Did you take a class in critical race theory?

[Copernicus]

Harry's point is that mortgages depend more on "objective criteria" such as credit scores than race, but I do think Politesse is right about how CRT works. The point is that one's general credit rating has to reach a threshold that is much harder for people in certain racial classes. So the system discriminates, not necessarily the actual lender. And that is why Poli's posts are so relevant to this discussion. CRT is portrayed by Republicans and conservatives as an attempt to actually blame racism on white people. That is what drives the hysterical reaction to CRT, which is mischaracterized as having something to do with K-12 education. The fact is that the real CRT is about as far away from its popular reputation as one can get. It has nothing to do with making white people the problem. The demonization of CRT is all about rebranding it. Since almost nobody outside of academia is familiar with the real theory, the rebranding effort is largely successful. Even those demonizing it don't realize how different the real theory is from how they themselves portray it.

I don't disagree. However, there is a very large issue here. When does the average republican (or people to the right) understand nuance? They have an incredible difficult time understanding the difference between today's definition of socialism and the traditional definition of socialism. CRT is more complicated and nuanced than socialism! And this group of folks represents a very large, very motivated group of the electorate. I'm sorry to say that but the CRT issue will be a very large loser for the left over time.

I agree with you on that point, and I also agree with Don2 that not all Republicans who purvey this nonsense about CRT are naive or ignorant on the actual theory. That isn't the point. This just shows how well-organized the right wing propaganda mill is at spinning liberal-progressive messaging strategies. People don't know what "systemic racism" is, but they sure do know it when they feel themselves being accused of racism. The "Critical Race Theory" label contains all of the words that evoke a visceral anger at people who call Republicans and conservatives racists, and it sounds even more like academic bullshit than "systemic racism". There isn't a lot that the left can do, especially if they get bogged down in trying to defend the real CRT, as opposed to the straw man version that is being sold over the media, both mass and social. Nuanced explanations aren't going to do much to change public perceptions. Those who oppose this whole line of rhetoric should probably find ways to change the language of the debate by denying the relevance of CRT, because it really is just a manufactured controversy built on a framework of misleading rhetoric. The CRT issue is a loser for the left, but it was designed by those on the right to be nothing more than that. What is relevant is that everyone should be treated equally regardless of race or gender, so the debate needs to be reframed in more neutral, less academic-sounding terms.

 

[Rhea]

It would not be hard at all to take advantage of prior racism to commit new racism, but with deniability.

For example:

What if prior racism causes Black Americans to have less wealth passed down, so their savings accounts are smaller. (We know this one is true)
Leading Black borrowers to tend toward debt-to-income ratios, like 45
Versus white borrowers whose parents were allowed to have rank in the army and were allowed to get office jobs, who can put a little extra down and have a 35 DI
And what if having a debt-to-income ratio of 35-45 has approximately the same default rate
But if you set your cutoff at 40, you manage to eliminate many more Black borrowers, who are not more likely to default, but they’re Black, so…. Yah.

That’s how you use past racism to enact present racism, while claiming, “It’s an objective number, though. I didn’t do a racism!”

 

[Harry Bosch]

Harry's point is that mortgages depend more on "objective criteria" such as credit scores than race, but I do think Politesse is right about how CRT works. The point is that one's general credit rating has to reach a threshold that is much harder for people in certain racial classes. So the system discriminates, not necessarily the actual lender. And that is why Poli's posts are so relevant to this discussion. CRT is portrayed by Republicans and conservatives as an attempt to actually blame racism on white people. That is what drives the hysterical reaction to CRT, which is mischaracterized as having something to do with K-12 education. The fact is that the real CRT is about as far away from its popular reputation as one can get. It has nothing to do with making white people the problem. The demonization of CRT is all about rebranding it. Since almost nobody outside of academia is familiar with the real theory, the rebranding effort is largely successful. Even those demonizing it don't realize how different the real theory is from how they themselves portray it.

I don't disagree. However, there is a very large issue here. When does the average republican (or people to the right) understand nuance? They have an incredible difficult time understanding the difference between today's definition of socialism and the traditional definition of socialism. CRT is more complicated and nuanced than socialism! And this group of folks represents a very large, very motivated group of the electorate. I'm sorry to say that but the CRT issue will be a very large loser for the left over time.

I agree with you on that point, and I also agree with Don2 that not all Republicans who purvey this nonsense about CRT are naive or ignorant on the actual theory. That isn't the point. This just shows how well-organized the right wing propaganda mill is at spinning liberal-progressive messaging strategies. People don't know what "systemic racism" is, but they sure do know it when they feel themselves being accused of racism. The "Critical Race Theory" label contains all of the words that evoke a visceral anger at people who call Republicans and conservatives racists, and it sounds even more like academic bullshit than "systemic racism". There isn't a lot that the left can do, especially if they get bogged down in trying to defend the real CRT, as opposed to the straw man version that is being sold over the media, both mass and social. Nuanced explanations aren't going to do much to change public perceptions. Those who oppose this whole line of rhetoric should probably find ways to change the language of the debate by denying the relevance of CRT, because it really is just a manufactured controversy built on a framework of misleading rhetoric. The CRT issue is a loser for the left, but it was designed by those on the right to be nothing more than that. What is relevant is that everyone should be treated equally regardless of race or gender, so the debate needs to be reframed in more neutral, less academic-sounding terms.

Totally agree. The left is so bad with political language. It's like we intentionally pick slogans just designed to piss off the people in the middle. Why?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It would not be hard at all to take advantage of prior racism to commit new racism, but with deniability.

For example:

What if prior racism causes Black Americans to have less wealth passed down, so their savings accounts are smaller. (We know this one is true)
Leading Black borrowers to tend toward debt-to-income ratios, like 45
Versus white borrowers whose parents were allowed to have rank in the army and were allowed to get office jobs, who can put a little extra down and have a 35 DI
And what if having a debt-to-income ratio of 35-45 has approximately the same default rate
But if you set your cutoff at 40, you manage to eliminate many more Black borrowers, who are not more likely to default, but they’re Black, so…. Yah.

That’s how you use past racism to enact present racism, while claiming, “It’s an objective number, though. I didn’t do a racism!”

"And what if having a debt-to-income ration of 35-45 has approximately the same default rate"--while you're at it why not assume someone who is drunk is no more likely to get into an accident than someone who is sober? At least back when I was applying for a mortgage you would be laughed out of the bank if you showed up with a DI ratio of 45.

You're trying to pretend that very real differences don't actually matter in order to support your claim of racism.

And note that the size of your savings account doesn't enter into the picture in a mortgage application anyway. They care about DI ratio, down payment and credit rating. The last mortgage I had they didn't even know my skin color until closing.

 

[Politesse]

I agree with you on that point, and I also agree with Don2 that not all Republicans who purvey this nonsense about CRT are naive or ignorant on the actual theory. That isn't the point. This just shows how well-organized the right wing propaganda mill is at spinning liberal-progressive messaging strategies. People don't know what "systemic racism" is, but they sure do know it when they feel themselves being accused of racism. The "Critical Race Theory" label contains all of the words that evoke a visceral anger at people who call Republicans and conservatives racists, and it sounds even more like academic bullshit than "systemic racism". There isn't a lot that the left can do, especially if they get bogged down in trying to defend the real CRT, as opposed to the straw man version that is being sold over the media, both mass and social. Nuanced explanations aren't going to do much to change public perceptions. Those who oppose this whole line of rhetoric should probably find ways to change the language of the debate by denying the relevance of CRT, because it really is just a manufactured controversy built on a framework of misleading rhetoric. The CRT issue is a loser for the left, but it was designed by those on the right to be nothing more than that. What is relevant is that everyone should be treated equally regardless of race or gender, so the debate needs to be reframed in more neutral, less academic-sounding terms.

Totally agree. The left is so bad with political language. It's like we intentionally pick slogans just designed to piss off the people in the middle. Why?

Critical Race Theory was not intended to be a political slogan, let alone for the "Left"; it was nominated for the role with ill intent.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

On my drive NJ/MD, they had a very good interview on Fresh Air about CRT, and there was talk about how the right-wing pretty much pigeonholes whatever the heck they want with CRT even when it isn't even part of CRT.

Kind of like complaining about hand ball violations in Basketball games.

 

[Metaphor]

Speaking of the downloadable toolkit for parents put out by the Heritage Foundation labeled "Reject Critical Race Theory," ...

I only downloaded it to examine their propaganda's content, but now they are emailing me, prompting me into "grassroots" action from the top-down direction:

[My Name is Here],

Thanks for downloading our critical race theory (CRT) ebook! Within the ebook, you will learn about what you can do to stop critical race theory.

One of the best ways to expose what is happening in schools with CRT is by submitting a FOIA request. Every state has different laws and procedures when it comes to submitting FOIA requests, so we have compiled links for each state to make it easier for you.

Head over to the ebook today to learn more about FOIA requests, see a sample of what to write, and to submit one. This will give you access to the debate and decision making process of your elected officials to ensure they are not pushing critical race theory into your schools.

Thank you!

Janae Stracke
Grassroots Director
Heritage Action​

I don't particularly see a problem with letting Americans know they have the right to request government information. Do you?

 

[Metaphor]

It would not be hard at all to take advantage of prior racism to commit new racism, but with deniability.

For example:

What if prior racism causes Black Americans to have less wealth passed down, so their savings accounts are smaller. (We know this one is true)
Leading Black borrowers to tend toward debt-to-income ratios, like 45
Versus white borrowers whose parents were allowed to have rank in the army and were allowed to get office jobs, who can put a little extra down and have a 35 DI
And what if having a debt-to-income ratio of 35-45 has approximately the same default rate
But if you set your cutoff at 40, you manage to eliminate many more Black borrowers, who are not more likely to default, but they’re Black, so…. Yah.

That’s how you use past racism to enact present racism, while claiming, “It’s an objective number, though. I didn’t do a racism!”

So you are proposing that
* The data show that D:I income ratios of 45 are similar risk as D:I ratios of 35
* Banks know this
* Banks set up the cutoff at a value just to be racist to black people, even though (if the risk is the same), they could be setting it at 45 and make more money?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Speaking of the downloadable toolkit for parents put out by the Heritage Foundation labeled "Reject Critical Race Theory," ...

I only downloaded it to examine their propaganda's content, but now they are emailing me, prompting me into "grassroots" action from the top-down direction:

[My Name is Here],

Thanks for downloading our critical race theory (CRT) ebook! Within the ebook, you will learn about what you can do to stop critical race theory.

One of the best ways to expose what is happening in schools with CRT is by submitting a FOIA request. Every state has different laws and procedures when it comes to submitting FOIA requests, so we have compiled links for each state to make it easier for you.

Head over to the ebook today to learn more about FOIA requests, see a sample of what to write, and to submit one. This will give you access to the debate and decision making process of your elected officials to ensure they are not pushing critical race theory into your schools.

Thank you!

Janae Stracke
Grassroots Director
Heritage Action​

I don't particularly see a problem with letting Americans know they have the right to request government information. Do you?

That's a disingenuous strawman.

 

[Metaphor]

Speaking of the downloadable toolkit for parents put out by the Heritage Foundation labeled "Reject Critical Race Theory," ...

I only downloaded it to examine their propaganda's content, but now they are emailing me, prompting me into "grassroots" action from the top-down direction:

[My Name is Here],

Thanks for downloading our critical race theory (CRT) ebook! Within the ebook, you will learn about what you can do to stop critical race theory.

One of the best ways to expose what is happening in schools with CRT is by submitting a FOIA request. Every state has different laws and procedures when it comes to submitting FOIA requests, so we have compiled links for each state to make it easier for you.

Head over to the ebook today to learn more about FOIA requests, see a sample of what to write, and to submit one. This will give you access to the debate and decision making process of your elected officials to ensure they are not pushing critical race theory into your schools.

Thank you!

Janae Stracke
Grassroots Director
Heritage Action​

I don't particularly see a problem with letting Americans know they have the right to request government information. Do you?

That's a disingenuous strawman.

What's a strawman about it? I asked a question.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Recall that Fox News & Friends prompted viewers to go to a link at the Heritage Foundation website to read all about Critical Race Theory. Recall I did this to look into it and I found a propaganda pamphlet (pdf) aimed at parents called a "toolkit" that included activism at board of education meetings and how to do FOIA requests. I received an email which I posted. Two days ago, I received my second email, but I thought this thread dropped off the radar so I had not posted it. The second email is just a partisan Ask for money. Nothing even about CRT which is weird but probably effective.

XXX, we’re just hours away from our mid-month deadline and we still need your help. We’re trying to jumpstart our End of Quarter efforts with a BIG turnout.

Can you chip in now?

YES: DONATE NOW [A link to donate]

XXX, our mission to protect our elections and defend our voting rights is one of the most important battles we've fought.

And we cannot afford to come up short now, because Senate Leader Schumer and Speaker Pelosi are more determined than ever to pass a pair of bills to rig the election laws in their favor.

They're working overtime to secure the votes they need to pass the #CorruptPoliticiansAct (S.1) and Pelosi's power grab (H.R. 4). But grassroots conservatives are working even harder to stop them!

With our first End of Quarter deadline of the summer coming up, we need every conservative on board to keep our momentum going strong. Will you step up and donate today, before the deadline at 11:59PM?

By donating below you are making an immediate contribution

[There are various buttons here in the email for donating between $25 and $100]

If you've saved payment information with Revv, your donation will go through automatically.



Thank you, XXX. We appreciate your support.



Jessica Anderson

Executive Director

Heritage Action​

 

[ZiprHead]

That's a disingenuous strawman.

What's a strawman about it? I asked a question.

Yes, you did, in typical Tucker Carlson fashion.

 

[Metaphor]

That's a disingenuous strawman.

What's a strawman about it? I asked a question.

Yes, you did, in typical Tucker Carlson fashion.

So, Don2 can't answer my question, and neither can you, and yet the question is still a strawman.

 

[ZiprHead]

Yes, you did, in typical Tucker Carlson fashion.

So, Don2 can't answer my question, and neither can you, and yet the question is still a strawman.

You've asked the same question several times. It's been answered several times. Instead of repeating the question, why don't you address the answers?

 

[laughing dog]

It would not be hard at all to take advantage of prior racism to commit new racism, but with deniability.

For example:

What if prior racism causes Black Americans to have less wealth passed down, so their savings accounts are smaller. (We know this one is true)
Leading Black borrowers to tend toward debt-to-income ratios, like 45
Versus white borrowers whose parents were allowed to have rank in the army and were allowed to get office jobs, who can put a little extra down and have a 35 DI
And what if having a debt-to-income ratio of 35-45 has approximately the same default rate
But if you set your cutoff at 40, you manage to eliminate many more Black borrowers, who are not more likely to default, but they’re Black, so…. Yah.

That’s how you use past racism to enact present racism, while claiming, “It’s an objective number, though. I didn’t do a racism!”

So you are proposing that
* The data show that D:I income ratios of 45 are similar risk as D:I ratios of 35
* Banks know this
* Banks set up the cutoff at a value just to be racist to black people, even though (if the risk is the same), they could be setting it at 45 and make more money?

No one said the cutoff was done just to be racist - that is another one of your predictable straw men. Regardless of the intent of the practice, the result is the same - blacks are less likely to get mortgages even though the risk the same. And this result is due in part to past racist policies that helped to keep black wealth down.

 

[SimpleDon]

I've never heard of it until recently through talking heads only, never through academic sources. I suspect it may be a thing in some liberal arts classes in college and very few people have been exposed in that way to the concept. But I'd like to observe how frequent such past class attendance is here in the forum.

Like you, I never heard about critical race theory until recently. This isn't a surprise, I wager that there are thousands of similar academic theories of which I am blissfully unaware.

I am over 70 years old, however, and was raised in the Jim Crow south, Texas. It is no exaggeration to say that I lived through critical race theory. I don't need to study it, I lived through it.

My father was an arch-conservative, but he wasn't a racist. He was raised in San Francisco where his father worked for a Chinese trading company.

My father and his father understood the lies behind racism, and they behaved accordingly, even when they moved to Texas. I was raised as an anti-racist. My father prevented me from going to an all-white school or belonging to an all-white boy scout troop or baseball team, for example.

The bottom line is that statutory racism was certainly the order of the day in the US for two hundred years or more. If you deny that systemic racism exists today then the question you need to answer is when did systemic racism vanish and what was responsible for killing it?

The 15th amendment is unambiguous and it didn't end the suppression of minorities voting rights that continues today. The voting rights bill of 1965 didn't end statutory minority voter suppression that continues today.

 

[Toni]

I mean we are stuck with blacks here.

You're stuck? How do you imagine they feel about it?

I know how I feel about being born in a wealthy Western democracy: I did not deserve to win such a fantastic prize in the geography-of-birth lottery, but I sure as hell am glad I got it.

With bonus points for being white and male.

 

[untermensche]

Being a white male helps to become part of the power structure. If you submit and say the right things.

It does not pay the rent in itself.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I've never heard of it until recently through talking heads only, never through academic sources. I suspect it may be a thing in some liberal arts classes in college and some very few people have been exposed in that way to the concept. But I'd like to observe how frequent such past class attendance is here in the forum.

Ya, it's a college level thing. The republicans are making it sound like it's taught in kindergarten.

That being said, it should probably be taught in kindergarten.

 

[SimpleDon]

I've never heard of it until recently through talking heads only, never through academic sources. I suspect it may be a thing in some liberal arts classes in college and some very few people have been exposed in that way to the concept. But I'd like to observe how frequent such past class attendance is here in the forum.

Ya, it's a college-level thing. The Republicans are making it sound like it's taught in kindergarten.

That being said, it should probably be taught in kindergarten.

Reading through the posts it seems that the Republicans/libertarians/conservatives/... aren't so much confused about CRT as they are afraid of any discussion of racism in the public schools. Except, of course, for the scourge of racism against white males, especially in admissions to elite universities.