Critical Race Theory.

People are talking past each other nationally on the issue of Critical Race Theory. There are those who are saying it is not taught in school except in law schools. They are talking about one thing. There are those talking bout stuff that is being taught in elementary schools, they are talking about a different thing that is informed by the first thing, but is not in itself the same thing. No matter how many times someone says Critical Race Theory isn't taught in schools outside of graduate level education, it is not a convincing argument against what the other group is talking about. This was poor messaging by the right, because what they are talking about, although it has grown out of Critical Race Theory, it is not itself CRT. Critical Race Theory, ultimately, is just examining things critically through the lens of race. It is no different than Critical Feminist Theory, which involves examining things critically through the lens of gender.

From the other side, people don't believe and don't want their children to be taught things like "all white people are racist" or "you are required to undertake a lifelong struggle to purge yourself of racism, but you cannot actually accomplish this goal" or "because you are black the system is stacked against you and you will not be able to succeed." This is the kind of crap being peddled by the likes of Robyn DiAngelo and Ibrahim X. Kendi and people are right to say it has no place in public education. Likewise, people are right that it SHOULD be taught that every state that seceded from the Union cited slavery as a primary motivating factor. Our education system is woeful, and should be improved.

It was recognized that they didn't want people's fates decided by the crown or the congress but by their peers. It was never recognized that criminals were worthy of respect. I never said I don't care how criminals are treated, I said they must be treated humanely. Human beings deserve a minimum baseline of humane treatment. Respect, on the other hand, is earned.

People are equal under the law. They are not equal in practice. Some people are movie stars. Some people are doctors. Some people drive trucks. Some people teach school. Some people clean toilets. Some people raise children. Some people steal cars. Some people murder or rape or molest. Some people are homeless. They are not equal and their lives are going to be very different.

That was differential treatment under the law for the color of one's skin. Something I oppose but many on the left support now. It has nothing to do with punishment for criminal acts. Criminals are going to be treated differently than non-criminals, because we have a system of justice that calls for consequences of criminal acts.

Can you prove that today people are treated differently under the law? Can you provide evidence of a racist cop, DA, judge, etc. that applied the law in a way it shouldn't apply because of race? Was this allowed to stand? Or are you looking at outcomes and calling racism when you get differential results, ignoring all other potential explanations?

 

this claim is what John McWhorter has derided as a "debate team stunt": "To insist that 'CRT' must properly refer only to the contents of obscure law review articles from decades ago is a debate team stunt, not serious engagement with a dynamic and distressing reality."

https://johnmcwhorter.substack.com/p/you-are-not-a-racist-to-criticize

​

 

"Opinion | I've Been a Critical Race Theorist for 30 Years. Our Opponents Are Just Proving Our Point For Us":

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/06/30/critical-race-theory-lightning-rod-opinion-497046

 

Kristie Dotson has accepted a position at the University of Michigan

https://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2021/06/dotson-from-michigan-state-to-michigan.html

 

When white people believe they've lost their country to sjw culture/secularism/diversity etc and don't like the direction, they still are "Patriots". When non-white people have issues with direction of nation or systemic things that are troublesome, they are suddenly un-American.

I've witnessed this countless times not it in media but in my personal life.

Why is this commadore? You have an explanation for this phenomenon?

 

LOL... using tweets from a hoax theorists... always a good look.

 

Because in America, you don't have a right to express your opinion unless you're a conservative

 

You said "do you have comprehension issues?" That is called an insult. If you can't see that, then I'd say it is you that has the comprehension issue. lol

You posted articles for everybody to see and provided no commentary. This section is called "debate and discussion". If you have nothing to discuss, why post? We all can do our own internet searches.

 

More cancel culture...

Texas state history museum abruptly cancels speech by authors of new book on the Alamo

https://theweek.com/news/1002212/te...ls-speech-by-authors-of-new-book-on-the-alamo

 

I like a lot what you said there. I'd simply like to reinforce that nobody on the left is discussing CRT. This conversation is initiated by and driven from the right. The only conversation the left is having about it is to figure out what it is so they can defend the position of #BLM. Nobody on the left is seriously defending CRT cause nobody knows what it is. The left IS defending the that we can't ignore topics about race and pretend that all we need to do is ensure equal protection under the law fixes everything. 150 years of history proves that doesn't work.

Do those folks hold public office or have first hand influence of the development of the ciriculum in public education? Just cause you find somebody out there that says we "should" do something, doesn't mean we are actually do that. It's false outrage.

You seem to be hung up on my usage of the word 'respect'. Fine, I retract that word. You and I seem to be in agreement and are caught up in semantics.

If you dismiss "outcomes" that so very clearly demonstrate a racial imbalance, I'm not sure where we go from there in this conversation. All I can say is if you look at the laws themselves, they are very cleverly written to remove all references to race ...intentionally so, but the outcomes speak for themselves. The "grandfather clause" for voting rights in the south is a great example. Even today, that convicted felons are not allowed to vote has the same outcome. But if the law is well written, despite bad faith intent, ...and that doesn't matter to you, then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

Still amazing to me how I got the John Wayne version of the story my whole life in school. Never a single mention of the fact that the Texan illegal immigrants were slave holders, and Mexico had outlawed slavery prior to their arrival. Only the picture of Santa Ana as a tyrant with little mans syndrome whose Achilles heal was his afternoon siesta.

The fact is though that Texas still has an incredible story to tell. It's just a shame that the real history cannot be told without a bunch of conservatives freaking out that the critical facts that yeah... White Texan settlers were technically illegal immigrants, and the fight with Mexico had alot to do with the settlers not obeying the laws of the land.... like umm... slavery.

 

Heard them interviewed on NPR. As I understand it, the book is essentially an argument that Texas Independence was essentially a pro-slavery war. I think there's more to it than that, but the aim to spread slavery into Texas is something 7th graders should be taught -- and I just had one recently, so I know the written materials they use don't reflect that.

 

again, that's gotta be a Texas thing. In the northeast with the emphasis on New England abolitionism, the War with Mexico gets pretty harsh treatment

 

I would be interested in hearing that and might read their book.

I was talking to some friends from MN last week about Texas history and about how mythologized the Battle of the Alamo has come. It is a pretty outstanding story even if we consider the many many faults of the main figures.

Regarding the motivations behind Texas independence I think slavery was certainly part of it along with racism by Anglo settlers towards the Mexican government but there was much more including Santa Anna going back on the 1824 Constitution. I think things like this need to acknowledged and rather than diminishing history enhance it.

Also this is the first I've heard of Abbott's 1836 Project. Frankly it sounds like another sad attempt to focus on culture war and distraction at a time when Texas is facing infrastructure and weather crisis.

 

exactly