[xxxxxxx12]

> although the article content itself is far from neutral

Can we admit how pernicious it is that the school system itself is manifestly captured by ideological motives and that simply criticizing that is impossible to be "neutral" by any standard people that agree with the program would define?

I guess I'm saying: how do you voice criticism in a neutral way when the program being criticized frames itself as basic human decency.

This is the same logic that lies at the center of something like the Patriot Act. Capture language and you've perniciously twisted language so as to be unimpeachable. This is Pandora's Box.

[cratermoon]

> Can we admit how pernicious it is that the school system itself is manifestly captured by ideological motives

Sure: https://www.theroot.com/we-found-the-textbooks-of-senators-w...

[_dps]

I only meant to comment on the article's neutrality with regard to evaluating the meta aspect of the headline quality. I personally think that the kinds of measures proposed here are counterproductive (I am, among other things, a mathematics educator) — but my opinion on that isn't really relevant to the question of helping keep HN submissions at the desired level of quality.

[xxxxxxx12]

I get what you're saying. I think there's an issue though, that neutrality is hard to come by for lots of reasons and especially nowadays when preference falsification is prevalent because critique of DEI/CRT is social suicide in certain sociopolitical milieu.

So naturally you're only going to find critique on the other side. As the CRT folk are keen to say - you can't be neutral - pick a side!