Leftists Cancel School Honors Night — Too “Exclusive”

by Selwyn Duke   5/23/14

It’s increasingly the case in America that the nail that sticks up gets hammered down. A case in point is Archie R. Cole Middle School in East Greenwich, Rhode Island. Writes East Greenwich Patch:

Citing concerns about the “exclusive nature” of the annual honors night at Archie R. Cole Middle School, school officials have decided to scrap the tradition.

Instead, students who would normally be recognized at the annual spring tradition will be honored during team-based recognition ceremonies and graduation.

The notice was sent to parents over the weekend in an e-mail signed by School Principal Alexis Meyer and Assistant Principal Dan Seger.

Certainly, we must battle feelings-bruising exclusivity. Thus do I have a question: Will Principal Meyer and Assistant Principal Seger now also lobby to eliminate the position of “principal” or at least for the elimination of the term? After all, as Dictionary.com informs, the word means, “1.first or highest in rank, importance, value, etc.; chief; foremost.” And the Online Etymology Dictionary states, “c.1300, ‘main, principal, chief, dominant, most important;’ also ‘great, large,’ from Old French principal ‘main, most important,’ of persons, ‘princely, high-ranking’ (11c.), from Latin principalis ‘first in importance; original, primitive,’ from princeps (see prince).”

That sounds awfully excusive to me. Note that “Princeps” was an official title of Roman Emperors that translated into “First Citizen.” And I can’t imagine that these egalitarian educators could tolerate such anti-egalitarian positions and titles. Or do I have it wrong?

Is it that refusal to recognize achievement is only to be applied to other people’s achievement?

This much reminds me of Elizabeth “Fauxcahontas” Warren, now senator from Taxachusetts. She not only supported affirmative action while saying nothing about the remarkably un-diverse faculty she was part of at Harvard Law School, but then — despite being white enough for two people — claimed Cherokee heritage, presumably to benefit from the Affirmative Action Daily Double: being female and minority. (Give her credit, though, as she could have gone for the Trifecta and claimed lesbian status, too.)

So I guess it’s poor blue-collar guys, such as the firemen in New Haven, Connecticut, who have to maintain Warren’s principles. Meanwhile, education’s other elitists will maintain their principals and whatever other exclusiveness benefits them. As with the Marxists in the former USSR, North Korea and elsewhere — who had/ have the best residences, cars, vacations and other free-market fruits — leftist policies are for the little people.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com
Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (1419 views)

This entry was posted in Blog Post and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Leftists Cancel School Honors Night — Too “Exclusive”

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    Someone (I don’t remember who) once noted that the early lawsuits against college affirmative action programs were filed by people with names like DeFunis, Bakke, and Weber — not Rockefeller or Kennedy or Ford. The concept of the “forgotten man” was originally that of the person who pays the price for all the clever notions of others, and was raised in a speech by William Graham Sumner (cited as the book epigraph in Amity Shlaes’s The Forgotten Man, about the New Deal, where the phrase was deliberately misappropriated).

    Long before I read the speech, this concern for those who pay (and not always just in money) for grandiose liberals notions had become the primary basis of my political philosophy. This really started with reading the accounts in National Review 30 years ago about the Yonkers court-ordered scattered-site housing.

  2. Timothy Lane says:

    Walter Williams has an article today (available on TownHall) about “petty annoyances” that could be considered a lesson in language use (which is why I’m mentioning it here). Naturally, my first thought was of Barack Obama, but then it occurred to me: He’s certainly petty and definitely an annoyance, but would he be considered a petty annoyance?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *