Social CRT (Critical Race Theory) Megathread, Vol.1

[panamaican]

AP courses are supposed to be based on college courses and that course is pretty typical of college courses from what I saw. Ultimately students are going to be exposed to politics when they study these subjects, we're not talking about physics here, and that's especially true when they're taking something like African American studies. So yes that includes things like the segment on black feminist and black queer theory and that kind of jazz. Like I said earlier I had a right wing professor for Early Western Civ for obvious reasons. Not a fan of the feminist/queer theory stuff myself but that's why I never took such classes. If the course gives the students real college credits that they can use then I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed.

Even though this is not a mandatory class, they still want to ban the option to take it. You know why and I know why.

There is an ongoing push, by some, to erase any vestige of the truth of slavery and Jim Crow from public education because they don't like how white kids are responding to hearing about those negative events. And the adults lack the moral fortitude to admit the nation's mistakes. So rather than explain a complex part of history to their kids and be forced to acknowledge that something bad happened, the adults are trying to prevent the teaching altogether.

Additionally, these adults don't want their kids empathizing with the victims of that time period. Which is what is happening. The kids learn about this history. They recognize how bad it is. They empathize with the victims and wonder how supposedly good people could do that to other people. They're kids so they tell their parents about how bad they feel learning that someone harmed someone else over skin color. And they're not blind so they know which side of the skin color line they fall on. They empathize. But the parents don't want their kids to empathize because they want to perpetuate the narrative that no one should feel bad about what happened.

It's emotional fragility at the highest level. The history triggers them so much that they don't even want other people to learn about it or even care about it, just so they can avoid the potential of an unpleasant conversation.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Even though this is not a mandatory class, they still want to ban the option to take it. You know why and I know why.

There is an ongoing push, by some, to erase any vestige of the truth of slavery and Jim Crow from public education because they don't like how white kids are responding to hearing about those negative events. And the adults lack the moral fortitude to admit the nation's mistakes. So rather than explain a complex part of history to their kids and be forced to acknowledge that something bad happened, the adults are trying to prevent the teaching altogether.

Additionally, these adults don't want their kids empathizing with the victims of that time period. Which is what is happening. The kids learn about this history. They recognize how bad it is. They empathize with the victims and wonder how supposedly good people could do that to other people. They're kids so they tell their parents about how bad they feel learning that someone harmed someone else over skin color. And they're not blind so they know which side of the skin color line they fall on. They empathize. But the parents don't want their kids to empathize because they want to perpetuate the narrative that no one should feel bad about what happened.

It's emotional fragility at the highest level. The history triggers them so much that they don't even want other people to learn about it or even care about it, just so they can avoid the potential of an unpleasant conversation.

I suspect the main point of contention is the black queer theory part of the course based on the Parental Rights bill that passed sometime ago that specifically singled out that kind of content. Its just that by getting rid of the whole course on that basis the state of Florida is opening itself up to the critique that its not interested in African-American studies which is a terrible look.

 

[panamaican]

I suspect the main point of contention is the black queer theory part of the course based on the Parental Rights bill that pass sometime ago that specifically singled out that kind of content. Its just that by getting rid of the whole course on that basis the state of Florida is opening itself up to the critique that its not interested in African-American studies which is a terrible look.

No, black queer theory is not the main point of contention. They've been waging this fake war against CRT long before this class showed up. They redefined any discussion of the social impacts of slavery and Jim Crow as "CRT" and then pushed to remove "CRT" from the education system.

It's like me saying that "Every animal with 4 legs is a dog" and then banning "dogs" from my house. It's bullshit, the truth is I don't want any animals in my house. But I can't come out and say that. So I lie about what a dog is and then ban dogs. So if you call me out being anti-animal, I can pretend that I'm not, I'm just anti-dog.

If you look at what they banned from the education system, not the terminology itself, they're pushing to whitewash slavery and Jim Crow so that kids will have to be in college before they learn the truth of that era. And then they want to limit funding for non-STEM majors and courses where kids would encounter this information. So removed from K-12 education then defunded at the college level. The outcome is a generation of young people who have no idea about the history.

They do this and then accuse everyone else of "indoctrination". As if we don't know that indoctrination comes the withholding of information as much as it comes from anything else.

 

[Loiosh]

It's emotional fragility at the highest level. The history triggers them so much that they don't even want other people to learn about it or even care about it, just so they can avoid the potential of an unpleasant conversation.

MTG gave the game away when she quoted Hitler and talked about control of children being control of the country.

Conservatives across the board have complained that they're losing the youth vote, they're so desperate they talk about raising the voting age.

This is a more sophisticated form of the nonsense initiated by the Daughters of the Confederacy, conservatives hyper focused on preserving the myth of American excellence and the exclusion of any criticism. This is the third time in a century this war has been waged and they win it every single time.

 

[Mr Holmes]

AP courses are supposed to be based on college courses and that course is pretty typical of college courses from what I saw. Ultimately students are going to be exposed to politics when they study these subjects, we're not talking about physics here, and that's especially true when they're taking something like African American studies. So yes that includes things like the segment on black feminist and black queer theory and that kind of jazz. Like I said earlier I had a right wing professor for Early Western Civ for obvious reasons. Not a fan of the feminist/queer theory stuff myself but that's why I never took such classes. If the course gives the students real college credits that they can use then I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed.

If its a college level course, then should teach opposing views and critical thinking (at least that's how it was when debated reparations in college). This course comes off as a 1-sided propaganda lesson. Also, I think when it comes to high school there are additional problems with teaching this type of garbage. These are children going to school for free on the community's tax revenue. Its a lot different from adults agreeing to sign up for it and paying thousands of dollars out of their pockets to do so.

Its just that by getting rid of the whole course on that basis the state of Florida is opening itself up to the critique that its not interested in African-American studies which is a terrible look.

More or less, that is their game: lie about subject and call you a racist if you oppose it. When you consider the character of the people doing it, I'm not sure it matters..

Here is the actual reasons why it is being banned:


You'll notice it doesn't say they oppose teaching about slavery.

 

[Streeter]

While I am opposed to CRT I am all for an even mandatory Black history class in high school.

Other than that why not just keep school to learning the basics like... math, science, reading/writing ,history , health, bio etc. Keep things CRT and stop promoting LGBT culture in school. I am all for tolerance n to co exist I am strongly against promoting that lifestyle at such a young age n messing with kids minds.


The case of Desantis trying to ban a AP black history class isn't true. Everyone was fine with 75% of it was great. It's the last 25% that was compleley liberal agenda driven that was the problem..

 

[Streeter]

Even though this is not a mandatory class, they still want to ban the option to take it. You know why and I know why.

.

It's not optional really even if it's called that. It then becomes a tool to label anyone that doesn't tske it a racist.

 

[mkess101]

Even though this is not a mandatory class, they still want to ban the option to take it. You know why and I know why.

There is an ongoing push, by some, to erase any vestige of the truth of slavery and Jim Crow from public education because they don't like how white kids are responding to hearing about those negative events. And the adults lack the moral fortitude to admit the nation's mistakes. So rather than explain a complex part of history to their kids and be forced to acknowledge that something bad happened, the adults are trying to prevent the teaching altogether.

Additionally, these adults don't want their kids empathizing with the victims of that time period. Which is what is happening. The kids learn about this history. They recognize how bad it is. They empathize with the victims and wonder how supposedly good people could do that to other people. They're kids so they tell their parents about how bad they feel learning that someone harmed someone else over skin color. And they're not blind so they know which side of the skin color line they fall on. They empathize. But the parents don't want their kids to empathize because they want to perpetuate the narrative that no one should feel bad about what happened.

It's emotional fragility at the highest level. The history triggers them so much that they don't even want other people to learn about it or even care about it, just so they can avoid the potential of an unpleasant conversation.

An ongoing push by "some". How many? Is your argument that this is something that exists beyond maybe some relatively fringe people in terms of just how "emotionally fragile" they are?

Because...no. **Most** adults do NOT want to shy away from the horrors of America's past vis a vis slavery, Jim Crow, the Civil Rights movement (and the opposition to it). Most of us know that while uncomfortable and horrific, it's part of what has led our nation to where we are today (the good and the bad and everything in between). People realize that pretending it didn't happen and that we don't need to strive to be better holds us back and does a disservice to the massive suffering that took place.

Most parents absolutely want their kids empathizing with what happened. I'm part Native American, and when Native American history is taught I'd hope the kids feel a lot of compassion and empathy when they discuss the Trail of Tears for example. And most kids do, and most parents encourage those feelings when the kids bring them up.

What parents DON'T want is their kids feeling misplaced guilt because they happen to be white and thus associated with the oppressors. How the conversation is framed matters, and the issue that parents might have with some aspects of CRT isn't in teaching the horrors of the history. It's in how it's presented and how that presentation influences how kids should feel about it.

Conflating parents thinking "Nobody should feel bad about it" with "My kid should not feel guilt over it" seems to be what you're doing. EVERYONE shouldn't feel "bad" about it. We should feel HORRIFIED by it. It's indisputably the worst of our nation's history. But depending on how it's presented, that horrified feeling being encouraged to foment into guilt is what most people don't want.

It can be as simple as a white teacher using "we" when referencing the atrocities committed instead of "they".

Anyway, there are of course some people who track the way you presented. I won't deny that. But they are not the majority or even close from my experience.

 

[Islam Imamate]

If its a college level course, then should teach opposing views and critical thinking (at least that's how it was when debated reparations in college). This course comes off as a 1-sided propaganda lesson. Also, I think when it comes to high school there are additional problems with teaching this type of garbage. These are children going to school for free on the community's tax revenue. Its a lot different from adults agreeing to sign up for it and paying thousands of dollars out of their pockets to do so.


More or less, that is their game: lie about subject and call you a racist if you oppose it. When you consider the character of the people doing it, I'm not sure it matters..

Here is the actual reasons why it is being banned:


You'll notice it doesn't say they oppose teaching about slavery.

Well yes college courses in the social sciences tend to get political. If you take an economics class you will have liberal economics preached to you instead of communism, should AP Economics be questioned or removed because its only advocating for one side? These classes are all optional so I don't see why they shouldn't be offered, these kids are going to be taking these class a year or two down the line anyway. I get things like feminism and queer theory are controversial to some but that's a part of the curriculum in college courses so its natural to expect students taking AP classes to run into some of these topics. Personally I wouldn't take such a class but I can think of a lot of my high school classmates who might've enjoyed and benefitted from such a class.

 

[Bald1]

No, the comments are not generic. I used a simple example to help you follow the concept. The concept is what is important, try not to get distracted by the example used to frame said concept.

And not liking what I'm saying doesn't make it biased or bigoted or shallow. But it seems that we've gotten far enough that you're no longer denying the existence of indirect benefits. Now you want to argue about which indirect benefits apply to which country. We can disagree on whether or not something I consider an indirect benefit is one or not.

But I'm not interested in trying to convince you about specific examples. I just needed you to stop denying that "indirect benefits" exist and misrepresenting what my position actually was. I dropped this conversation with you months ago because I don't spend time trying to convince people of things when it's obvious that they're deadset against the possibility of those things.

If you've decided that something is impossible, per your way of thinking, then nothing I say, no matter how reasonable or intelligent, is going to change your mind. And I've more important things to do with my time.

I've never denied "indirect benefits" was a thing. What I am telling you is that concept can be applied to British colonization of the Indian subcontinent as well as brining modern medicine to Inuit. It's so broad and subjective as to be useless.

And no, your initial post said nothing about indirect benefits. You made a dumbass claim then tap danced because because you couldn't accept it.

Yet my point stands. You point to Europe and indirect benefits, yet at the very least you're reluctant to admit that pointing to one location while ignoring others shows bias.

Once again, how did Estonia benefit more from colonialism than China? Your "simple example" is simple for a reason, because the claim wouldn't stand up to scrutiny if it had any merit. It's as broad as calling dogs mammals.

 

[Bald1]

Guys like him weren't paying attention in history class which is why they're remembering it all wrong. If anything history tends to whitewash these things but that's mainly because its hard enough to get kids to pay attention in history class without going over all the nuance and details.

I paid attention enough in history class to know it's so western biased that it neglects the history of most of the world unless you research it yourself or go into that field after highschool. But you know this to be true as I've read plenty of your posts detailing Islamic history that's not taught in highschools. What makes you think I'm less informed of the history of the little corner of the world I was born in?

You know how your knowledge gives you insight to back up your claims that Islam wasn't always as it is now? How there's historical context? How #notall and the exception doesn't prove the rule or vice versa? It's curious that you can't admit I'm doing exactly the same thing.

Whitewash? Yeah, I guess that's an indirect benefit as well. Yay me! I guess.

 

[uppercutbus]

Critical Race Theory is for a bunch of racist assholes that like to cry about everything.

They even tried to push it on other countries like Australia and UK, but apparently it's a myth/not happening/<insert joke about war on Christmas>

Teaching white privilege as uncontested fact is illegal, minister says
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...vilege-is-a-fact-breaks-the-law-minister-says

Why is the UK government suddenly targeting 'critical race theory'?
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ory-trump-conservatives-structural-inequality

 

[ShadowRun]

While I am opposed to CRT I am all for an even mandatory Black history class in high school.

Other than that why not just keep school to learning the basics like... math, science, reading/writing ,history , health, bio etc. Keep things CRT and stop promoting LGBT culture in school. I am all for tolerance n to co exist I am strongly against promoting that lifestyle at such a young age n messing with kids minds.


The case of Desantis trying to ban a AP black history class isn't true. Everyone was fine with 75% of it was great. It's the last 25% that was compleley liberal agenda driven that was the problem..

Yea he said black history is great it doesn’t need queer theory and abolishing prisons sliced it, tainting black history.

 

[Denter]

Even though this is not a mandatory class, they still want to ban the option to take it. You know why and I know why.

There is an ongoing push, by some, to erase any vestige of the truth of slavery and Jim Crow from public education because they don't like how white kids are responding to hearing about those negative events. And the adults lack the moral fortitude to admit the nation's mistakes. So rather than explain a complex part of history to their kids and be forced to acknowledge that something bad happened, the adults are trying to prevent the teaching altogether.

Additionally, these adults don't want their kids empathizing with the victims of that time period. Which is what is happening. The kids learn about this history. They recognize how bad it is. They empathize with the victims and wonder how supposedly good people could do that to other people. They're kids so they tell their parents about how bad they feel learning that someone harmed someone else over skin color. And they're not blind so they know which side of the skin color line they fall on. They empathize. But the parents don't want their kids to empathize because they want to perpetuate the narrative that no one should feel bad about what happened.

It's emotional fragility at the highest level. The history triggers them so much that they don't even want other people to learn about it or even care about it, just so they can avoid the potential of an unpleasant conversation.

What you are describing is a cartoon version of history, not the complex version. Delving quite deeply into the question of slavery and reconstruction would actually also be very uncomfortable for the "good side" as well. The idea that southerners were these savage monsters who "wanted to hurt people just because of the color of their skin" is absolutely ridiculous. There were historical, cultural and political reasons things went down the way they did, and irrational animus was not the primary reason all this happened. Historical actors were not acting in a vacuum where they could simply make unencumbered choices, to the extent such "choices" were even possible at all.

 

[panamaican]

What you are describing is a cartoon version of history, not the complex version. Delving quite deeply into the question of slavery and reconstruction would actually also be very uncomfortable for the "good side" as well. The idea that southerners were these savage monsters who "wanted to hurt people just because of the color of their skin" is absolutely ridiculous. There were historical, cultural and political reasons things went down the way they did, and irrational animus was not the primary reason all this happened. Historical actors were not acting in a vacuum where they could simply make unencumbered choices, to the extent such "choices" were even possible at all.

I didn't posit anything about only one side being uncomfortable. What I said is that one side doesn't want to have the conversations at all. One side is fine having the conversation, warts and all. The other side wants to avoid the conversation.

 

[IamStryker]

Right wing hysteria is far and away the most socially destructive problem today

The lunatics are running the asylum

CRT is nothing but a red herring

Your side has five year old boys transitioning to be girls because you feed them lies. Beyond gross.

 

[Two Crows]

Well yes college courses in the social sciences tend to get political. If you take an economics class you will have liberal economics preached to you instead of communism, should AP Economics be questioned or removed because its only advocating for one side? These classes are all optional so I don't see why they shouldn't be offered, these kids are going to be taking these class a year or two down the line anyway. I get things like feminism and queer theory are controversial to some but that's a part of the curriculum in college courses so its natural to expect students taking AP classes to run into some of these topics. Personally I wouldn't take such a class but I can think of a lot of my high school classmates who might've enjoyed and benefitted from such a class.

I hold a B.S. in Econ and am currently pursuing my M.S. in Applied Econ.

This is simply incorrect. There are arguments in Econ, and different schools of thought. No one with any level of competence in the field is arguing for Communism. No models support the superiority of the approach. "Communists" are not not economists, they are historians, social activists, hucksters, and various other people attempting to make massive assertations that are directly contrary to all available evidence.

In short; they speak of what "should be" in their minds, and not "what is" in the world. They are to Economics what Creationists are to Biology.
Or you get the jokers who are selling sh!t to suckers, like Yanis Varoufakis ... the "Libertarian Marxist". That's an anarchist label. (Spoiler: He's a politician)

I'd like to ask any self-proclaimed "communist" a very simple question: "What do you propose utilizing in substitute of profit for scarcity distribution?" The historic response has inevitably been a form of fiat. There are tons more ... like freedom of labor selection by workers (IOW, you picking what you want to do as a job) ... I'd LOVE to hear their ideas.

Note: Socialism is NOT Communism. All mainstream economics thought agrees there are a handful of very specific markets that are better served by socialistic approaches, but they are current utilized my the vast majority of "free market" nations. An example would be Fire Departments. Mixed markets are overwhelmingly prevalent, and even China is included in this pool.

 

[Bwagster]

He who controls the past, controls the future.

He who controls the present, controls the past.

George Orwell

 

[Hung Like a Hamster]

Lol @ abolishing prison, man people gone the coocoo.

 

[IamStryker]

Even though this is not a mandatory class, they still want to ban the option to take it. You know why and I know why.

There is an ongoing push, by some, to erase any vestige of the truth of slavery and Jim Crow from public education because they don't like how white kids are responding to hearing about those negative events. And the adults lack the moral fortitude to admit the nation's mistakes. So rather than explain a complex part of history to their kids and be forced to acknowledge that something bad happened, the adults are trying to prevent the teaching altogether.

Additionally, these adults don't want their kids empathizing with the victims of that time period. Which is what is happening. The kids learn about this history. They recognize how bad it is. They empathize with the victims and wonder how supposedly good people could do that to other people. They're kids so they tell their parents about how bad they feel learning that someone harmed someone else over skin color. And they're not blind so they know which side of the skin color line they fall on. They empathize. But the parents don't want their kids to empathize because they want to perpetuate the narrative that no one should feel bad about what happened.

It's emotional fragility at the highest level. The history triggers them so much that they don't even want other people to learn about it or even care about it, just so they can avoid the potential of an unpleasant conversation.

This is pure fantasy. No one on the right wants to stop teaching about slavery and Jim Crow. You have absolutely no evidence of this. Anyone who is defending this AP course which includes queer theory and then trying to turn it around as trying to erase black history is a clown that cannot be reasoned with.