No. of Recommendations: 4
Hannah-Jones’ daughter was the price she was willing to pay to virtue-signal to leftists about righteousness because, as always, the left has no problem sacrificing other people’s time, money, and, in this case, education, if it makes them feel good about it — especially when they’re not the one suffering the consequences. Hannah-Jones could have donated to a struggling school, even advocated on behalf of other children as a Good Samaritan. But in Hannah-Jones’ calculation, she thought her daughter belonged to the cause of fighting so-called systemic racism — systemic racism that was purportedly the cause of underfunding and other maladies.
Hannah-Jones explains that she and her husband chose to send their daughter “to the type of school that wealthier families with choices uniformly avoid — one that is low-income and mostly Black.” Hannah-Jones said she and her husband could make large donations, cover supplies, use their connections and power to help advocate for students and teachers. She described how when she first wrote about her decision (in the aforementioned 2016 article) to send her daughter to a known failing school, she received “valor” from the “outside world.”
That “valor” was more important than her daughter — who seemingly complained about the education she was receiving every single year. To Hannah-Jones, “valor” from the “outside world” made her feel righteous and good because virtue-signaling is the highest currency in the left-wing ecosphere.
liberalism. A mental disorder.
