As someone who has not been in FIRST during a conservative presidency I have been fine with FIRST. After Houston, I have seen the ugly side of the leaders of FRIST with their liberal agenda and ideology that they can change the world to believe what, they believe. The pop-shots at president Trumps presidency is in bad taste and should not be part of first. If FIRST wants to weigh in on politics, they should take lesson from ESPN and Target. If they continue this path they will open the door for an alternative to FIRST people will flock too.
ESPN is far from immune from the political fever that has afflicted so much of the country over the past year. Internally, thereās a feeling among many staffers ā both liberal and conservative ā that the companyās perceived move leftward has had a stifling effect on discourse inside the company and has affected its public-facing product. Consumers have sensed that same leftward movement, alienating some. http://dailyheadlines.net/2016/11/after-massive-cancellations-espn-admits-being-too-liberal/
Target Corporation stock is continuing to sink in value as it faces the boycott of over one million Americans object to their transgender, open-door bathroom policy. The Flush Target group hit the retailer hard with a new ad and the backlash has caused the stock to plunge near $67 per share, closing at $67.06, their lowest price since 2014.
Target stock has declined by over 19 percent since announcing its new open bathrooms policy.
FIRST is an organization that believes strongly in supporting women and helping science flourish. Itās therefore completely reasonable to talk about womenās issues (especially in STEM fields) and climate change at a FIRST event.
One of FIRSTās greatest qualities is itās emphasis on culture change and real world application. Politics are part of the culture we live in, and some politically tense subjects happen to be the real world weāre preparing kids for.
I would warn people to be careful what they post in a thread like this. Itās possible to have a healthy and productive conversation about this topic, but only if people act like Gracious Professionals.
While I do believe politics is real world and FIRST should recognize it to some degree, I also believe that when FIRST does recognize it they should make a conscious effort to keep the references as neutral as possible.
The core mission of FIRST is transforming our culture to be more accepting of Science and Technology. The Trump administration is directly attacking the ideals of FIRST by attacking truth and the scientific method. If you believe in the ideals of FIRST then I donāt see how you can support the Trump administration, the two are in direct opposition of each other. FIRST should be more political not less, changing culture is going to be messy, there are going to be a lot of people who donāt like change and thatās ok.
Talking about women in STEM and science is totally reasonable. Saying things that even sound like making fun of the president is not a good idea.
Imagine showing those videos to a very pro-Trump school board. Do you think you could get them to approve more funding for robotics after listening to those comments?
The issue isnāt the topics which I agree are essential to FIRST, but how they were presented. It wasnāt professional, and just makes people upset.
For the record, the hardest hit to Targetās stock was their quarterly report that displayed poor earnings (predictable, not believed to be due to any protest condition) and questionable business direction.
Iām not really sure how your political affiliation has anything to do with supporting FIRST. Iām pretty sure you can support an organization that supports building robots, spreading STE(A)M, and changing peopleās lives for the better no matter which way you fall.
As a conservative, I still thought it was very neat that Obama recorded a video for Worlds in 2015. One of my team mateās disliked Obama so much, he just ignored the video. He wasnāt rude about it and, I encourage you to do the same thing if the same situation occursā¦
The programās stated mission is āchanging the culture.ā The ideals of opening doors to people of all backgrounds within the STEM fields, and promoting a cultural shift to embrace science, innovation, and evidence-driven decision making have been core goals of this program since literally day 1, and are preached about every year, at every event. There were no out-of-the-ordinary ideas featured in FIRSTās messaging this year aside from a few buzzwords that have entered our vocabulary due to recent events to connect their message to the current situation. I donāt think of these ideals and messages as being particularly āliberalā or particularly āconservativeā, rather, theyāre just plain good ideas. I know people across the political spectrum who enthusiastically support them. Heck, every previous administration in FIRSTās history, at least on the surface, has proudly supported these ideals regardless of party. There is a perception that things are different this time, and so it should be expected that weāll hear leaders of the movement to change the culture speaking out.
I fail to see how a version of FIRST which does not advocate for these core ideas, or actively opposes them, would be anything but directly operating in opposition to the reasons that this program and others like it exist in the first place.
If part of the politics seems to rely on denying scientific process, restrict open discourse (a core requirement of most scientific progress), and ignore provable factsā¦ I donāt see how itās not at odds with STEAM education. [1]
[1] To say nothing of proposed cuts to the the arts.
If you ask me, what FIRST leaders said is completely justified. If anyone is seriously threatening the values that FIRST stands for, I would expect the leaders to stand against them. The same goes no matter who that is, even if itās the government.
If you have a problem with āthe ugly side of the leaders of FIRST with their liberal agenda and ideology that they can change the world to believe what they believeā, you might want to look for a different robotics competition. The vision of FIRST is āTo transform our culture by creating a world where science and technology are celebrated and where young people dream of becoming science and technology leaders.ā They are literally saying their goal is to change the world. Claiming that they need to stop pushing some liberal agenda is goes against everything FIRST stands for.
I personally have no problem with people leaving the FIRST program if they disagree with FIRSTās actions. Not every program is for everyone. If you donāt stand by FIRSTās mission and vision, there are plenty of other robotics competitions that donāt seek to transform the world. Meanwhile Iāll be here making the world better through STEM.
This is not to say that anyone who supports the current administration cannot be involved in FIRST, just that if you think that promoting a STEM culture is political and evil maybe you should find somewhere else to build your robots
Thanks Tyler!