| ||||||||||||
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
8 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
An Obsequious Apologetic!,
By Brian A. Glennon "BAG" (South Boston, Massachusetts) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Schools on Trial: An Inside Account of the Boston Desegregation Case (Hardcover)
Essentially written by a quisling, the screed; 'SCHOOLS ON TRIAL: An Inside Account of the Boston Desegregation Case' (c. 1981) by sociologist Robert A. Dentler, et. al.; supposedly presented an intimate view of the planning process which put a federal judge's controversial 1974 court order to desegregate the Boston Public Schools into practice, yet surprisingly offered very little insight into the planning stages which did not draw from the general books published on the subject; or the findings of nebulous research institutes; or vague newspaper accounts, which the author listed in scanty notes at the end of each chapter.Demonstrating a clumsily articulated defense of the ruling, the book, SCHOOLS ON TRIAL, was often punctuated by meglomaniac rants (e.g. "When a federal court concluded that local or state school officials have engaged in illegal discriminatory actions, it must order an immediate remedy for the wrong." p. 13) and totalitarian tirades (e.g. "...free choice and open enrollment options are rejected." p. 13). And throughout the book, the author, like the judge, displayed an egotistical contempt for the democratic traditions of free choice, self-government, self-rule, and the separation of powers. Flawed in his reasoning, Dr. Dentler shifted from pertinent questions regarding forced desegregation (e.g. "Who will learn more?" p. 19) to inchoate ramblings (e.g. "Its [forced busing] social importance is clear, but its real bearing on learning is obscure except for the importance to the advantaged of relying upon what is already known." p. 19) ??? Also absurdly incongruous, Dr. Robert Dentler Phd stated: "The Boston case was never about busing. Busing, like the neighborhood school, was an invention of antidesegregationists" (p. 27) followed by "We learned quickly that busing of public school children in Boston was desirable, feasible, and necessary to achieve desegregation" (p. 29) which flew in the face of the reality of the protests and counter-suits in 1974 Boston! Please read these solecisms again, and remember that this author was the 'expert' appointed by the offending judge as the primary architect of forced busing which resulted in massive white flight; forced collectivization; the stabbing of two white students; and the academic ruination of the Boston Public Schools, and one might gather an insight as to the socialist agenda of the judge himself. But like a good little toady, the author of SCHOOLS ON TRIAL blamed the victims of forced busing in an attempt to excoriate his master from responsibility of his destructive 1974 decision by this, 'a post priori' 1981 observation that "Most of the serious flaws in the court plan that have materialized in a five year period of implementation can be traced back to insufficient and incorrect information" (p. 48); to which the author listed all the "incorrect information", [which influenced the judge's decision], on pages 25 thru 27. Incompetent even as a sycophant, Dr. Robert Dentler unintentionally pointed out that "No one had shown during the liability hearings that every school in the system was segregated" (p. 40) and how Garrity admitted himself in 'Morgan v. Hennigan' that "How many students were intentionally separated on a racial basis cannot be stated with any degree of precision, ..." (p. 6). This author showed, in 'ignoratio elenchi' that "incorrect information" coupled with reasonable doubt were what the federal judge based his court decision that Boston's schools were segregated. Then in 'capro expiatori' scapegoated jurisprudence itself by stating "We believe that a court and attorneys for plaintiff are, in this regard, victims of structural constraint" (p. 47). As a jumble of dim platitudes, the book: SCHOOLS ON TRIAL, must be eligible for some sort of prize in its fatuity, for it is not a history of the planning of forced busing in Boston, but a poorly written and tortured rationalization for the erroneous decision made by the federal judge, by one of his own court appointed stooges.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items. |
