From the article:
In the past, students celebrated Valentine’s Day with the traditional exchange of cards and candy. But the district slowly has been phasing out those traditions for the past few years. The new holiday guidelines have not been fully implemented at each school yet, but no schools in the Bethel district will have traditional Valentine’s Day parties — with candy and card exchanges — this year. That prompted some parents to accuse the district of selectively “taking away” other traditional school holidays as well. For instance, Bethel district students no longer wear costumes for Halloween, and Thanksgiving celebrations have been renamed “harvest parties.”
...“As a public school system, we can’t intentionally plan events that we know will exclude children,” McGillivray said Tuesday. “Schools (in the district) are thinking creatively about how we celebrate with children and how we can have those activities at school where everyone gets to participate.”
If you are the sort of person who has stared into the abyss for far too long, no doubt you have the sneaking suspicion that somewhere out there a coin clutching merchant is at the bottom of this. Whether that is the case or no is, unfortunately, irrelevant to yours truly because the question and answer do nothing to solve our problems. I would not be surprised to discover a resounding 'yes', but I could also not be more apathetic. Partially this is out of a permanent lack of surprise when I discover certain people of a certain ethnicity behaving badly. Mostly, however, this is because noticing that certain people of a certain ethnicity tend to behave poorly has not moved us closer to resolving the crisis of Western Civilization. Blaming the other forever is the strategy of African-Americans and lesbians, and look at how well they've fared. If we are to avoid a similar fate then we must look inward:
... and how we can have those activities at school where everyone gets to participate.
Does this sound familiar? If you look closely at the above article there are a few sentences that imitate McGillivray, spoken or implied by others. Coincidentally, these ought rationales sound a whole lot like the very obvious resentment you hear from fat feminists when they crab about Stacey Sorority. While they wrap their rhetoric in grandiose moral platitudes, most find it fairly obvious to point out that the source of their 'moral' crusade is that Stacey Sorority is a universal object of male desire, while they are often mistaken for a particularly lumpy potato.
The pretense of high morality thinly coating an obvious core resentment is so ubiquitous today that you can be forgiven for not pointing it out. Behind every screeching soccer mom is a girl who never got invited to the dance, or worse - got pumped and dumped throughout college and high school. The tragedy of helicopter parenting is that it is antithetical to the universal law of suffering: You must exchange in order to gain. Every once in a while life has to punch you in the face. This law is immutable, unchanging, omnipresent. Even if you manage to delay it for a short while, it is merely a delay. The cost, multiplied by the time you have managed to stave off the inevitable, will make the suffering far greater.
Case in point, White America decided that they could give their kid's a jumpstart on the rat race into a good college by forgoing chores in favor of paying Paco and Juan to mow the lawn. As a bonus, Paco and Juan's labor would fund generous pensions for Whitey. The consequence of that seemingly well intentioned plan is that America is no longer a homogeneous nation, societal trust is consequently at an all time low, the state is in financial tatters, and instead of gaining a good job through old boy networks at college, White America woke up one day and discovered that their boy was wearing dresses and makeup and screeching incessantly about the evils of cisprivilege.
Way to fucking go, guys, you really knocked it out of the park.
The solution, naturally, is to cull, by which I mean some form of exclusion is necessary for the perpetuation of civilization. We may, may, be at a point of no return with regards to the extraction and utilization of cheap energy. If we go back we may never reach the stars because restarting the industrial revolution from scratch isn't possible with known energy reserves increasingly requiring advanced, post-industrial revolution technology in order to harvest, refine and use it. Starting back at square one and advancing to tier 3 of the Kardashev Scale is, therefore, out of the question. This is, of course, just a hypothesis, but the risk falls under the theorem of expected value: When the cost of failure is infinite, odds no longer matter.
Culling, of course, brings to mind Social Darwinism - the sort of idea that immediately raises the deflector shields of the fashionable urbanite cohort. Ironically these are the sort of people who gleefully describe themselves as a reality based community or some other drivel, while eagerly excluding certain topics from debate. This brings us to a seemingly unsolvable problem in that the fashionable urbanite cohort, being obsessed with masking their own sense of inferiority with outward displays of unwarranted self-importance are intractable, obsessed with the gaudy trinket called "social affirmation", as opposed to the relatively unsexy rewards of "problem solving". The division among White America - and remember that Whites are unique in that they do not vote monolithically - is so harsh that it seems insurmountable.
In order to think so you must first believe - and this is usually an unconscious thing - that White people should unify.
This is a mistake.
The negative side effects of urbanization and excessive secondary and tertiary education are a blessing in disguise: Those most susceptible to the siren song of progressive idealism are not breeding at even close to replacement rate. In a handful of generations they will be irrelevant. Let them go, and wait for your labor to bear fruit.
This, of course, does not solve the problem of how to keep the insane and wayward soccer-mom types from seats of power, but that's a discussion for another day.
What is most interesting is that one hundred parents stormed a PTA meeting. How many kids do you think the administrators have on average? I'm guessing it's far less than one.
How many kids do you think the meeting-stormers have?