Thursday
Oct082009
So What is Arne Duncan Saying? A Tale of Two Presidents Photo Essay on "Safe Passage"
Thursday, October 8, 2009 at 8:59AM The Blogmother
We've covered the Derrion Albert case in two posts on this blog, but this just about broke my heart.
On Wednesday, Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, who ushered in an era of increased school killings, held meetings about the spate of violence in Chicago.
The quote that stuck out to me was one I have heard echoed in blog comments sections over the past two weeks. Basically the gist, that I got anyway, is "So what a kid died, Children die all the time!" But I could be wrong:
Was it an attempt to make sure that people minimize Chicago's out of control child death epidemic or highlight the woes of other cities whose children may have been neglected by the bright light of the media glare on Chicago's out of control child murder epidemic where 45 of its school children were murdered in the 2008-2009 school year?
My final thoughts on Chicago school kids having to walk through a gauntlet of violence to enter school.
In 1957 Black students in Little Rock had their paths to school blocked by an angry mob. Then U.S. President Eisenhower sent in the 101st Airborne Division of the U.S. Army to make sure they got to school safely. 
52 years later when Black students in Chicago are dodging bullets and violent gang members swinging railroad ties, the U.S. President sends the US Attorney General and the Secretary of Education to do what exactly?
And would those of you repeating "Its the parents responsibility" wake up and get a clue. Don't believe the hype, government is screwing up too!
Its the parents responsibility to raise children, but should those parents be abject FAILURES, it is society's responsibility to say:
"Hey, we know you have crappy parents, and that totally sucks, but we have this thing called rules and laws and we can't let you run around beating, shooting, raping and killing other citizens indiscriminately, so um, you have two charges, decline to sink into the abyss of barbarism, or face draconian consequences."
Two separate issues, one is no substitute for the other. The fundamental role of government, before health care, social security, transportation, drivers licenses, electricity, etc is to KEEP THE PEACE and maintain the common defense. Period. That's the first priority of any government. So wretched parents notwithstanding, the government is not absolved of its responsibility to maintain order on the streets. Especially where there are clearly identifiable patterns of violent behavior.
When it comes to ARMED CONFLICT, It is government's role, when indivduals fail on a massive scale to craft a solution or a process to solve together those problems which we cannot solve alone. Democracy cannot function in the midst of violent anarchy, neither can the average child.
I keep hearing all of these large sums of money people want to throw at this problem as if the solutions has to be high tech. If the problem is children being forced to walk through rival gang territory, the solution is called a SCHOOL BUS and neighborhood schools! Its called a massive police presence to stabilize violence plagued neighborhoods to allow the residents the same chance that people in Iraq and Afghanistan are being given. All of the 30 million dollar programs in the world aren't going to change life in Chicago if 85% of your kids are in poverty walking around with PTSD because they live in a war zone. Send in the National Guard already.
I could be wrong. Perhaps I'm jaded by covering attempts by individuals, institutions and government to minimize violence for over two years. What say you?
"The violence is bad. You get jumped going to the store," said Porch, 17, standing near the spot where a 16-year-old schoolmate was beaten to death last month. "It seems like all the good kids are dying first, and the bad ones keep doing what they're doing. I'm a good kid, but I'm trying to be half good and half dumb so at least I have a 50-50 chance. Washington Post
On Wednesday, Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, who ushered in an era of increased school killings, held meetings about the spate of violence in Chicago.
The quote that stuck out to me was one I have heard echoed in blog comments sections over the past two weeks. Basically the gist, that I got anyway, is "So what a kid died, Children die all the time!" But I could be wrong:
As Duncan noted, "Chicago is not unique. Four students have been shot in Tulsa, Okla., already this year. Philadelphia, Seattle, Miami, New Orleans, and many rural communities have also lost schoolchildren to violence in recent weeks." Politics Daily
Was it an attempt to make sure that people minimize Chicago's out of control child death epidemic or highlight the woes of other cities whose children may have been neglected by the bright light of the media glare on Chicago's out of control child murder epidemic where 45 of its school children were murdered in the 2008-2009 school year?
My final thoughts on Chicago school kids having to walk through a gauntlet of violence to enter school.
In 1957 Black students in Little Rock had their paths to school blocked by an angry mob. Then U.S. President Eisenhower sent in the 101st Airborne Division of the U.S. Army to make sure they got to school safely. 52 years later when Black students in Chicago are dodging bullets and violent gang members swinging railroad ties, the U.S. President sends the US Attorney General and the Secretary of Education to do what exactly?
And would those of you repeating "Its the parents responsibility" wake up and get a clue. Don't believe the hype, government is screwing up too!
"It's the parents. There's really not much the government can do. You can't legislate a good heart," said Jessie Smith, 73, a retired heating and air-conditioning technician who lives near Fenger. Washington Post
Its the parents responsibility to raise children, but should those parents be abject FAILURES, it is society's responsibility to say:
"Hey, we know you have crappy parents, and that totally sucks, but we have this thing called rules and laws and we can't let you run around beating, shooting, raping and killing other citizens indiscriminately, so um, you have two charges, decline to sink into the abyss of barbarism, or face draconian consequences."
Two separate issues, one is no substitute for the other. The fundamental role of government, before health care, social security, transportation, drivers licenses, electricity, etc is to KEEP THE PEACE and maintain the common defense. Period. That's the first priority of any government. So wretched parents notwithstanding, the government is not absolved of its responsibility to maintain order on the streets. Especially where there are clearly identifiable patterns of violent behavior.
When it comes to ARMED CONFLICT, It is government's role, when indivduals fail on a massive scale to craft a solution or a process to solve together those problems which we cannot solve alone. Democracy cannot function in the midst of violent anarchy, neither can the average child.
I keep hearing all of these large sums of money people want to throw at this problem as if the solutions has to be high tech. If the problem is children being forced to walk through rival gang territory, the solution is called a SCHOOL BUS and neighborhood schools! Its called a massive police presence to stabilize violence plagued neighborhoods to allow the residents the same chance that people in Iraq and Afghanistan are being given. All of the 30 million dollar programs in the world aren't going to change life in Chicago if 85% of your kids are in poverty walking around with PTSD because they live in a war zone. Send in the National Guard already.
I could be wrong. Perhaps I'm jaded by covering attempts by individuals, institutions and government to minimize violence for over two years. What say you?
Don't forget to like our Facebook Page. We shut down our NING network. My book More Than Words is now available for download for $3.99 | 22 Comments | Share Article
22 Comments | Share Article
Reader Comments (22)
I hear Fenger HS has a school bus now. Is it just an unwillingness of the gov't to enforce law and order or are they afraid of the ACLU and various civil rights groups? I remember when they put cops in the NYC public schools there was a backlash from the parents and the civil rights groups. They thought it was just so that they could arrest more black children. How many teachers have told you when they punish a student the parent comes and curses them out not the child? There are various reports complaining that black children get suspended more often then white children. When law and order is strongly enforced civil rights and issues of race will pop up. If you son is just walking down the street in the neighborhood and the cops stop and frisk him (probably just b/c he is a blk teen wearing hip hop clothes), they find nothing but he is humiliated, is it worth it? Are we willing to sacrifice some civil rights for law and order in our communities? Do we have to? I am just asking these questions b/c as a NYer we have been dealing with these issues, crime has gone down but complaints against the NYPD is at an all time high.
actually the call for government seems to be the kind of reaction that has become far too common and unwittingly leads to such problems. we've become far too accustomed to shouting to the govt to fix everything even when it is not in the ability of the govt to do so. they have school buses not on a whim but to help get kids to schools that are far away. i haven't read this indepth but it seems obvious that if the kid is walking to school, he falls outside of the parameters of a school bus, i.e., he is close enough to walk to school that providing a bus doesn't make sense. what's more, the notion that the society must step in through the govt to help kids who fall through the cracks ignores the fact that the govt already does that through foster homes, child protective services, etc., and there is only so much a govt with limited resources can do. then there are the conflicts that arrive as govt begins to increase its presense. hell, just check out the uproar about a public option and health care, do we seriously think the govt can just waltz into neighborhoods and declare parents unfit because their kid joins a gang and the u.s. population will not jump up and cry foul? the place where govt has let us down is not in caring for kids but dealing with goofy policies that allow gangs to flourish, like the war on drugs, inadequate funding of education infrastructure, etc., because as the drug policy fails and folks see they can make lots of money selling the crap, they gravitate to that as their education fails them and doesn't provide meaningful employment and because so many become locked up due to the same drug policies, putting them in jail situations that further reinforce the notion that thug life is a way to live. to think a bus would do much flies in the face of reason: gangs have guns and bullets can go right into the bus. the problem is gang violence fueled by a drug culture and celebration of ignorance.
also, the quote about how such violence isn't occurring just in chicago isn't some crack about how the chicago incident is no big deal. they're obviously trying to tie it into a larger, big-picture argument otherwise, it IS just another killing in chicago and if i live anywhere outside of chicago, why the hell do i care? to have the govt involved, to have administration officials go to this particular city for this particular death, would be a slap in the face to all the other families suffering similar tragedies if the administration officials could not tie it to a larger issue, as if saying this child from chicago is more deserving of recognition than the child who died in oklahoma or anywhere else. pointing out the other places where violence has occurs helps underline the deeper significance of the chicago killing, it doesn't seek to undercut that significance.
The Chicago child killing is significant because our presidential administration comes from that very city. If the current Secretary of Education, who was also the head of Chicago schools, doesn't have a handle on his own city, how can he run the entire country's schools?
I think the administration flew in to avoid being embarrassed by the violence.
@ Sis. Wanda, "I think the administration flew in to avoid being embarrassed by the violence."
So true, so true. And so very sad. :( :(
As you noted, there was a time when black children were being terrorized by racist white students and their parents when they were just trying to go to school. Clearly these children, growing up in such racist households, were not being raised properly and had parents who were too ignorant to do a good job.
At no time did anyone suggest, in any significant manner, that the way we protect these black children is by changing the hearts and minds of those white children who were terrorizing them. At no time did we suggest, in any significant way, that the way we protect these black children is by making the parents of the white children more accountable. At no time did we try to suggest that an appropriate strategy for protecting these students was to encourage their parents to be better parents.
We knew we were up against a culture where hatred, racism and violence was tolerated and celebrated. We knew that was something that went beyond just changing the hearts and minds of individuals and because of that we called on government to help provide some of the solutions.
We are in a similar situation today. We have children, and at times parents, who are violent. We live in a culture were violence is tolerated and at times celebrated. To suggest that we can solve this problem by somehow changing the hearts and minds of all these children and making their parents more accountable is not sufficient.
Yes, parents play the greatest role the development of children, but unless we plan on “re-raising” every violent and broken child in America while shielding them from all aspects of our violent culture, we have to acknowledge that the government has an obligation to help find some of the solutions. Please remember that these “bad kids” are in the minority. Despite what grabs headlines, most kids are not acting like this. I mentor and I’ve seen first hand how many teens, like the one you quoted, just want nothing more than to be safe. That concern for safety sometime supersedes every other aspect of their life including academics and forces them to be unreasonably tough to the point when “acting like a kid” is a form of letting their guard down. These cities have an obligation to keep children safe and to make sure they feel comfortable and safe while learning. No one should government off the hook the “parents, parents, parents” refrain. We don’t vote for parents, but you do have a say in who leads us.
I like the idea of a school bus. To a different school. Different neighborhood.
@ wanda
the rationale doesn't make sense. presidents and administrations don't look to cover their butts in places where they are not in office. the idea that coming in now will shield them from any sort of criticism would ignore the violence that came before, as if that also weren't connected. it's also odd that while one hand so many ask for the govt to come in and do something, when the govt does come in to do something, they're being bad-mouthed as just trying to cover their own tails.
What would swift and massive government intervention look like? Part of the reason why I'm a little hesitant at a sweeping government response to increase/maintain the peace is what happens when it is no longer needed or produces unintended consequences. For example, during the height of the crack epidemic, lawmakers, particularly the Congressional Black Caucus, lobbied heavily for the WAR on drugs and actually supported "tougher" sentences for crack dealers than those who dealt powder cocaine. The result? Prison filling to the brim with people of color, mainly black people and now people crying foul.
I'm all for the National Guard going in and enacting martial law, I just want to be sure that such a policy is flexible to chnage as the neighborhood stabilizes.
I was baffled they sent Arne Duncan to Chicago anyway...I was like...good grief, didn't he just leave Chicago? Clearly, this wasn't a surprise to him. Shucks, Obama just left Chicago. They knew good and well what they were leaving behind.
I got bawled out once for suggesting that the Department of Education chief for the USA, should have a background in ... education. Arne's only claim to fame was that he was appointed to Chicago's Public School by Daley or so I heard.
The man has never attended a public school, has a bachelor's degree in sociology, and apparently has one hell of a jump shot because I can't think of any other reason he has the top job.
If children can't walk down the street to school...we're turning into these places that we send troops...so where are the troops?
@michael. That's a cop out. People are so used to government getting involved in nonsense that the government has no business beign involved with that when they finally stumble upon something that is entirely the province of government, they don't notice. Of course politicians are far too willing to deceived and obfuscate and abdicate their responsibility. To be clear. government has a MONOPOLY on using FORCE to maintain order. You have a clearly defined problem, safe passage two and from school, including taking out gang member firing at school buses. TRUST that the reasons these idiots are firing indiscriminately is because they have never confronted real force.
There is nothing ODD about what wanda said. You just have an agenda.
@iman you broke it down like a fraction. People don't really want change. It would make them too uncomfortable.
@blkseagoat you can give guardsmen limited defined roles with benchmarks. Happens all the time in hurricane country, the area gets saturated with guardsmen and law enforcement from all over the state. They have simple objectives, evacuate people and stop looters. When the crisis passes, they go home.
I get annoyed when people talk about the Drug War. They seem to forget the pure unholy HELL that crack unleashed on many communities. Remember the crack babies? Yes there was some poor execution, but a whol elot of folks who need to be in jail are exactly where they are supposed to be.
Yme,
I do not know enough about Arne Duncan, but Rod Paige had a background in education and was a hot mess as education secretary. In fact, most of the educators that have run school systems are the reasons why public education is so jacked up in the first place.
Sometimes it takes a fresh person to bring in new and radical ideas. We have similar problems here in DC and Michelle Rhee, the Chancellor of DC's schools is taking heat for wanting to fire teachers who think that they are entitled to have their position for life, with no accountability or meritocracy.
While I may not agree with Michelle Rhee's tactics, DC's public schools, at the hands of educators, sunk into an abyss. Mired in corruption and cronyism, sometimes bottom-line people get through all of the crap, puts the unions in their place, and they produce.
Wow Gina,
This is an excellent article! They definitely need to demand more police presence. The bottom line in all of this is that ADULTS are letting down their children. Children do not ask to be brought into this world. Nor do they ask to be required to go to school, but walk through and dodge danger every single day. If my route to school included an incident where an innocent student was beaten to death -- I probably wouldn't go to school -- not if it meant I had to walk that route! Society -- parents, the police, school administrators, the gov't, ADULTS -- all need to protect these children.
How are you going to require children to attend school, and then leave it to them to figure out how to navigate gang violence on their own in route?
@ gem2001 "TRUST that the reasons these idiots are firing indiscriminately is because they have never confronted real force." -- AGREED. If they had to contend with REAL violence from armed guards/military who are not afraid of them, they'd stand down.
RevMamaAfrika on 10.08.09 at 12:57 pm
@ Sis. Wanda, “I think the administration flew in to avoid being embarrassed by the violence.”
So true, so true. And so very sad. :( :(
This is what happens when government officials are picked or elected based on style not substance.
We need more sober-minded public servants (note the emphasis) and fewer primadonnas in office.
@Fred... and John McCain and Sarah Palin were MORE substantive?
Anywhoo... I compare this response to the Chicago killings to George Bush's flyover after Katrina. It sounded like a good idea at the time, but just LOOK BAD.
miriam on 10.08.09 at 2:37 pm
I like the idea of a school bus. To a different school. Different neighborhood.
Now, you know why school choice is popular among so many DC parents:
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/voucher-opponents-losing-pr-battle/
Too many public schools have devolved into crime-ridden hellholes. What rational parent including yours truly would willing sent his kid into the DCPS when better, safer alternatives (e.g., charter schools) are available.
True...Rod Paige was not impressive. LOL. But, let's be serious. You do expect your top educator...to at least be an educator.
I'm not feeling that pick. And, I think that defines our feeling about education.
I'll get my basketball buddy...who my Chicago pal selected to run the Chicago schools in charge of all the schools in the US. After all, he can do for the US, what he did for Chicago???
You expect someone in medicine to have a medical background. You'd want your attorney to have attended a law school. If you majored in anything besides education, your state is going to send you back to school to get an alternative certificate or something to teach and get teacher's pay.
So, hey...either apply the rule more broadly. You don't need a background in education...remove the credentialing process in education. If it is necessary...lead from the top and make sure your top guy has hopped every hoop teachers have to hop.
The president does have top picks that I do like. Although, I'm sure he doesn't care. LOL. I like Eric Holder.
The education pick...I'm not feeling...
I'm not really feeling the Safe Schools dude, either. But, no one's crazy enough to make me president...so it doesn't really matter.
I think sending them in was kind of like trying to avoid that fly over moment.
It's not that they weren't concerned, but they wanted to make sure people saw them "on the ground" in Chicago.
Otherwise, you were going to have people going...what the heck? What is the administration doing about this?
If this hadn't been so publicized, I don't think they would have been there.
The sad truth of it is...they'd have to be somewhere every day talking about crime in and around our schools. And, I don't think that's going to happen.
It's my understanding that in the effort to close underperforming neighborhood schools, the Chicago school system began placing students in charter schools and better performing schools across the city. It sounds like a good plan. It would have been a great plan if administrators had taken into account the city's long standing gang problem.
Educational leaders in that city have to admit that they did not consider the implications of closing these schools. Only then, can they move on to solutions. Speeches, marches and news conference will not help. A one size fits all solution will be inadequate. Leaders are going to have to go school by school and determine the needs for students in that neighborhood.
gem2001 wrote:
@Fred… and John McCain and Sarah Palin were MORE substantive?
I'll respond with a question.
Is violence against teens in major cities in Arizona (McCain's state) or Alaska (Palin's state) higher or lower than Chicago in Illinois (Obama's state)?
Anywhoo… I compare this response to the Chicago killings to George Bush’s flyover after Katrina. It sounded like a good idea at the time, but just LOOK BAD.
It really does come across as a publicity stunt.
Thus, some Black Democrats like Politik Ditto aren't impressed:
http://politikditto.blogspot.com/2009/10/obama-to-speak-on-gay-rightsagain-this.html
This is too complex a situation for one simple answer. Will keep on reading comments.
fenger is just 4 miles away. People act like it a world away its nobody job to save black people . You cant have it both ways if they had national guard , jesse jackson would be complaining or al sharpton , the first time a cop did something wrong black people would be talking about civil rights . What your talking about is a lack of civility and common decency thats all its not the government job to save black people, because the more it tries the screwd up black people get