Separate schools for ill-behaved students

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

The thought of jerks being punished for their behaviour with menial jobs has become a popular revenge fantasy, yet we are relying on capitalism to do it.

Capitalism, in case you haven't noticed, doesn't have a strong track record on dispensing justice.

However, we already have a good picture even by middle school of what sort of person someone is. Some of them have a track record of repeatedly touching classmates inappropriately. Some have a track record of being as respectful as possible to classmates and teachers alike. Some have a track record of multiple acts of violence. Some of them wouldn't hurt a fly.

Clearly, they are not all equally worthy of others' tax dollars, let alone equally worthy the same jobs.

When an adult breaks the law, they go to prison. Their criminal record pretty much precludes them from working anywhere other than prison. By creating an exception for teenagers (who, historically, were considered adults) we're at worst incentivizing a "now or never" approach to crime, and at best we're flipping off better people by saying they get nothing for being better people.

So why not just segregate people in high school, based on prior behaviour, into schools for those who are morally upstanding citizens and schools for those who are not? Whatever happened to "act like a thug and you'll be treated like one"?

[New haven america]

I can tell you this won't work because some of the biggest douchebags in my school experience were upstanding students, while some of the nicest kids could get in the most trouble due to lack of participation or being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Being a good student academically generally gives you leeway to act however you wish behaviorally.

[Bear Stearns]

We sort of already do this. Ill-behaved students tend to also be dumber overall and thus struggle academically. Their anti-social behavior tends to keep them out of extracurricular activities, and because of those factors, they tend to find themselves naturally segregated from everyone else. Smart kids might take AP classes and thus never have be in a room with them. Socially-adjusted kids in clubs and sports will also have little in common with them as well.

These kids tend to struggle until they are eventually out of school (whether through flunking out or graduating due to the school basically pushing them along). Some get their act together and turns their lives around, and end up joining the working class. Others degenerate into criminals.

We already do have remedial schools for the kids that keep getting in trouble at normal schools too much and end up posing a threat to other students.

Of course, public schools have been so bad at dealing with these problems that parents who can almost invariably put their kids in private schools or move to a nice suburb that doesn't have these miscreants.

[Bear Stearns]

I can tell you this won't work because some of the biggest douchebags in my school experience were upstanding students, while some of the nicest kids could get in the most trouble due to lack of participation or being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Being a good student academically generally gives you leeway to act however you wish behaviorally.

The high-achieving students might be douchebags, but they aren't the kids fighting in class, assaulting teachers, or jumping other students. Lack of participation won't get you in trouble. Being an anti-social sociopath usually will.

[Kowani]

. Smart kids might take AP classes and thus never have be in a room with them.

Funny joke.

[New haven america]

I can tell you this won't work because some of the biggest douchebags in my school experience were upstanding students, while some of the nicest kids could get in the most trouble due to lack of participation or being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Being a good student academically generally gives you leeway to act however you wish behaviorally.

The high-achieving students might be douchebags, 1. but they aren't the kids fighting in class, 2. assaulting teachers, 3. or jumping other students. 4. Lack of participation won't get you in trouble. 5. Being an anti-social sociopath usually will.

1. Yes they are
2. They know better to not do it, but that doesn't mean they don't want to
3. Yes they do (I should know, in middle school I was jumped by 4 kids who were in the Gifted and Talented program and almost got into a fight with one who was a straight A student and on the football team)
4. Yes it will, participation grades exist.
5. While being a social sociopath makes you more likely to become a CEO or politician.

[Katganistan]

Separate is not equal.

[Jabberwocky]

We already have a separate system for problem students. It's called prison.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Separate is not equal.

Sometimes, equality isn't desirable.

[Former Citizens of the Nimbus System]

Separate is not equal.

Sometimes, equality isn't desirable.

For clarity: could you provide your definition of 'equality' in this context?

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Sometimes, equality isn't desirable.

For clarity: could you provide your definition of 'equality' in this context?

Treated the exact same way and given the same privileges regardless of what someone does.

[Cekoviu]

Doing that is a self-fulfilling prophecy more massive than nearly any other.

[Emulation White]

Sick of these armchair eugenics and social engineering. If you want a perfect little artificial world, so be it. Future generations will never have to experience any discomfort. They will be even more lacking in character, boring and weak than they are now. As the spine goes, so does the heart and the brain.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Just for the record, anything I would support would be more moderate than what OP is suggesting, though I am for separating troublemakers. I would try to reform the ones that can be reformed.

[Kowani]

Sick of these armchair eugenics and social engineering. If you want a perfect little artificial world, so be it. Future generations will never have to experience any discomfort. They will be even more lacking in character, boring and weak than they are now. As the spine goes, so does the heart and the brain.

All societies are built on social engineering of some sort.

[Bear Stearns]

When more "genteel" people say they're moving to the fluffy suburbs for "the good schools", this is usually what they mean, if you catch my drift.

The great irony is that many of these people are self-proclaimed liberals.

[New haven america]

When more "genteel" people say they're moving to the fluffy suburbs for "the good schools", this is usually what they mean, if you catch my drift.

The great irony is that many of these people are self-proclaimed liberals.

And their kids tend to end up being shitheads who are smart enough to know how to get away with their crappy behavior.

[Former Citizens of the Nimbus System]

For clarity: could you provide your definition of 'equality' in this context?

Treated the exact same way and given the same privileges regardless of what someone does.

I'd call that 'sameness' rather than equality - not saying you're wrong (language is subjective) but I would argue that that definition could be confusing. If there's a pile of oranges and as many apples and two people to share it between, one of whom likes oranges and dislikes apples to the equivalent degree that the other likes apples and dislikes oranges, I would suggest that giving the latter all of the apples and the former all of the oranges would be treating them equally. (Of course, you could then make the case that that would also be treating them in the same way, just with a more complex decision-making principle - 'share amongst people according to maximisation of enjoyment' - with the corollary that you could design a system of laws that did the same but in reality created massive inequalities by building in exceptions. Sort of reminds me of an objection to Kantian universalisability: that one can create moral principles that can technically be universalised and still make sense but are so specific that in reality they only apply to onesself ['People named Mark Brown living at 22 Banner Street in 2019 should be able to freely requisition marshmallows' or something of that ilk'].)

Sick of these armchair eugenics and social engineering. If you want a perfect little artificial world, so be it. Future generations will never have to experience any discomfort. They will be even more lacking in character, boring and weak than they are now. As the spine goes, so does the heart and the brain.

All societies are built on social engineering of some sort.

Mmm. Indeed, we should actively strive to engineer society to promote each individual's personal growth - resilience, selflessness, passion, open-mindedness and desire for the actualisation of onesself, others and the world as a whole being a few good targets that I'd suggest. This is why we need to increase education budgets, people!

[Emulation White]

Sick of these armchair eugenics and social engineering. If you want a perfect little artificial world, so be it. Future generations will never have to experience any discomfort. They will be even more lacking in character, boring and weak than they are now. As the spine goes, so does the heart and the brain.

All societies are built on social engineering of some sort.

I know, I'm just sick of the heavy hand and short-sightedness. It's not a coincidence that the most self-domesticated peoples are also the ones that are dying and at the nadir of their existence in general.

[Kowani]

All societies are built on social engineering of some sort.

I know, I'm just sick of the heavy hand and short-sightedness. It's not a coincidence that the most self-domesticated peoples are also the ones that are dying and at the nadir of their existence in general.

Heavy-handedness? If you think this is heavy-handed, you should’ve seen the Puritans, or the Calvinists.

You may have a point with short-sightedness, though-although I suspect how we would fix that would be radically opposed.

[Bear Stearns]

When more "genteel" people say they're moving to the fluffy suburbs for "the good schools", this is usually what they mean, if you catch my drift.

The great irony is that many of these people are self-proclaimed liberals.

And their kids tend to end up being shitheads who are smart enough to know how to get away with their crappy behavior.

Some of them...many of them are the children of prominent politicians.

[New haven america]

And their kids tend to end up being shitheads who are smart enough to know how to get away with their crappy behavior.

Some of them...many of them are the children of prominent politicians.

So they have the same likelihood of sociopathy as their parents.

[Bear Stearns]

Some of them...many of them are the children of prominent politicians.

So they have the same likelihood of sociopathy as their parents.

Not sociopathy. Most sociopaths are losers and their anti-social behavior usually leads them to a life of crime, poverty, and addiction.

I think these people are just such extreme narcissists that they genuinely believe that what they are doing is good.

[Emulation White]

I know, I'm just sick of the heavy hand and short-sightedness. It's not a coincidence that the most self-domesticated peoples are also the ones that are dying and at the nadir of their existence in general.

Heavy-handedness? If you think this is heavy-handed, you should’ve seen the Puritans, or the Calvinists.

You may have a point with short-sightedness, though-although I suspect how we would fix that would be radically opposed.

Yes, that's a good point of reference. Actually K, I'd be tempted to pick your brain on it, haha. In the end, despite our differences, we are both long term planners that emphasize the big picture over temporal detours.

[New haven america]

So they have the same likelihood of sociopathy as their parents.

Not sociopathy. Most sociopaths are losers and their anti-social behavior usually leads them to a life of crime, poverty, and addiction.

I think these people are just such extreme narcissists that they genuinely believe that what they are doing is good.

You only think that because that's what the media tells you to think, when in reality, most sociopaths tend to appear are social and act as well adjusted and normal people.

Guess why the media paints sociopaths as anti-social and incapable?