable it might be. But ill read and form an opinion.
Keep in mind I went to school and grew up during the 80s when biden was still a central figure head on the topic and where I was actually living the issue (as a small child). So, I dont really need a recap without cited sources on something i was alive through and a part of. But I will read it all the same later today.
> You may or may not agree with it, but I found him wording this issue in such a way that aligns with how I feel about it after reading the aforementioned articles.
You are always welcome to disagree, no matter how wrong or how obvious it is that you are wrong you may be, you are still welcome to do so :)
> I have to disengage now as real life is calling me. My resources are depleted at this point anyway.
No worries, hope you have a great rest of your day.
