GOP 'protecting' our schools

[Jimmy Higgins]

How? It was about creating all-white neighborhoods. Explicitly. In the law. You can't explain this without mentioning race, or the role of the white middle class in supporting redlining.

You don't have to blame all White people for that!

Conservatives warn of the dangers of broad brushing... all white people.

 

[Ford]

Of course not. But history should be taught as it happened, not as a propagandized mess reformulated to excuse the actions and motivations of the powerful. Redlining is the formalization of a desire to create all-white neighborhoods. It is not and never was anything else. You cannot accurately describe the practice as anything other than a white sergregationist social project.

I don't disagree. But you can do that without blaming a specific race.

How? It was about creating all-white neighborhoods. Explicitly. In the law. You can't explain this without mentioning race, or the role of the white middle class in supporting it. It did. That's just facts. Quotes. Recorded history. If you pretend they had any other goal, you're going to have to ignore pretty much every primary document involved.

"See, Apartheid was a system whereby the people who just happened to be descended from British immigrants to South Africa imposed purely economic sanctions on the people who were descended from the native Africans. The skin color of the people involved on either side was not an issue, because we wouldn't want to cast aspersions on the British descendants. They were just trying to keep their traditions alive!"

(taken from the "History of Africa" by Trausti)

 

[Bomb#20]

Without blaming a specific race. Did you miss the 20th Century?

Apparently you did. What exactly do you think redlining is? Your ancestors were not as ashamed of their racism as you are, they built it right into the law. And you cannot teach US history accurately without discussing it.

You're proposing to teach US history accurately by telling children that redlining was perpetrated by Trausti's ancestors? How do you know? Did Trausti tell you who his ancestors are? Or did you break into TFT's records, find out his email address, dig up his real name, go to Salt Lake City and plow through the Mormons' massive database of non-Mormons' genealogy, and pay a PI to dig up dirt on two or more of his ancestors?

 

[marc]

ok, forget redlining and apartheid. I'd like to see how a teacher is supposed to handle women getting the right to vote in 1920 after a 150 year of being denied the right by... um... non-women..?.

 

[Bomb#20]

"See, Apartheid was a system whereby the people who just happened to be descended from British immigrants to South Africa imposed purely economic sanctions on the people who were descended from the native Africans. The skin color of the people involved on either side was not an issue, because we wouldn't want to cast aspersions on the British descendants. They were just trying to keep their traditions alive!"

(taken from the "History of Africa" by Trausti)

Yeah, nothing says "British" like "Apartheid". You know the English word for "apartheid" is "segregation", don't you? You're reminding me of the iceberg joke.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So the Chinese guy is punching the Jewish guy over the Titanic because...? Yes, punchline, but work up to it matters just as much. Talk about stretching a premise to fit a preconceived idea that actually didn't work too well.

But there is always this, apparently six Chinese males survived the sinking of the Titanic.

 

[Trausti]

Without blaming a specific race. Did you miss the 20th Century?

Apparently you did. What exactly do you think redlining is? Your ancestors were not as ashamed of their racism as you are, they built it right into the law. And you cannot teach US history accurately without discussing it.

You're proposing to teach US history accurately by telling children that redlining was perpetrated by Trausti's ancestors? How do you know? Did Trausti tell you who his ancestors are? Or did you break into TFT's records, find out his email address, dig up his real name, go to Salt Lake City and plow through the Mormons' massive database of non-Mormons' genealogy, and pay a PI to dig up dirt on two or more of his ancestors?

 

[Politesse]

You don't understand critical race theory in the slightest... neither "corrupt natures" nor "instinct" have nothing to do with it. Indeed, one of the foundational assumptions of critical race theory is that race itself is culturally constructed, having no true connection to biology and thus arbitrary in form. Racial stereotypes are created to serve the interests of the powerful, not the other way around. What is said in critical race theory is that due to participation in an inherently racist social system, privileged classes are obliged by their circumstances to participate in racism. This isn't because there's something wrong with their genetics, but because their social climate has been engineered in such a way as to privilege their life and prerogatives over others, especially through the intersection points of society and legal structures.

 

[Trausti]

You don't understand critical race theory in the slightest...

 

[Trausti]

You don't understand critical race theory in the slightest... neither "corrupt natures" nor "instinct" have nothing to do with it. Indeed, one of the foundational assumptions of critical race theory is that race itself is culturally constructed, having no true connection to biology and thus arbitrary in form. Racial stereotypes are created to serve the interests of the powerful, not the other way around. What is said in critical race theory is that due to participation in an inherently racist social system, privileged classes are obliged to participate in racism. This isn't because there's something wrong with their genetics, but because their social climate has been engineered in such a way as to privilege their life and prerogatives over others.

Are you joking? For CRT, focus on race is everything. There are no other explanations. The individualism of the enlightenment is rejected. Thus, I reject CRT.

 

[Politesse]

You don't understand critical race theory in the slightest... neither "corrupt natures" nor "instinct" have nothing to do with it. Indeed, one of the foundational assumptions of critical race theory is that race itself is culturally constructed, having no true connection to biology and thus arbitrary in form. Racial stereotypes are created to serve the interests of the powerful, not the other way around. What is said in critical race theory is that due to participation in an inherently racist social system, privileged classes are obliged to participate in racism. This isn't because there's something wrong with their genetics, but because their social climate has been engineered in such a way as to privilege their life and prerogatives over others.

Are you joking? For CRT, focus on race is everything. There are no other explanations. The individualism of the enlightenment is rejected. Thus, I reject CRT.

You simply aren't correct about that. Race is indeed very important within critical race theory, hence the name, but the kind of "race" you mean, an inherent quality of a human being that you can perceive by looking at the pigmentation of their skin, is definitively rejected by all formulations of CRT. Race, in CRT, is exclusively and definitively a social construct. Real, but optional; real only in the sense that people make it real by beleiving that it is and acting accordingly.

The idea that "everything" is defined by race in CRT is also a very silly thing for you to claim, as I am certain you've heard of intersectionality theory, itself the intellectual offspring of CRT and included in most theoretical descriptions of race these days. Intersectionality theory, at its core, asserts that race cannot be understood in isolation, but only as one component of a more complex social system in which other hierarchical signals of status interact with and are modified by concepts of race.

 

[Trausti]

You don't understand critical race theory in the slightest... neither "corrupt natures" nor "instinct" have nothing to do with it. Indeed, one of the foundational assumptions of critical race theory is that race itself is culturally constructed, having no true connection to biology and thus arbitrary in form. Racial stereotypes are created to serve the interests of the powerful, not the other way around. What is said in critical race theory is that due to participation in an inherently racist social system, privileged classes are obliged to participate in racism. This isn't because there's something wrong with their genetics, but because their social climate has been engineered in such a way as to privilege their life and prerogatives over others.

Are you joking? For CRT, focus on race is everything. There are no other explanations. The individualism of the enlightenment is rejected. Thus, I reject CRT.

You simply aren't correct about that. Race is indeed very important within critical race theory, hence the name, but the kind of "race" you mean, an inherent quality of a human being that you can perceive by looking at the pigmentation of their skin, is definitively rejected by all formulations of CRT. Race, in CRT, is exclusively and definitively a social construct. Real, but optional; real only in the sense that people make it real by beleiving that it is and acting accordingly.

The idea that "everything" is defined by race in CRT is also a very silly thing for you to claim, as I am certain you've heard of intersectionality theory, itself the intellectual offspring of CRT and included in most theoretical descriptions of race these days. Intersectionality theory, at its core, asserts that race cannot be understood in isolation, but only as one component of a more complex social system in which other hierarchical signals of status interact with and are modified by concepts of race.

Religion. You have yourself a religion. Please leave the rest of us alone with your divisive crap.

 

[Politesse]

I've always had a tolerant attitude when it comes to religion, but that's not what social theories are. If you're going to get so worked up about the idea, you should at least learn a little bit about it. I see very little evidence that people were, in fact, "just getting along" per the advent of CRT.

I've cited some basic sources. Can you?

 

[Trausti]

Asian American students have a target on their backs thanks to critical race theory

 

[Trausti]

I've always had a tolerant attitude when it comes to religion, but that's not what social theories are. If you're going to get so worked up about the idea, you should at least learn a little bit about it.

You have a belief system. You are seeing race everywhere; just like the fire and brimstone preacher sees the Devil's mischief. Is the reason Hispanics and Asians live longer than Whites because of social hierarchy?

 

[Politesse]

So, uninformed opinion pieces in national media and contextless .gifs from conservative websites?

Also: you sure make a lot of racial generalizations for someone who claims to be beyond any accusation of racism.

 

[Trausti]

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/sullydish/status/1372988388341612554[/TWEET]

 

[Trausti]

So, uninformed opinion pieces in national media and contextless .gifs from conservative websites?

Also: you sure make a lot of racial generalizations for someone who claims to be beyond any accusation of racism.

CRT is not science. Yet, its proponents seem to think it is. There is nothing backing it - or "intersectionality" - expect the "because I say so" of its priestly class.

 

[Politesse]

And avalanches of empirical data, which is really more the point where scientists are concerned.

 

[Elixir]

...where "critical race theory" is code for "white neo-conservative racism neurosis".