"Many commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that 'masks don't work', which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation."
The unstated goal of the phonics test with the nonsense words is to make it impossible for teachers to cheat by having students rote-learn a bunch of high-frequency words. They can only pass by actually learning the grapheme-phoneme correspondances. It's a good thing.
"There is a common belief that corporate directors have a legal duty to maximize corporate profits and “shareholder value” ... this belief is utterly false."
Whiteness and maleness are not and cannot be material facts and it is a category error to insist otherwise, nevermind elevating them as the axiomatic center of your worldview.
But the dei perspective is the one that is hegemonic at this point. Something off a paradox for those possessed of it, displayed in such absurdities as believing that viewpoint diversity is the (precise) aim of dei.
What if the political appointee publicly states they would like Spotify to censor Joe Rogan? Perhaps 'the government' is simply too ineffably abstract an entity to attach to any individual actor commonly regarded as comprising it.
Why would we "see" Piaget if his work, as you correctly note, his theories have been refuted? Educationalists, who have never personally and successfully taught anythingmarried simply wrong theories of learning, are a good 50% of the problem.
This is extraordinarily vicious, and yet entirely par for the course, a good example of the basically pro forma denunciation OP is arguing should be verboten in the work place.
Being unable to countenance good faith disagreement is not a persuasive argument against your ideology being a cult.
As an alternative approach, you can cut the gordian knot of being against anti-racism without being in favor of racism by simply noting that the thing is not what it calls itself.
An interesting social science result is that one (in my mind, the primary) result of wokeness is deminished empathy for impoverished whites. I took ops comment to mean "hey, don't disregard my struggle because i happen not to be black", rather than seeing, as you apparently have, "racist drivel". A point I'm sure has been made a million times, and which you are no doubt impervious to, but one that remains valid nonetheless.
The fact-checker the Times hired zeroed in[1] on this claim (though there were others of import):
>At one point, she sent me this assertion: “One critical reason that the colonists declared their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery in the colonies, which had produced tremendous wealth. At the time there were growing calls to abolish slavery throughout the British Empire, which would have badly damaged the economies of colonies in both North and South.”
>I vigorously disputed the claim. Although slavery was certainly an issue in the American Revolution, the protection of slavery was not one of the main reasons the 13 Colonies went to war.
Nobody's systematically hyper charging emotionally hooking anything. This is or rather, without the artificial suppression, would be completely 100% organically viral.
It shouldn't be up to absolutely obviously partisan corporations to decide which October surprise info dump is misinformation deserving of censorship, and which is the aok rough and tumble of presidential electioneering.
Finally, on the facts, the Steele dossier was far more obviously fraudulent than pictures of hunter smoking a crack pipe in the bathtub...
We live in a society where tech conference organisers, far from being biased in favor of white men, are actually desperate to shield themselves from accusations of anti-female/poc bias. Derive from that what you will.
https://www.cochrane.org/news/statement-physical-interventio...