Understanding Felon’s Plan Is Step #1 to Stopping Him

The FOTUS is laying the groundwork to dismantle democracy on his own behalf. The most despicable, destructive, divisive individual we've ever encountered is determined to proclaim himself our King.

[image or embed]

— kenofseattle (@kenofseattle.bsky.social) July 18, 2026 at 11:41 PM

Tennessee, Exemplar for Meritocratic Rot

A recent news story in the Tennessean found that the most recent TN standardized test scores show remarkable disparities between affluent and poor school districts across the state:

Out of the subjects we analyzed, Algebra II saw the largest performance gap with a staggering 72-percentage-point spread. Williamson County Schools posted a 74% proficiency rate, while Humboldt City Schools came in at 2%. Geometry came in second for disparities with a 71-point spread between Williamson County Schools, which saw 76% proficiency, and 2% proficiency rate for Humboldt City Schools.

The city of Humboldt is shared by both Gibson and Madison Counties. Gibson County is ranked #33 in household income, and Madison County comes in at #45. Williamson County, on the other hand, is ranked #1 in household income.

Not only are income gaps between advantaged and disadvantaged school systems reflected in test scores, but the same gaps are found within districts when comparing scores of "economically disadvantaged" students with students who are "non-disadvantaged." 

The first chart below shows proficiency rates of "economically non-disadvantaged” students in 30 of Tennessee’s 151 school districts.

Now compare those scores with the second chart below, which shows proficiency rates for “economically disadvantaged” students in those same school districts. Within the same school district, disparities in scores between disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged students vary by 30-50+ percent.  

While not alone among states where such vast inequities exist, Tennessee offers a perfect example of an education system built on a rotted meritocracy based on flawed and outdated assessments of educational worth, i.e. standardized tests.  Promoted as scientifically objective, these rankings are trumpeted and blindly celebrated by high-performing rich communities like Williamson County, while citizens of poor districts like Humboldt are eager to find someone to blame for their shortcomings.

Those "someones" are almost always identified as those lazy teachers and parents in the lowest scoring schools, the ones you know, with a disproportionate number of economically disadvantaged students. And the disadvantaged students? Having been indoctrinated to believe that because the same test is given the same way to every student on the same day, and is, therefore, a fair reflection of what every student should know, then they end up, implicitly or explicitly, blaming themselves. That, or rejecting school outright.

And, thus, the poisonous meritocracy rolls on, with no one the wiser, neither the non-disadvantaged citizens who continue to celebrate the parents and children and teachers in their communities who deserve to reap the rewards for their diligence and hard work, or the disadvantaged citizens who continue to blame the poorest parents, children, and teachers in their communities for their test score failures.

Without such a system in place, it would be much harder for the upper classes to climb their way over the less fortunate and, thus, claim their well-deserved top spots in colleges and careers. That’s why it is critical for both neocon and neolib meritocrats to bond together once more to 1) promote another generation of universal high stakes testing in K-12, and 2) to re-assert the critical importance of ACT and SAT in college admissions.

Tech Bros Scurry to Humanize Their Dehumanizing AI Product Lines

When academic philosophy’s rock stars like David Chalmers start advising their grad students toward careers with tech corporations, you can bet, with pretty good odds, that philosophy is about to have a moment. Probably the biggest since the 1960s, when new advances in life-saving technology like dialysis and organ transplants gave rise to the new philosophical sub-discipline, medical ethics, which was charged with sorting out questions like, “if you have 50 people requiring dialysis to live, and you have capacity to serve only six, what do you do?”. 

Of course, ethics with a capital “E” has been considering this type of human problem since before the pre-Socratics, as was pointed out repeatedly by one of my old crusty philosophy profs at UT, who growled regularly about what he considered the ridiculousness of creating a whole new sub-discipline to use the same time-honored philosophical tools that have been around for thousands of years to examine the same type of human problem, except in a contemporary context.

But I suppose that philosophy majors, too, deserve jobs when they graduate, even if they are working for tech bro billionaires willing to pay a few millions to some of them to come up with a code for the coders that might protect, 1) their product lines from being switched off to prevent, let’s say, some bot-inspired human catastrophe, or 2) the tech bros, themselves, from legal liability for the actions of their own digital Frankensteins.

Of course, a much needed case should be made for tech bros hiring axiological stuntmen (ethicists) to develop conceptual frameworks that might protect humanity from the dangers associated with developing autonomous digital things (ADTs) whose actions and evolutions remain entirely beyond the understanding of their creators.

But, no, quite the opposite is happening.  The Musks and the Zucks are hiring philosophers to delineate consciousness in such a way as to allow their self-organizing (autonomous) machines the “conscious” designation and the protections that go with it. So the argument: if conscious beings deserve ethical consideration, as they surely do, and if AI bots are conscious, then AI bots deserve ethical consideration just as humans do. This, you might say, is the biggest “if” of the century.

So the bottom line for the tech bros: if bots are conscious, they (their product lines) must be protected.  If they (their products lines) are autonomous, no human can be blamed for their actions. Therefore, hire more philosophers.

I urge all those capable of thought, both lay thinkers and professional thinkers (philosophers), to consider the, uh, ethical implications of this situation. 

Recommended reading: https://www.sup.org/books/theory-and-philosophy/ethical-know-how

Graham Platner, GO HOME!

Federal Appeals Court Eviscerates DeSantis’s Stop Woke Act

Big, big win for Florida students and faculty! 👏 www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026...

[image or embed]

— James Horn (@schools-matter24.bsky.social) July 7, 2026 at 2:53 PM

Take 17 Minutes to Learn About School Vouchers

And if you are already educated about vouchers, there’s still more here that will surprise you about the biggest educational scam in American educational history. Pass it on. 

Recalling the Bad Ole Days of No Child Left Behind

 

I wrote this in 2007, when it was clear that NCLB had failed children, parents, teachers, and schools. As the standardized testing cabal is now trying to get the band back together for another round of psychometric madness, let’s pause and remember what it was like: www.schoolsmatter.info/2007/11/what...

[image or embed]

— James Horn (@schools-matter24.bsky.social) July 2, 2026 at 1:17 PM

Felon-in-Chief and Freedom 250 Wire Fraud

 

The definition of wire fraud: " . . . fundraisers including O’Rourke misled prospective America250 donors by providing them with Freedom 250’s banking and routing numbers instead." www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026...

[image or embed]

— James Horn (@schools-matter24.bsky.social) July 2, 2026 at 8:42 AM

Texas Taliban Mandates Bible and Bill Bennett in Schools

Texas has a long history of repeated attempts to turn the public school curriculum into an indoctrination tool in support of Christofascist values promoted by the John Birch Society of the late 1950s—which had such profound influence on Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, and the MAGAts that are now seeking to replace our constitutional republic with a fascist theocracy. 

The recent approval of a mandated book list for all K-12 Texas public school children is the latest, most brazen, and stupidest version of those many attempts to mold the next generation toward acceptance of the intellectual, ethical, religious, and social values of the late Jim Crow Era.

The religious indoctrination effort is underpinned by an unprecedented requirement for specified Protestant bible readings and/or bible lessons through elementary and high school.

The ethical training component comes in the form of required reading of neocon hypocrite, racist, and admitted habitual gambler, Bill Bennett, whose Book of Virtues and Children’s Book of Virtues serve as texts. (For some background on Bennett, see "The Bookie of Virtue" by Joshua Green writing for the Washington Monthly.)

Almost ten percent of all U.S. public school children attend Texas public schools.  Therefore, textbook companies are quick to yield to the monetary incentive to offer texts nationally that will sell in Texas as well. So if you think the retro pablum in the Texas required list of books will be limited to Texas, think again. 

By the way, the only significant differences between the new Texas requirements and what I was expected to read in school (1955-1967): we did not have a right-wing gambling addict teaching us ethical know-how, we didn’t have to read the bible (Protestant or otherwise), and we DID get to read Romeo and Juliet in 11th grade.  

Worldwide Movement Underway to Protect Schoolchildren from AI

A strong article here at The Guardian. 

Some of the science noted in the piece:

. . . neuroscience and education experts argue that rather than help students learn, AI can cause “cognitive off-loading”, meaning using an external aid to avoid mental effort.

A study published in 2025 in the journal Societies found that people ages 17 to 25 “exhibited higher dependence on AI tools and lower critical thinking scores compared to older participants”.

Stanford University reported in March that there was little evidence on how AI impacts K-12 education and that it’s unclear whether AI is “helping students complete tasks or helping them develop durable learning and skills”.

AI “was never designed to be a learning tool”, said Jared Cooney Horvath, a neuroscientist who has linked the recent nationwide decrease in test scores to increased screen time. “The tool an expert uses to make his or her life easier is not the tool a novice could use to learn how to become an expert. When they use the same tool, they don’t learn anything.” . . . .