CRT questions

[Robert F. Smith]

47 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

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. 

By all means teach that real history, while at the same time setting our sights on high moral and ethical norms.  History is a process, not a final objective.  Why has it now become O.K. to deny the highest aspirations of Dr King?

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

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?

@SeekingUnderstanding got it just as soon as you did. 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

8 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

By all means teach that real history, while at the same time setting our sights on high moral and ethical norms.  History is a process, not a final objective.  Why has it now become O.K. to deny the highest aspirations of Dr King?

I am not sure anyone has given up on the aspirations, but their is fierce disagreement that we get there by pretending to be color blind when (in the words of no less that Elder Dallin Oaks) systemic racism abounds. 

Edited August 15, 2021 by SeekingUnderstanding

[Vanguard]

1 hour ago, 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? 
 

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

Yes, you're right and I stand corrected. My response to SU implied this recognition though I know it wasn't clear. Again, my capital point was not whether our history included highly racist doctrines/idea but that where are these racist ideas now imbued in our laws? Isn't that one of if not the capital claims of CRT?

[Calm]

What do you think of gerrymandering?

[SeekingUnderstanding]

1 hour ago, Vanguard said:

Yes, you're right and I stand corrected. My response to SU implied this recognition though I know it wasn't clear. Again, my capital point was not whether our history included highly racist doctrines/idea but that where are these racist ideas now imbued in our laws? Isn't that one of if not the capital claims of CRT?

From Elder Oaks:

”There are many examples of racism in recent American history. The examples most familiarly reported by the media today are those that victimize Black Americans. These include the police brutality and other systemic discrimination in employment and housing publicized recently.”

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Vanguard said:

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.

That is not the theory. It is not about the constitution allowing slavery. The theory was created as a method of explaining (and hopefully mitigating or eliminating) continuing racial disparities that continued to exist due to racially biased institutions after overt racism was almost entirely eliminated from laws and regulations.

It is not “only a theory” in the same way evolution is not “only a theory”. The continuing racial disparity continues and virtually all public institutions are biased to differing extents. The discussion is over how this is perpetuated and how to remedy it. Various models continue to clash in explaining the incentives and such that keep it going on but it is going on.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I am not sure anyone has given up on the aspirations, but their is fierce disagreement that we get there by pretending to be color blind when (in the words of no less that Elder Dallin Oaks) systemic racism abounds. 

This, one of the tenets of CRT is that the objective of “colorblindness” perpetuates racism. It soothes the consciences of the advantaged and gives them justification to ignore calls for justice from the disadvantaged. It is not unique to CRT. It is generally recognized by virtually all dedicated advocates for eliminating racial discrimination as a stumbling block. Here is a good summary of the problems though I think this article simplifies the cure:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/culturally-speaking/201112/colorblind-ideology-is-form-racism

The flaw is in the word itself: blind. It is pretending to not see something you do see and that does influence you.

Edited August 15, 2021 by The Nehor

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I am not sure anyone has given up on the aspirations,

This is precisely what is now taking place:  Woke, racist nonsense is now replacing all the accomplishments of the civil rights movement of my youth -- which was led by Dr King.

2 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

but their is fierce disagreement that we get there by pretending to be color blind when (in the words of no less that Elder Dallin Oaks) systemic racism abounds. 

So, President Oaks is now telling us that "systemic racism abounds."  First I have heard of that.  My question would be, Does Pres Oaks even know what "systemic racism" is supposed to be?

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, Robert F. Smith said:

This is precisely what is now taking place:  Woke, racist nonsense is now replacing all the accomplishments of the civil rights movement of my youth -- which was led by Dr King.

So, President Oaks is now telling us that "systemic racism abounds."  First I have heard of that.  My question would be, Does Pres Oaks even know what "systemic racism" is supposed to be?

Since one of the greatest inequities identified is in the courts and legal system I am going to hazard that the answer is “yes”.

[smac97]

A roundup of news items:

tampabay.com:

Quote

Critical race theory — a broad set of ideas about systemic bias and privilege — might have its roots in legal academia, but it is fast becoming one of the more explosive flashpoints in America’s state legislatures.

Conservative lawmakers in over a dozen states, including Missouri, Idaho, Tennessee, have introduced bills aimed at barring critical race theory in the classroom. The bills generally forbid teachers from offering any instruction that suggests that the United States is fundamentally racist, or that leads students to feel guilty for past actions by white people. Some of the bills expressly use the term “critical race theory” while others ban certain practices.
...
The grandfather of the movement was Harvard Law School professor Derrick Bell, who in the mid-1970s voiced frustration at the limited impact of landmark civil rights laws and U.S. Supreme Court rulings of the previous decade. While those changes aimed to broaden access to high-quality education, jobs and housing, they fell short, he said. Laws remained embedded in a set of values and practices that discriminated against people of color, Bell said.

Legal scholars, such as Kimberlé Crenshaw, Neil Gotanda, Gary Peller and Kendall Thomas, developed Bell’s ideas further. In a 1995 book, they wrote that critical race theory is rooted in the desire “to understand how a regime of white supremacy and its subordination of people of color have been created and maintained in America.”

They said that the fundamental problem was the “distribution of political and economic power.” And they defined their movement as one that was “race conscious” and was committed to change.

Critics often call the theory Marxist, and there is a tie. As Crenshaw and others wrote in 1995, a “collection on neo-Marxist and new Left activists” in law schools were part of the movement to challenge the ways American law served “to legitimize an oppressive social order.” Far from every scholar was a Marxist, so the label is overly broad.

In plain terms, critical race theory holds that racism is part of a broader pattern in America: It is woven into laws, and it shows up in who gets a job interview, the sort of home loans people are offered, how they are treated by police, and other facets of daily life large and small.
...
A group of Republican members of Congress introduced a bill and a resolution decrying critical race theory. The lead sponsor, Rep. Burgess Owens, R-Utah, said by focusing on skin color, the theory “preserves” racist thinking and “undermines civil rights.”
...
Politicians aren’t the only ones who are concerned, however. New York University social psychology professor Jonathan Haidt raised a deep concern about the approach’s focus on power relationships

“Every situation is to be analyzed in terms of the bad people acting to preserve their power and privilege over the good people,” Haidt wrote. “This is not an education. This is induction into a cult.”

Educators who are open to the concepts of critical race theory counter that this is a caricature of what actually goes on inside the classroom. It “is not propaganda or anti-American,” wrote professors David DeMatthews and Terri Watson in Education Week.

“It is a toolkit for examining and addressing racism and other forms of marginalization,” they wrote.

The entire article is worth a read.  It seems pretty even-handed.

Here's a more critical perspective:

Quote

Since this is so long: here’s the ‘too long; didn’t read’ bullet-point summary:

Critical Race Theory…

• believes racism is present in every aspect of life, every relationship, and every interaction and therefore has its advocates look for it everywhere
• relies upon “interest convergence” (white people only give black people opportunities and freedoms when it is also in their own interests) and therefore doesn’t trust any attempt to make racism better
• is against free societies and wants to dismantle them and replace them with something its advocates control
• only treats race issues as “socially constructed groups,” so there are no individuals in Critical Race Theory
• believes science, reason, and evidence are a “white” way of knowing and that storytelling and lived experience are a “black” alternative, which hurts everyone, especially black people
• rejects all potential alternatives, like colorblindness, as forms of racism, making itself the only allowable game in town (which is totalitarian)
• acts like anyone who disagrees with it must do so for racist and white supremacist reasons, even if those people are black (which is also totalitarian)
• cannot be satisfied, so it becomes a kind of activist black hole that threatens to destroy everything it is introduced into

The article is indeed quite long, and attempts to substantiate each of the bullet points with citations, links, etc. 

The74Million.org:

Quote

On the other hand, critical race theory says that racism is inherent in our institutions and structures of governance. It’s ordinary, and it’s baked into all our consciousnesses in complex ways through our education, government, the media, and our participation in systems. Racism must be addressed not just by punishing individuals, but by shifting structures and policies.
...
Is critical race theory being taught in K-12 classrooms?

Experts and teachers put it plainly.

“Nobody in K-12 is teaching critical race theory,” Andrew Robinson, an 8th grade U.S. history teacher at Uplift Luna Preparatory in Dallas, said. “If I tried to walk in and teach critical race theory, my kids would just have a blank stare on their face.”

“Critical race theory is not being taught in schools,” Martinez said.

Keffrelyn Brown, a professor of cultural studies in education at UT-Austin and a teacher-educator, agreed.

“A vast majority of teachers in K-12 schools don’t know critical race theory,” she said. “They are not coming into the classroom and saying, ‘I’m going to teach critical race theory.’”

The Washington Free Beacon: 

Quote

Thousands of teachers are pledging to teach critical race theory in the face of state laws seeking to ban it from classrooms.

More than 5,000 educators have signed the Zinn Education Project’s "Pledge to Teach the Truth" since June 21. In the letter, the leftist education group claims the United States was founded on "structural racism and oppression"—tenets of the Marxist-based ideology called critical race theory.

"We, the undersigned educators, refuse to lie to young people about U.S. history and current events—regardless of the law," the pledge reads.
...
Racism is integral to the founding of the United States, the pledge states, and failing to educate students on "the roots of U.S. racism" is deceptive.

"From police violence, to the prison system to the wealth gap, to maternal mortality rates, to housing, to education and beyond, the major institutions and systems of our country are deeply infected with anti-Blackness and its intersection with other forms of oppression," the pledge states. "To not acknowledge this and help students understand the roots of U.S. racism is to deceive them—not educate them."

The "Pleadge to Teach the Truth" thing referenced above (link here) does not mention the phrase "critical race theory," but does decry legislative efforts that, per the pledge "require teachers to lie to students about the role of racism, sexism, heterosexism, and oppression throughout U.S. history."  It also references "critical race theory" in many other places on its website.  See, e.g., here:

Quote

How the Word Is Passed arrives at a moment when Republican legislators in at least 27 states are offering the country a lesson in How the Word Is Suppressed. Proposed legislation takes aim at a host of curricular initiatives, approaches to understanding society (e.g., Critical Race Theory), and organizations — including in Missouri’s House Bill 952, which would ban use of Zinn Education Project materials in all of the state’s schools. 

A bit more about the Zinn Education Project here:

Quote

As the controversy over critical race theory in public schools heats up, activists on both sides of the debate have spent massive amounts of time and money on a topic that takes aim at white privilege in America.

It's the latest front in the culture war over how students should be taught U.S. history. Its roots date back to the early 1970s, but it has become a modern-day flashpoint that has moved from the classrooms into politics. Now, some are wondering who is funding the movement and why.
...
At its core, critical race theory is a broad set of ideas about systemic bias and racism in American history. It argues the legacy of white supremacy remains embedded in society through laws and institutions.

Supporters believe the law has preserved the unequal treatment of people based on race. Opponents argue because the theory focuses on race, the approach itself is racist. Others claim it paints a negative picture of the United States and is designed to make white children feel bad about their country.
...
The Biden administration rescinded Trump's order, which prompted Republican lawmakers in several GOP-controlled legislatures to introduce bills that would prohibit teaching it. Some states, such as Idaho and Missouri, mentioned critical race theory by name. Others, such as Tennessee, Arizona, and Iowa, touched on key aspects that are part of critical race theory.

The National Education Association, the largest labor union representing public school teachers, has strongly pushed against the ban and encouraged its members on June 12 to participate in a "national day of action" by selecting a site in their town or city that "symbolizes or reflects history that educators would be required to lie about or omit if these bills become laws" and protest.

Zinn Education Project, which cranks out race-centric material for middle and high schools across the country, sponsored the event. Teachers in all 50 states can and do download these lesson plans for free.

But some question the motives and teachings of the Zinn Education Project,

One lesson, called "Students Design a Reparations Bill," asks students to improve on the "flimsy" reparation bills making way through Congress.

"Critical thinking isn't encouraged," Betsy McCaughey, former lieutenant governor of New York, wrote in an opinion piece. "This isn't a debate about whether there should be reparations. This is one-sided indoctrination."

The Zinn Education Project launched in 2008, boasting 130,000 members and about 10,000 new registrants each year. The group is a collaboration of two non-profits: Teaching for Change and Rethinking Schools.

The Zinn Education Project has organized massive rallies in support of teaching critical race theory and supports teachers unions that promote its teachings.

The group was founded by the late Howard Zinn, a Marxist historian who served as a foot soldier in the Communist Party. Zinn became a progressive hero and is best known for his book A People's History of the United States. The book quickly became required reading by enthusiastic professors around the country and has sold more than two million copies.

So is CRT being taught in school?  If yes, then why are there thousands of teachers publicly announcing their intention to defy laws banning the teaching of it?

I wonder if there is some equivocation going on.  See, e.g., here:

Quote

The president of the nation’s second-largest teachers’ union vowed to defend educators who face backlash for teaching critical race theory, hours after denying that the ideology has entered the classroom.

"#CriticalRaceTheory is not taught in K-12 schools," American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten tweeted Tuesday. "The right’s culture warriors are labeling any discussion of race, racism or discrimination as such to try to make it toxic. They’re bullying teachers to try and keep them from teaching the truth."

Later that day, Education Week published an article titled "Teachers' Unions Vow to Defend Members in Critical Race Theory Fight." In the piece, Weingarten said if any educator faces backlash for teaching about race, the union "will have their back."

Teachers' unions have largely supported schools’ embrace of critical race theory. The American Federation of Teachers has promoted critical race theory as "an irreplaceable lens" through which Americans can look at the country’s past. The National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers' union, this weekend adopted measures to promote critical race theory in K-12 classrooms and conduct research on "the organizations attacking educators doing anti-racist work."

Other members of the American Federation of Teachers' top brass have admitted that critical race theory is being taught in K-12 schools. Secretary-treasurer Fedrick Ingram said in a June interview that critical race theory gives students the opportunity to learn the "breadth and depth of the American society," from the Constitution to slavery to Jim Crow laws.

The Brookings Institute has a pretty good article here:

Quote

To understand why CRT has become such a flash point in the culture, it is important to understand what it is and what it is not. Opponents fear that CRT admonishes all white people for being oppressors while classifying all Black people as hopelessly oppressed victims. These fears have spurred school boards and state legislatures from Tennessee to Idaho to ban teachings about racism in classrooms. However, there is a fundamental problem: these narratives about CRT are gross exaggerations of the theoretical framework. The broad brush that is being applied to CRT is puzzling to academics, including some of the scholars who coined and advanced the framework.

CRT does not attribute racism to white people as individuals or even to entire groups of people. Simply put, critical race theory states that U.S. social institutions (e.g., the criminal justice system, education system, labor market, housing market, and healthcare system) are laced with racism embedded in laws, regulations, rules, and procedures that lead to differential outcomes by race. Sociologists and other scholars have long noted that racism can exist without racists. However, many Americans are not able to separate their individual identity as an American from the social institutions that govern us—these people perceive themselves as the system. Consequently, they interpret calling social institutions racist as calling them racist personally. It speaks to how normative racial ideology is to American identity that some people just cannot separate the two. There are also people who may recognize America’s racist past but have bought into the false narrative that the U.S. is now an equitable democracy. They are simply unwilling to remove the blind spot obscuring the fact that America is still not great for everyone.

Scholars and activists who discuss CRT are not arguing that white people living now are to blame for what people did in the past. They are saying that white people living now have a moral responsibility to do something about how racism still impacts all of our lives today. 

This story out of Atlanta:

Quote

A black mother is blasting her daughter’s Georgia elementary school for “segregating” African American students to give them “more opportunities” amid a series of controversies tied to critical race theory.

Kila Posey filed a federal discrimination complaint against Mary Lin Elementary School in Atlanta after learning that her daughter had been placed in a class only for black students.

The outraged mother told WSB-TV that principal Sharyn Briscoe, who is also black, informed her that students were being separated by race to give them more opportunities.

The school had two classes for black students and six for white students, Posey said.

Posey claims she only found out about the situation after the principal said her daughter couldn’t be placed in a certain teacher’s class.

“She said that’s not one of the black classes, and I immediately said, ‘What does that mean?’ I was confused. I asked for more clarification. I was like, ‘We have those in the school?’ And she proceeded to say, ‘Yes. I have decided that I’m going to place all of the black students in two classes,’” Posey said.

The mother said she insisted her daughter be placed in a white class but the principal said it meant the girl would be isolated.

“I explained to her she shouldn’t be isolated or punished because I’m unwilling to go along with your illegal and unethical practice,” Posey said.

The mother said she has “lost sleep” trying to work out why the school thought it was a good idea.

“It was just disbelief that I was having this conversation in 2020 with a person that looks just like me — a black woman,” Posey said.

“It’s segregating classrooms. You cannot segregate classrooms. You can’t do it.”

The Atlanta Public Schools district confirmed it had investigated the allegations made by Posey and that appropriate actions were taken.

A district spokesperson would not elaborate on what those actions were.

“Atlanta public schools does not condone the assigning of students to classrooms based on race,” a statement from the district said.

The district did not deny the allegations.

The Department of Education is running a separate investigation related to Posey’s discrimination complaint.

Race and the teaching of critical race theory in schools has increased tension in the US over the last year.

Is this an example of CRT being taught?

How about this story?

Quote

Teacher Dana Stangel-Plowe publicly announced her resignation from a New Jersey private school in June on YouTube because of such initiatives. The school had embraced an ideology that “requires students to see themselves not as individuals, but as representatives of either an oppressor or oppressed group.” According to Stangel-Plowe, students self-censored, approaching assigned texts “in search of the oppressor.” Teachers at a February faculty meeting were even “segregated by skin color.”

Here's the YouTube video linked to above:

Is this CRT?

How about this one?

Quote

In Illinois’s Evanston-Skokie School District 65, another teacher, Stacy Deemar, felt compelled to formally file suit in federal court earlier this month against the anti-racist encroachment within school life. Teachers in the district were also separated by race and mandated to participate in “privilege walks,” which the suit’s general counsel described as conditioning teachers “to see one another’s skin color first and foremost.” Such thinking, understandably, flowed downstream to students. Lessons distributed to eighth-graders in the district included assertions that “white people have a very, very serious problem and they should start thinking about what they should do about it.”

How about this story?

Quote

Then on July 3 the National Education Association — the largest teachers union in the country — announced a six-figure campaign to “have a team of staffers for members who want to learn more and fight back against anti-CRT rhetoric” and an official position that “in teaching these topics, it is reasonable and appropriate for curriculum to be informed by academic frameworks for understanding and interpreting the impact of the past on current society, including critical race theory.”
...

There are faculty meetings where teachers are purposefully segregated based on color as part of a seminar to teach about systemic racism in school curricula. There are prestigious New York schools in which there have been “racist cop” reenactments in science, “decentering whiteness” instruction in art class, and lessons on white supremacy and sexuality in health class.

Or how about the simple fact that school systems across the country are incorporating the Southern Poverty Law Center’s “Teaching Hard History” curriculum and the 1619 Project curriculum? Both of these explicitly expose students to the realities of systemic racism in American history and contemporary society, and examine the ways white supremacy still defines American institutions and results in negative outcomes for “persons of color.”

Assertions that CRT is not being taught in American schools and undergraduate courses are deeply disingenuous, and thus the campaign to argue otherwise is unraveling. Even if teachers do not explicitly cite the phrase “critical race theory” to their students, it doesn’t mean they aren’t teaching principles based on or in agreement with CRT.

If CRT is not being taught in schools, why is the NEA funding efforts to oppose CRT?

This article itemizes what it says are examples of CRT being used in public schools:

Quote

1. Children for communism

Earlier this year, a whistleblower uncovered a fifth-grade social studies lesson in Philadelphia that asked students to celebrate the "black communist" Angela Davis. Students were asked to act out "free Angela Davis" rallies, demanding that the government release the Black Panther imprisoned on charges of murder, conspiracy, and kidnapping.

The Philadelphia public school system released an "Antiracism Declaration" last summer that said educators must "no longer be passive or disjointed in [their] approach."

"Race is the social construction that set the foundation and built the infrastructure for the United States we know today," the memo read. "Racism is the root of all other forms of injustice and provides the nourishment needed for other systems of oppression to thrive. As such, in order to destroy the tree, we cannot simply pick at the leaves or chop away at the trunk, we must destroy the root."

That memo sounds pretty CRT-ish.

Quote

2. BLM's Buffalo soldiers

The Office of Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Initiatives in Buffalo, New York, announced a new curriculum for fifth-grade students last July centered on Black Lives Matter. The lessons include learning the Black Lives Matter "declaration on Black Villages."

"We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and 'villages' that collectively care for one another, and especially 'our' children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable," the lesson read.

One of the core tenants of Black Lives Matter had long been rebuking the "Western-prescribed nuclear family structure." After much criticism, the organization took that goal off its website.

Fifth graders being taught about "disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family" is an example of CRT?  Not sure about that.

Quote

4. Fear and learning in Las Vegas

A black mother filed a lawsuit against a Las Vegas charter school earlier this year over a course that mandated seniors list elements of their identity that would be regarded as privileged.

“William Clark was compelled to participate in public professions of his racial, religious, sexual, and gender identities, and would be labeled as an 'oppressor' on these bases,” the mother's court filing read.

Lessons in the course included statements such as "reverse racism isn't real" and that the traditional idea of family "reinforce[s] racist/homophobic prejudices."

Hmm...

From this opinion piece:

Quote

While we all debate what critical race theory is and whether lawmakers should ban it from public schools, every honest person should agree on one thing: This theory is behind the curricula in school districts all over the country, shaping the minds of unsuspecting, malleable children.

Just this week, the Manhattan Institute’s Christopher Rufo reported that 30 public school districts in 15 states are teaching a book, Not My Idea, that tells readers that “whiteness” leads white people to make deals with the devil for “stolen land, stolen riches, and special favors.” White people get to “mess endlessly with the lives of your friends, neighbors, loved ones, and all fellow humans of color for the purpose of profit,” the book adds.

From the book:

"Whiteness" as "a bad deal" and as entitlement to "stolen land / stolen riches / special favors" and as license to "mess endlessly with the lives of ... humans of COLOR" sure sounds CRT-ish.  

Quote

There are plenty of other examples that prove racial essentialism and collective guilt are being taught to young students. In Cupertino, California, an elementary school required third graders to rank themselves according to the “power and privilege” associated with their ethnicities.

From that embedded link:

Quote

An elementary school in Cupertino, California—a Silicon Valley community with a median home price of $2.3 million—recently forced a class of third-graders to deconstruct their racial identities, then rank themselves according to their “power and privilege.”

Based on whistleblower documents and parents familiar with the session, a third-grade teacher at R.I. Meyerholz Elementary School began the lesson on “social identities” during a math class. The teacher asked all students to create an “identity map,” listing their race, class, gender, religion, family structure, and other characteristics. The teacher explained that the students live in a “dominant culture” of “white, middle class, cisgender, educated, able-bodied, Christian, English speaker[s],” who, according to the lesson, “created and maintained” this culture in order “to hold power and stay in power.”

Next, reading from This Book Is Antiracist, the students learned that “those with privilege have power over others” and that “folx who do not benefit from their social identities, who are in the subordinate culture, have little to no privilege and power.” As an example, the reading states that “a white, cisgender man, who is able-bodied, heterosexual, considered handsome and speaks English has more privilege than a Black transgender woman.” In some cases, because of the principle of intersectionality, “there are parts of us that hold some power and other parts that are oppressed,” even within a single individual.

Following this discussion, the teacher had the students deconstruct their own intersectional identities and “circle the identities that hold power and privilege” on their identity maps, ranking their traits according to the hierarchy. In a related assignment, the students were asked to write short essays describing which aspects of their identities “hold power and privilege” and which do not. The students were expected to produce “at least one full page of writing.” As an example, the presentation included a short paragraph about transgenderism and nonbinary sexuality.

The lesson caused an immediate uproar among Meyerholz Elementary parents. “We were shocked,” said one parent, who agreed to speak with me on condition of anonymity. “They were basically teaching racism to my eight-year-old.”

That sounds pretty CRT-ish.

 

 

This story about teaching in Buffalo, NY:

Quote

Buffalo public schools claim 'all white people' perpetuate systemic racism and force kindergarteners to watch video of dead black children to warn them about 'racist police and state-sanctioned violence'

• Fatima Morrell is associate superintendent for Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Initiatives at Buffalo public schools in New York
• Morrell has introduced a new curriculum, lesson plans and teacher training
• The teachers are encouraged to be more 'woke' in their efforts at 'antiracism'
• Morrell suggests teaching kindergarten classes about children killed by police
• Videos featuring Trayvon Martin, Tamir Rice and others tell their stories
• Older pupils learn 'all white people play a part in perpetuating systemic racism'
• A whistleblower told City Journal about the news lesson plans
• Morrell is yet to comment on the controversial new teaching program 

A public school system in New York has introduced a new curriculum to teach that 'all white people play a part in perpetuating systemic racism', and show kindergarten classes videos of black children shot and killed by police, instructing them about the dangers of police brutality.

Buffalo's schools are expected to follow lesson plans devised by Fatima Morrell, the associate superintendent for Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Initiatives.

Morrell's lesson plans, obtained by City Journal, teach pupils and their teachers how to be, in her words, more 'woke.'

...

The texts help children with their 'learning for liberation' and tell the stories of children 'that we have lost to racist police and state-sanctioned violence.'

Six young people killed by police, including Trayvon Martin, 17; Tamir Rice, 12; and seven-year-old Aiyana Stanley-Jones, are imagined telling their stories on video. 

...

The four to six-year-olds in kindergarten will also be asked by their teachers to compare their skin color with an arrangement of crayons, City Journal reported.

Older students will also be taught about the 'sickness' of American society.

By fifth grade, students are taught that America has created a 'school-to-grave pipeline' for black children and that, as adults, 'one million black people are locked in cages.'

In middle and high school, students were taught under headings such as 'The racial power of white elites'.

...

Students were taught about 'systemic racism,' with emphasis on American society being created for the 'impoverishment of people of color and enrichment of white people'.

Pupils learnt that the United States 'created a social system that had racist economic inequality built into its foundation,' and that 'the [current] wealth gap is the result of black slavery, which created unjust wealth for white people,' who are 'unfairly rich.' 

Students are taught that 'all white people play a part in perpetuating systemic racism', according to the lesson plans, and that 'often unconsciously, white elites work to perpetuate racism through politics, law, education, and the media.'

Thanks,

-Smac

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Here's a more critical perspective:

That is not critical. It is a strawman.

It is here is what they believe: (long list of stuff they don’t believe)

I stopped there. If that is the quality of the vetting you do with articles I am just going to assume the rest is trash.

[Danzo]

38 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

This, one of the tenets of CRT is that the objective of “colorblindness” perpetuates racism. It soothes the consciences of the advantaged and gives them justification to ignore calls for justice from the disadvantaged. It is not unique to CRT. It is generally recognized by virtually all dedicated advocates for eliminating racial discrimination as a stumbling block. Here is a good summary of the problems though I think this article simplifies the cure:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/culturally-speaking/201112/colorblind-ideology-is-form-racism

The flaw is in the word itself: blind. It is pretending to not see something you do see and that does influence you.

Trying to understand what you are saying.

Are you saying all color blind people are racist? The only way to not be racist is to treat people differently based on the color of their skin?

[TAO_2]

3 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That is not critical. It is a strawman.

It is here is what they believe: (long list of stuff they don’t believe)

I stopped there. If that is the quality of the vetting you do with articles I am just going to assume the rest is trash.

If you don't mind... I'm gonna CFR you here.  Can you please demonstrate that they don't hold these views?

I'm pretty sure you can... but I think that you'll get a much better discussion if you provide those examples.

Thanks, and hope your having a good day.

[The Nehor]

3 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Trying to understand what you are saying.

Are you saying all color blind people are racist? The only way to not be racist is to treat people differently based on the color of their skin?

No, it means that everyone (or almost everyone) has baked in stereotypes and preconceptions of all kinds based on race. It also applies to gender and other physical features. People who try to focus on treating everyone exactly the same are likely to ignore those preconceptions and subtle biases and continue to hold them. It is better to acknowledge them and mitigate them.

[Calm]

21 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Woke, racist nonsense is now replacing all the accomplishments of the civil rights movement of my youth -- which was led by Dr King.

Why does it have to be replacing the accomplishments of your youth rather than building on them?

[Danzo]

Just now, The Nehor said:

No, it means that everyone (or almost everyone) has baked in stereotypes and preconceptions of all kinds based on race. It also applies to gender and other physical features. People who try to focus on treating everyone exactly the same are likely to ignore those preconceptions and subtle biases and continue to hold them. It is better to acknowledge them and mitigate them.

So I am not supposed to focus on treating people the same. Should I start focus on treating people differently? Based on their skin color? How does that work in real life. When people call me up at work, do I need to get a picture of them before I decide how to treat them?

[The Nehor]

4 minutes ago, TAO_2 said:

If you don't mind... I'm gonna CFR you here.  Can you please demonstrate that they don't hold these views?

I'm pretty sure you can... but I think that you'll get a much better discussion if you provide those examples.

Thanks, and hope your having a good day.

• believes racism is present in every aspect of life, every relationship, and every interaction and therefore has its advocates look for it everywhere

I would prefer to just ask smac or the article writer to CFR that one line. They analyze things and look for it but the idea that advocates spend their whole lives searching for it everywhere? No.

• cannot be satisfied, so it becomes a kind of activist black hole that threatens to destroy everything it is introduced into

This is like complaining that feminists will never be satisfied until they have equality. Well, duh, yeah, that is kind of the objective. Being satisfied partway there is a form of surrender to a tolerable level of racism.

[Robert F. Smith]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Since one of the greatest inequities identified is in the courts and legal system I am going to hazard that the answer is “yes”.

I would like to know precisely what Pres Oaks has to say on the issue, not mere supposition.  Like Pres Oaks, I have spent decades of my life within the courts and legal system of the USA and in the academic study of same (never received a grade of less than "A" in all my years of university study of that subject).

I have had some very deep misgivings about American justice, and have made some formal statements about that in both California and Utah.  I have found American justice to be largely impervious to improvement.  It has an inertia all its own, despite the best critique of aspects of it.  This is not the place to go into those details, but some broad views can be made -- in line with the wise counsel of Thomas Sowell, Cornel West, and John McWhorter, to mention only a few.

American society is best served by admitting upfront the plain facts which woke racist ideology denies:  America recently had a Black President for 8 years, which should have been impossible under the fantasy of "systemic racism."  As John McWhorter has stated: "America Has Never Been Less Racist."  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3POpubeoIc

 

[TAO_2]

6 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

 

• believes racism is present in every aspect of life, every relationship, and every interaction and therefore has its advocates look for it everywhere

I would prefer to just ask smac or the article writer to CFR that one line. They analyze things and look for it but the idea that advocates spend their whole lives searching for it everywhere? No.

 

• cannot be satisfied, so it becomes a kind of activist black hole that threatens to destroy everything it is introduced into

This is like complaining that feminists will never be satisfied until they have equality. Well, duh, yeah, that is kind of the objective. Being satisfied partway there is a form of surrender to a tolerable level of racism.

Okay, I think that's fair, I do think the article was too certain with it's statements.  When you claim big things like everywhere, and all the time, it's very difficult to justify a statement.  But if you removed the absolutism in these statements, what are they trying to say?  Do the statements have some value if you remove the absolutism?

[The Nehor]

3 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I would like to know precisely what Pres Oaks has to say on the issue, not mere supposition.  Like Pres Oaks, I have spent decades of my life within the courts and legal system of the USA and in the academic study of same (never received a grade of less than "A" in all my years of university study of that subject).

I have had some very deep misgivings about American justice, and have made some formal statements about that in both California and Utah.  I have found American justice to be largely impervious to improvement.  It has an inertia all its own, despite the best critique of aspects of it.  This is not the place to go into those details, but some broad views can be made -- in line with the wise counsel of Thomas Sowell, Cornel West, and John McWhorter, to mention only a few.

American society is best served by admitting upfront the plain facts which woke racist ideology denies:  America recently had a Black President for 8 years, which should have been impossible under the fantasy of "systemic racism."  As John McWhorter has stated: "America Has Never Been Less Racist."  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3POpubeoIc

 

Have you looked at racial sentencing disparities?

Being the least racist ever is not an end to racism and it does not mean that course will continue. The one black president was endlessly maligned for his race. It is a step but it is not victory. Look at the distribution of wealth, the racial numbers on traffic stops, and a long list of other very unequal situations.

Edited August 15, 2021 by The Nehor

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

American society is best served by admitting upfront the plain facts which woke racist ideology denies:  America recently had a Black President for 8 years, which should have been impossible under the fantasy of "systemic racism." 

I assume that in your youth, you saw racism that was upheld by laws and societies’ at times almost codified behaviour (white only clubs, etc).  That would be, I am assuming, why you saw it as important to follow the lead of Dr. King and others.

Why is “systemic racism” not an appropriate label in your view for the type of racism that creates rules, legal and cultural, that sustain it?

Edited August 15, 2021 by Calm

[Robert F. Smith]

17 minutes ago, Calm said:

Why does it have to be replacing the accomplishments of your youth rather than building on them?

It is precisely the current woke rejection the high moral and ethical standards which we stood for then which I find completely unacceptable.  Indeed, as John McWhorter points out, this woke racism is a new secular religion.  The demand for a return to segregation a la George Corley Wallace is sick and perverted.

[Calm]

6 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

America recently had a Black President for 8 years, which should have been impossible under the fantasy of "systemic racism." 

Why do you think it would be impossible?  Systemic racism doesn’t require a system to be completely 100% racist or the system exist simply to protect racist behaviour, some racism simply needs to be present and perpetuated by the system.

[The Nehor]

6 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

It is precisely the current woke rejection the high moral and ethical standards which we stood for then which I find completely unacceptable.  Indeed, as John McWhorter points out, this woke racism is a new secular religion.  The demand for a return to segregation a la George Corley Wallace is sick and perverted.

Which CRT is not demanding.

Also….high moral and ethical standards? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!