What, exactly, is CRT?

[SLD]

Emphasis added. This was discussed in the other thread, which is about the actual legislation.

You are rephrasing the law into things it doesn't say. It doesn't say teaching THAT one race is superior is illegal. The actual text amounts to inclusion of the concept in teaching is illegal. See the difference? Also, the topic of the legislation is in another thread, not this one.

From the other thread:

That link doesn’t work anymore. But it seems that other legislation might be different than Alabama’s. My reading of this piece is that it would allow a teacher to state in a high school class that the U.S. Constitution was the product of white male property owners and was written to specifically preserve their powers and enshrine African slavery as a permanent institution. As long as they don’t say whites as a whole are guilty of racism Or that blacks are a superior race.

 

[KeepTalking]

I came by this short video of Putin making this short speech about wokeness and it seemed appropriate for this thread. President Putin's own words about how he believes western PC culture and wokeness amounts to crimes against humanity. Appearing to be hyperbole....until you actually fit this in the context of Soviet history.





I agree with what Putin had to say. And I did not know this before, but the Bolshevik were a very "woke" movement during Lenins revolution. That's just not something I learned in my history class at grammer school. They say history does not always repeat itself but it does seem to rhyme. And this time it is looking to be the "woke" US instead of the "woke" USSR.

The Russian revolution was woke? That is news to me. I hope you aren't basing that perspective on Putin's quote alone.

Please provide your operating definition of "woke", and show us how it was woke.

Also, this thread is about CRT, not "woke". There was another thread about defining woke, but it turned out to be quite the shit show, so has been buried. I am loathe to recommend that you resurrect that thread, but perhaps your curious endorsement of Putin's perspective can be used to start a new thread.

 

[Bomb#20]

Ok so I’m coming late to this party but yesterday the Alabama Board of Education passed the following teaching ban:

"no state education agency, local education agency, or school should train any administrator, teacher, staff member, or employee, or teach any student, to believe that one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex; that members of one race or sex cannot, or should not attempt to, treat others disrespectfully due to race or sex; or that fault, blame, or bias should be assigned to a race or sex, or to members of a race or sex solely or partly because of their race or sex;"

The governor promptly tweeted that CRT had been banned from our schools.

Does this in fact ban the teaching of important key elements of CRT? I was unaware that CRT advocated the superiority of one race or even that people are guilty of some misdeeds merely because of their race.

No school should teach any student to believe that members of one race or sex should not attempt to treat others disrespectfully? Seriously? That's a triple negative; the state is opposing being respectful. This cannot be what they intended to enact. It appears the Alabama Board of Education members need a refresher on basic reading and writing.

 

[none]

The people understand maybe 2 syllables at a time, words ain't mean nuthin'
Swastika, now that's three syllables... Confederate, who's going to understand that?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

No school should teach any student to believe that members of one race or sex should not attempt to treat others disrespectfully? Seriously? That's a triple negative; the state is opposing being respectful. This cannot be what they intended to enact. It appears the Alabama Board of Education members need a refresher on basic reading and writing.

I am unsure that is what the law actually says, though it does say that the schools cannot categorize students by race, which is probably a necessity to search out racial discrimination.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I came by this short video of Putin making this short speech about wokeness and it seemed appropriate for this thread. President Putin's own words about how he believes western PC culture and wokeness amounts to crimes against humanity. Appearing to be hyperbole....until you actually fit this in the context of Soviet history.

"The advocates of so-called "social progress" believe they are introducing humanity to some kind of new and better consciousness. Godspeed, hoist the flags as we say and go right ahead! The only thing that I want to say now is that their prescriptions are not new at all because Russia has been there already."

I agree with what Putin had to say. And I did not know this before, but the Bolshevik were a very "woke" movement during Lenins revolution. That's just not something I learned in my history class at grammer school. They say history does not always repeat itself but it does seem to rhyme. And this time it is looking to be the "woke" US instead of the "woke" USSR.

Yours is a very silly point to make. You are trying to tarnish something by association, but you are also cherry-picking the history in order to create that narrative. While elements of the Revolution and elements of both Lenin and Trotsky may match some elements of wokeness, Stalin eliminated many of those things when he took over after Lenin's death.

 

[thebeave]

Seems like Mr. Kendi has undermined his own theories on race with a recent tweet. Oops.

https://abcnews4.com/news/nation-wo...ey-showing-american-colleges-favor-minorities

Progressive author and critical race theorist Ibram X. Kendi posted something on Twitter that appeared to contradict his messaging that a “structurally racist” America exhibits racism in its current society, according to critics.

Kendi allegedly posted an article which reported on a survey that found over a third of white students applying to colleges had lied about their ethnicity on their applications to get accepted. It showed that “about 3 in 4, or 77 percent” of the white applicants who faked their minority status had their applications accepted.

Kendi, a Boston University professor who has also worked in conjunction with other universities across the country to promote his anti-racist activism, reportedly posted the article alongside text affirming the survey’s findings.

 

[Politesse]

Seems like Mr. Kendi has undermined his own theories on race with a recent tweet. Oops.

https://abcnews4.com/news/nation-wo...ey-showing-american-colleges-favor-minorities

Progressive author and critical race theorist Ibram X. Kendi posted something on Twitter that appeared to contradict his messaging that a “structurally racist” America exhibits racism in its current society, according to critics.

Kendi allegedly posted an article which reported on a survey that found over a third of white students applying to colleges had lied about their ethnicity on their applications to get accepted. It showed that “about 3 in 4, or 77 percent” of the white applicants who faked their minority status had their applications accepted.

Kendi, a Boston University professor who has also worked in conjunction with other universities across the country to promote his anti-racist activism, reportedly posted the article alongside text affirming the survey’s findings.

I'm not seeing the connection. If even Whites with false racial identities have a higher acceptance rate than actual minorities, isn't that more or else exactly what you would expect in a system where systemic colorism is prevalent?

 

[Metaphor]

Seems like Mr. Kendi has undermined his own theories on race with a recent tweet. Oops.

https://abcnews4.com/news/nation-wo...ey-showing-american-colleges-favor-minorities

Progressive author and critical race theorist Ibram X. Kendi posted something on Twitter that appeared to contradict his messaging that a “structurally racist” America exhibits racism in its current society, according to critics.

Kendi allegedly posted an article which reported on a survey that found over a third of white students applying to colleges had lied about their ethnicity on their applications to get accepted. It showed that “about 3 in 4, or 77 percent” of the white applicants who faked their minority status had their applications accepted.

Kendi, a Boston University professor who has also worked in conjunction with other universities across the country to promote his anti-racist activism, reportedly posted the article alongside text affirming the survey’s findings.

I'm not seeing the connection. If even Whites with false racial identities have a higher acceptance rate than actual minorities, isn't that more or else exactly what you would expect in a system where systemic colorism is prevalent?

First, Kendi's link didn't talk about colourism but racism. Second, how many colleges actually assess a student's colour other than by visual confirmation? How many students have a physical interview or send a photo with an application? (A university asking for a photo seems like a really fucking weird thing to do, but I haven't applied to universities in America).

But there is not enough data at the survey link to understand the effect of the lying. It says that 77 per cent of the white people who lied were accepted, but it does not say what per cent of white people who did not lie were accepted. Of course, the raw stats wouldn't be definitive either, as it seems to me that poorer-performing white students would have more motivation to lie.

But you also haven't said how the white students who lied have a 'higher acceptance rate than actual minorities'? I don't see that anywhere in the data either.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Seems like Mr. Kendi has undermined his own theories on race with a recent tweet. Oops.

https://abcnews4.com/news/nation-wo...ey-showing-american-colleges-favor-minorities

Progressive author and critical race theorist Ibram X. Kendi posted something on Twitter that appeared to contradict his messaging that a “structurally racist” America exhibits racism in its current society, according to critics.

Kendi allegedly posted an article which reported on a survey that found over a third of white students applying to colleges had lied about their ethnicity on their applications to get accepted. It showed that “about 3 in 4, or 77 percent” of the white applicants who faked their minority status had their applications accepted.

Kendi, a Boston University professor who has also worked in conjunction with other universities across the country to promote his anti-racist activism, reportedly posted the article alongside text affirming the survey’s findings.

In other words, university admissions are biased against whites.

 

[Swammerdami]

NPR interviews a Black liberal whose recent book argues against "anti-racism."

I have no doubt that Martin Luther King would have understood what I'm saying in terms of helping people who actually need help. It's not an accident that at the end of his life, he was beginning to focus more on poverty in general than on the race question.


The idea is to help people who need help. The modern idea that microaggressions and how white people feel in their heart of hearts is what we should be thinking about to me is a detour. Frankly, the left has to get more honest about this sort of thing. If you want to say that Youngkin has exploited a certain kind of sentiment and maybe sometimes even racist sentiment, there's an argument there.


But for the left to say that there's nothing going on in schools that we need to talk about, that critical race theory isn't in the schools because nobody's teaching the papers of Richard Delgado and Kimberlé Crenshaw — that's a debate team feint. There is something going on in terms of how children are being taught in a lot of schools, and to pretend that it's not true, or to quietly think that that's the way it should be and so therefore we shouldn't talk about it as a new development: that doesn't work. There's a certain kind of maybe, regrettably, imperfect voter who is not fooled by that. And it's time for a more honest conversation.

PS: I did a copy-paste from the NPR page and, as you see, two hyperlinks were preserved! I've not seen this before. Was this the NPR page, our new MB software, the latest Firefox update, or a combination of all three?

 

[ZiprHead]

PS: I did a copy-paste from the NPR page and, as you see, two hyperlinks were preserved! I've not seen this before. Was this the NPR page, our new MB software, the latest Firefox update, or a combination of all three?

The new board software. Pretty slick, I think.

 

[Politesse]

Why do "moderates" always feel the need to shit on Dr King's legacy? No, he never abandoned the cause of racial equality. Yes, he was an advocate for the oppressed underclass, regardless of race his whole life, not just at the end.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Why do "moderates" always feel the need to shit on Dr King's legacy? No, he never abandoned the cause of racial equality. Yes, he was an advocate for the oppressed underclass, regardless of race his whole life, not just at the end.

It's actually a really good point, if you think about it. Just put it in the context of the assassination of King. It had nothing to do with the prevalence of racism. Rich people assassinated him, other rich people of multiple races covered for it, and then the wealthy class of diverse people tarnished his reputation. Decades later when Arizona didn't want to make MLK day a national holiday they claimed it was because it would be economically divisive.

Okay, seriously, now, this part "There is something going on in terms of how children are being taught in a lot of schools, and to pretend that it's not true, or to quietly think that that's the way it should be and so therefore we shouldn't talk about it as a new development: that doesn't work." is an idea that is worth discussion by rational, disinterested persons. The problem is that most people are not rational, most people are not disinterested, and most of the rest have had the well poisoned by serious propaganda. Even a seemingly "moderate" statement such as the quote is more of a political attack containing untrue information directed against one set of people. It is biased, but if deconstructed could provide a basis for discussion with people who are interested in Reason.

 

[Politesse]

Why do "moderates" always feel the need to shit on Dr King's legacy? No, he never abandoned the cause of racial equality. Yes, he was an advocate for the oppressed underclass, regardless of race his whole life, not just at the end.

It's actually a really good point, if you think about it. Just put it in the context of the assassination of King. It had nothing to do with the prevalence of racism. Rich people assassinated him, other rich people of multiple races covered for it, and then the wealthy class of diverse people tarnished his reputation. Decades later when Arizona didn't want to make MLK day a national holiday they claimed it was because it would be economically divisive.

Conclusion: we should eat the rich?

 

[Lumpenproletariat]

Does CRT = "defund the police"?

These have something in common.

Both are based on the premise that the nation is systemically racist, and so therefore simple reform of the police won't fix anything.

Even if CRTers deny a connection, it seems that "defund the police" is a product of CRT thinking, because it's based on the premise that the whole society is structurally racist, which means that mere reform of the police won't fix the basic problem, which goes much deeper. So to fix what's wrong requires total elimination of the American system of law and justice and law enforcement and courts, which includes elimination of police as we know it.

So don't CRT and "defund the police" seem to say about the same thing?

 

[Politesse]

Does CRT = "defund the police"?

These have something in common.

Both are based on the premise that the nation is systemically racist, and so therefore simple reform of the police won't fix anything.

Even if CRTers deny a connection, it seems that "defund the police" is a product of CRT thinking, because it's based on the premise that the whole society is structurally racist, which means that mere reform of the police won't fix the basic problem, which goes much deeper. So to fix what's wrong requires total elimination of the American system of law and justice and law enforcement and courts, which includes elimination of police as we know it.

So don't CRT and "defund the police" seem to say about the same thing?

If you don't know anything about either, sure.

 

[lpetrich]

Given that this thread has turned into discussion of how best to handle racial issues, I must mention something that I found recently:

New York Times Pitchbot on Twitter: "Were Abolitionists Too Woke?

A new book by historian Niall Ferguson argues that if anti-slavery northerners had been less condescending towards slave-owning southerners, the Civil War might have been averted." / Twitter
It seems to be a satire account -- Super-edgy anonymous left-ish irony account. Author of "The Trump Supporter in the Vegan Co-op: Reflections on Division and Commonality".

Emily but said in a spooky voice on Twitter: "@DougJBalloon We joke, but the NYT literally said this back before the Civil War: (pic link)" / Twitter

The very best thing that could possibly be done towards the abolition of Slavery would be for the North to stop talking about it. Ten years of absolute silence would do more than fifty of turmoil and hostility, towards a peaceful removal of the evil. It is quite possible that the Abolition crusade may force a bloody and violent termination of the system, but this no sane man desires: and any other solution of the problem is infinitely retarded by the incessant intermeddling of parties who have neither responsibility nor power in regard to the subject. The great necessity is to let the South alone,-to leave them leisure to think of their own affairs,-to throw upon them the necessity of studying their own condition and of looking into their own future. So long as we engross their thoughts by alarming their fears, they have neither time nor inclination to examine the question except from this single point of view.

Adam H. Johnson on Twitter: "Yes! A 1859 NYT editorial scolding abolitionists as unreasonable and doing harm to the cause of opposing slavery is a fascinating read, especially the part where they say “silence on the part of the north concerning slavery would be the best policy” (pix link)" / Twitter

King Kaufman on Twitter: "@leahmcelrath @DougJBalloon @SethCotlar The NYTimes did a thing starting in 2010 with sort of annotated coverage of 150 years earlier in real time, for the 150th of the Civil War.
I was amazed at how the rhetoric from that time matched that of today. If you corrected for syntax and names, they were the same." / Twitter

King Kaufman on Twitter: "@Dewaan_e_khas @leahmcelrath @DougJBalloon @SethCotlar I don't have time to look it up right now, sorry. I want to see too. But find the project and look for what Democrats were saying about Lincoln in the summer of 1860. Sounds exactly like what Republicans were saying about Obama in 2008. Exactly." / Twitter

This account is dead on Twitter: "@DougJBalloon Are Abolitionists Too Woke? We asked a small cotton farmer in South Carolina" / Twitter

NavyHelo on Twitter: "@4fiji @Nepthai1982 @DougJBalloon “Even the UK banned slavery in 1834, they compensated EVERY slaveholder for losses.” * British bonds to finance freedom for 700,000 slaves took until 2014 to redeem! USA had 4 Million by 1860." / Twitter

James North on Twitter: "@DougJBalloon This is a wicked parody -- but my U.S. history textbook in 1960s Chicago made exactly this argument: that the abolitionists were too "extreme" and helped cause the Civil War. @DougJBalloon" / Twitter

Sasha Hemon on Twitter: "@DougJBalloon Niall Ferguson, soon to be the Robert E. Lee Chair of Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Austin." / Twitter

Robert Holzer on Twitter: "@DougJBalloon Why I’m Giving the Fugitive Slave Act the Benefit of the Doubt
by Benjamin Wittes" / Twitter

KSR on Twitter: "@RobertHolzer @DougJBalloon The Dred Scot decision, which I do not support, has some merits
- Glenn Greenwald" / Twitter

EHUSMAN on Twitter: "@DougJBalloon _Chattel Slavery and Slave Culture: How Slaves Forge Their Own Chains_, a new book by Thomas Sowell, exploring how slave culture and the misguided choices they make at gunpoint in the name of “justice” reinforces enslavement. Foreword by Glenn Loury" / Twitter

WanderingNomad on Twitter: "@DougJBalloon 'The Birth of a Nation' is a sympathetic portrayal of race-relations from the perspective of Ku Klux Klan. A must watch.
- David Brooks, Cultural Critic." / Twitter

 

[lpetrich]

The next target of right-wing culture warriors in education?

Parents protesting 'critical race theory' identify a new target: Mental health programs

Two days after Eddins made the remarks, Southlake Families PAC — a group that has fought to stop a diversity plan at Carroll — sent an email to supporters calling on the school district to “Leave mental health and parenting to parents.”

Christina Edmiston, a Southlake resident and mother of two, was outraged when she saw the email. Earlier that month, Edmiston had pulled her 12-year-old son out of the Carroll district after he reported thoughts of suicide after having been bullied by classmates for his sexuality.

“You can’t expect just to teach kids arithmetic and reading and look at their test scores and expect them to be decent human beings,” Edmiston said. “I personally cannot understand why a parent would not want their children to have knowledge of what depression looks like, what anxiety looks like.”

But that’s what’s now being debated in communities across the country. As school districts struggle to address accusations that administrators are indoctrinating students in progressive ideas about race, gender and sexuality, the same parents and activists making the claims have begun targeting school initiatives centered on students’ mental health and emotional well-being.

 

[Politesse]

Not too surprising. Having grown up in a small town myself, I can see how teaching children what abuse and gaslighting look like could be extremely disruptive to social order.