CRT questions

[Chum]

2 hours ago, bsjkki said:

Nor is a default trust in your Bishop, or your teacher, or your parent or cousin or neighbor.

An important difference is that your Bishop, teacher, parent, cousin and neighbor aren't systemically steeped in a militaristic, warrior culture, that is increasingly trained to see the public as the enemy.

[Canadiandude]

Curious, are the anti-CRT folks also trying to ban or marginalize the theory, and other critical theories, from post-secondary institutions in the USA as well?

crazy.

This is why I always have to smirk when people talk about their supposed dedication to ‘freedom of speech.

 

[Canadiandude]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Bishops and teachers and cousins and neighbors aren’t generally part of an institution that has an ongoing problem with overt racism and targeting and harassing minorities.

Depends on the church. As an lgbtq+ man I’m not so sure about the bishops tbh. Another topic admittedly but I feel it’s important to point this out.

Nothing like the Bishopric/Stake President roulette and discovering different interpretations of the exact same policy; policies that are themselves often problematic.

[OGHoosier]

7 minutes ago, Canadiandude said:

Curious, are the anti-CRT folks also trying to ban or marginalize the theory, and other critical theories, from post-secondary institutions in the USA as well?

crazy.

This is why I always have to smirk when people talk about their supposed dedication to ‘freedom of speech.

 

I'm not sure "freedom of speech" is the right concept here. I don't think schools, especially at the elementary level, are really appropriate places for the freewheeling exchange of ideas that we have in the public square (at least in theory). Whether or not a specific idea ought to be taught is another question, but I don't think "free speech" is a good generic precedent for formal childhood education. 

[Canadiandude]

5 minutes ago, OGHoosier said:

I'm not sure "freedom of speech" is the right concept here. I don't think schools, especially at the elementary level, are really appropriate places for the freewheeling exchange of ideas that we have in the public square (at least in theory). Whether or not a specific idea ought to be taught is another question, but I don't think "free speech" is a good generic precedent for formal childhood education. 

We have freedom of expression here in Canada which is a bit more limited a concept.

When I look at one of the proposals for the Utah State Board of Education, for a list of ‘banned words’ supposedly related to CRT, I  get the shivers.

The proposal wasn’t adopted thankfully but when words like “empathy” become suspect, it makes me wonder what ‘darkest timeline’ I’ve accidentally wandered into.

Edit: not liking how I can’t seem to get my font and font size consistent after copying + pasting 😂 

Edited August 15, 2021 by Canadiandude
Type size

[The Nehor]

19 minutes ago, Canadiandude said:

Curious, are the anti-CRT folks also trying to ban or marginalize the theory, and other critical theories, from post-secondary institutions in the USA as well?

crazy.

This is why I always have to smirk when people talk about their supposed dedication to ‘freedom of speech.

I wish we better educated people on what the First Amendment does and does not protect while they are in school. It would prevent a lot of stupid.

[OGHoosier]

1 minute ago, Canadiandude said:

We have freedom of expression here in Canada which is a bit more limited a concept.

When I look at one of the proposals for the Utah State Board of Education, for a list of ‘banned words’ supposedly related to CRT, I  get the shivers.

The proposal wasn’t adopted thankfully but when words like “empathy” become suspect, it makes me wonder what ‘darkest timeline’ I’ve accidentally wandered into.

To be entirely honest I think there are problems with the idealization of "empathy." I'm more for rational compassion. Nevertheless, banning the word seems...extreme. 

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, bsjkki said:

Nor is a default trust in your Bishop, or your teacher, or your parent or cousin or neighbor. I need to read the whole book to get all the context and I can’t right now. As a parent, I would want this reviewed thoroughly by each family so they can follow up at home. 

Most school districts review and reject any textbooks which actually cover real history or anything controversial, which in turn leads the publishers to exclude anything meaningful or interesting from their texts.  And we wonder why students are bored with school.

In the process, everyone forgets that Dr King said

Quote

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

The ideologues among us are moving rapidly in the opposite direction, and throwing Dr King under the bus.

[Robert F. Smith]

15 minutes ago, Canadiandude said:

We have freedom of expression here in Canada which is a bit more limited a concept.

Yep, much to the disgust of Jordan Peterson.

15 minutes ago, Canadiandude said:

............................

Edit: not liking how I can’t seem to get my font and font size consistent after copying + pasting 😂 

Same here.

[The Nehor]

7 minutes ago, OGHoosier said:

To be entirely honest I think there are problems with the idealization of "empathy." I'm more for rational compassion. Nevertheless, banning the word seems...extreme. 

I read that book and was not convinced the author knew what the definition of empathy is. It seemed like he took it to mean a kind of extreme emotional identification over half the time where your individuality is denied in favor of the other person which is not what empathy is.

[The Nehor]

4 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

In the process, everyone forgets that Dr King said

The ideologues among us are moving rapidly in the opposite direction, and throwing Dr King under the bus.

[Robert F. Smith]

44 minutes ago, Chum said:

An important difference is that your Bishop, teacher, parent, cousin and neighbor aren't systemically steeped in a militaristic, warrior culture, that is increasingly trained to see the public as the enemy.

Yes, and who was it that repeatedly defined the press as "enemies of the people"?

[SeekingUnderstanding]

6 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, and who was it that repeatedly defined the press as "enemies of the people"?

T****

[Robert F. Smith]

Just now, The Nehor said:

Exactly.  MLK, John Lewis, Medger Evers, Goodman-Schwerner-Chaney, Frederick Douglass, and Harriet Tubman are now out of favor, and the fundamental beliefs of Bull Connor, George Corley Wallace, and Lester Maddox now reign supreme.  Segregation is now back in style, along with quotas, and selective shaming based on race and gender.  An egalitarian society is automatically evil.  We don't need no stinkin meritocacy nohow.  Equity über alles.

[The Nehor]

7 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, and who was it that repeatedly defined the press as "enemies of the people"?

The phrase “enemy of the people” was a favorite of Robespierre, Lenin, Goebbels, Mao, Stalin, and Chavez. Khrushchev, hardly a saint, denounced Lenin and Stalin’s use of the phrase as license to wipe out the named target and sought to end its use.

Oh, did you mean recently?

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

An egalitarian society is automatically evil. 

To be fair we have never tried one so how would we know if it works or not. The danger is in assuming it exists and and any movement to redress wrongs is backwards progress.

[Vanguard]

1 hour ago, Canadiandude said:

Curious, are the anti-CRT folks also trying to ban or marginalize the theory, and other critical theories, from post-secondary institutions in the USA as well?

crazy.

This is why I always have to smirk when people talk about their supposed dedication to ‘freedom of speech.

 

If the theory stipulates that by definition our founding documents are riddled with laws to favor only the 'lighter-skinned', to disfavor those who are 'darker-skinned', and must be redone, then, yes, this should be marginalized accordingly. I have no problem - and would encourage - exposing post-secondary students to these theories as long as they are presented as such - only theories. My sense is that this is not what is happening not only in post-secondary circles but also at the high school level and younger. The internet is replete with examples of these theories being taught as the unvarnished truth.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

2 minutes ago, Vanguard said:

If the theory stipulates that by definition our founding documents are riddled with laws to favor

“which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons”

 Nothing to see here. Move along…

[Navidad]

4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

This approach requires that the definition of CRT was something that changed gradually over time. It didn’t. In 2014 it was still the same field as it was when it started. Of course the people writing about it changed their views and what they were discussing but what the theory was about and what it encompassed had not. Then suddenly it was massively expanded for this campaign.

Again:

They may not feel privileged or supreme but they sure feel privileged and supreme enough to make it all about them.

 

Edited August 15, 2021 by Navidad

[Tacenda]

1 minute ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

“which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons”

 Nothing to see here. Move along…

Truth needs to be taught in schools period. If we don't then many things have a tendency to reoccur. We see it in other countries. Such as genocide. Or evil leaders that can incite crowds of people to take down democracies that believe in one race only. 

[Vanguard]

16 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

“which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons”

 Nothing to see here. Move along…

And this hasn't been corrected? Or are you saying much of the current struggle has to do with these laws that haven't been honored for how many generations?

[Calm]

3 minutes ago, Vanguard said:

And this hasn't been corrected? Or are you saying much of the current struggle has to do with these laws that haven't been honored for how many generations?

If it has been corrected, does that mean neither the specific case nor the racist attitudes and slavery that led to it being seen as necessary should be taught as history? 
 

A founding document was impacted by racism, was it not?

Edited August 15, 2021 by Calm

[SeekingUnderstanding]

9 minutes ago, Vanguard said:

And this hasn't been corrected? Or are you saying much of the current struggle has to do with these laws that haven't been honored for how many generations?

I’m saying “by definition our founding documents are riddled with laws to favor only the 'lighter-skinned', to disfavor those who are 'darker-skinned',”

How can this possibly be disputed!? Our founding documents and laws treated “Indians” as subhuman, slaves as non people and women as an after thought. 

Edited August 15, 2021 by SeekingUnderstanding

[Vanguard]

Just now, Calm said:

If it has been corrected, does that mean neither the specific case nor the racist attitudes and slavery that led to it being seen as necessary should be taught as history? 

It absolutely should be taught as history. That's not the issue with CRT though.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

To be fair we have never tried one so how would we know if it works or not. The danger is in assuming it exists and and any movement to redress wrongs is backwards progress.

That's the fallacy of the Call to Perfection.  The notion of egalitarianism is central to American society and to the notion of a meritocracy, even if we have never achieved it.  Those who want to abandon it only because it is difficult to achieve are selling us down the river.