Black Education / Schools : Ebonics

One of the reasons people are still extant as a species is because of their ability to adapt to changing life conditions.
To succeed in an environment one must adapt to it, and the ability to effectively communicate within that environment is key to that success.

Does that include creating one's own environments?

CraigK said:
In my opinion, speaking standard English in this country is one of the basic requirements (along with a good education and work habits) to succeed. In my reading, one of the main reasons given by wealthy minorities (apart from musicians and athletes) for their success is the insistence of their parents that they speak standard English in the home.

In my opinion, standard English is inferior to Law English. Now what is Law English? This is the language of the courts. This is why most people have to hire an attorney because they don't understand the language.

You can see this at work by grabbing any Supreme Court case. Most newspapers are written between a 5th - 8th grade reading level.

A Supreme Court case is in the stratosphere and beyond the comprehension of the majority of people.

Working hard is good. Working smarter is better.

CraigK said:
Do I consider Ebonics a separate language? No. Like pidgin, it is a 'make do' tongue; it enables the speaker to 'get by' in society, but will never allow them to do much more than just 'get by'. Who wants to settle for that?
Now, may I have your opinion?

From a sociological perspective, whoever possesses a hegemony on the culture or territory determines what is "standard" or "acceptable".
 
Yes. One of the differences between men and animals is the ability of man to alter his environment to suit his needs or preferences. Sadly, the physical environment man lives in is much easier to mold than is the social one.

Social derives from the word society.
Societies can be created and destroyed. They are virtual.
Societies are maintained by institutions ... gatekeepers as well as the subjects within them.

CraigK said:
And Law English has achieved its purpose: to ensure enrichment of those who have created it by requiring others to hire them to interpret (or twist) it.

This I don't deny. However, there are tremendous educational benefits to studying Law English.
In addition to etymology, one is exposed to Latin, Greek, French, Law French, and Spanish.
It also aides in developing critical reading, critical thinking, critical analysis, and research.

Judging from your post, it appears you are not a "big fan" of attorneys and courts?
 
One of my hobbies it to attend and monitor local trials. I applaud our court system: it is, in my opinion, one of the best in the world, embodying freedoms and rights many have died to preserve. It is, on the whole, fair and just.

I can concur that the adversarial court systems of the US are on the whole the best.
I would not concur that they are fair and just.
I could point out more than a few court cases to underscore my previous sentence.

CraigK said:
Lawyers, on the other hand, I view as, in the main, a necessary evil of the system.

Attorneys have always been a hated class... even by the King of England for a long while.

CraigK said:
Lawyers write the laws, and as a result these laws are so incredibly nuanced that it is impossible, and inadvisable, to navigate them without a lawyer at your side.

Correction: Legislatures author statutes and acts although many times the members of Congress are attorneys.
I say if you put in the study, one can navigate the courts sans attornatus.

CraigK said:
While the Constitution (which I spent many years in uniform protecting) guarantees these people a fair trial, it is impossible to be a fan of those lawyers who defend known criminals by the use of trickery, media manipulation, and legal legerdemain.

This is 'due process'. Due process is achieved by knowing the rules and procedures.

I would like to think that your years of service went not to protect a document, but the people who live under that document.

The State is the people assembled into an association, a body politic.
Government is the corporation created by the State.
Its charter is a constitution. The Constitution of the United States is a compact, a treaty. States are signatories to that treaty. Constitutions are binding on governments, not people.
The State is the principal. Government is its agent.

CraigK said:
While most trials are not 'Perry Mason' material, some are.

Most courts are administrative. Common law courts and trial by jury have given way to Roman Civil Law and the Lord High Chancellor .... at the hands of legislatures.
 
The ideal would be to have wise, impartial, honest men as judges, with no juries at all, but these sort of men are hard to find, and even harder to verify.

I believe this can be mitigated by defendants learning how to defend themselves and declining the offer of becoming a ward of the court.

Trial by jury can work. Many courts are simply the judge or magistrate deciding the facts and the law.

CraigK said:
Our federal legislature is composed of about 50% attorneys: something the Federalist Papers warned against but which has, nonetheless, come to pass. In effect, lawyers create the laws.

I consider the Federalist Papers propaganda.
Hamilton was an elitist. This is not surprising given who the drafters of the Constitution were.
The Federalists were actually nationalists.
The Anti-Federalists were true federalists, but this requires diving into what a federal government is versus a national government.
 

Donate

Support destee.com, the oldest, most respectful, online black community in the world - PayPal or CashApp

Latest profile posts

HODEE wrote on Etophil's profile.
Welcome to Destee
@Etophil
Destee wrote on SleezyBigSlim's profile.
Hi @SleezyBigSlim ... Welcome Welcome Welcome ... :flowers: ... please make yourself at home ... :swings:
Back
Top