Florida bans its schools from teaching critical race theory

[Valcazar]

Awww... "Cultural Marxism".
I almost forgot when they tried to make that a thing.

You could just admit you don't know what CRT is.

But let's look at Santis's language.

Florida had a rule saying instruction “may not suppress or distort significant historical events, such as the Holocaust”... it specifically adds “slavery, the Civil War and Reconstruction, the civil rights movement and the contributions of women, African American and Hispanic people to our country.”

I don't really object to that. You should teach all those things and not distort them.


There is some more new language, though.

"Examples of theories that distort historical events and are inconsistent with State Board approved standards include the denial or minimization of the Holocaust, and the teaching of Critical Race Theory, meaning the theory that racism is not merely the product of prejudice, but that racism is embedded in American society and its legal systems in order to uphold the supremacy of white persons. Instruction may not utilize material from the 1619 Project"

So this is interesting. You cannot teach that racism is anything other than prejudice. But, if I call the continued effects of racial discrimination in US society by another name, could I teach it?

Also, how can you teach "slavery, the Civil War and Reconstruction, the civil rights movement" and not discuss that the legal system itself was biased against non-whites?

Bannon the 1619 Project is just typical GOP censorship but ultimately minor. That's just there for the scared Fox News demographic, since you can get all the same information from other sources.

 

[K Douglas]

Awww... "Cultural Marxism".
I almost forgot when they tried to make that a thing.

You could just admit you don't know what CRT is.

But let's look at Santis's language.

Florida had a rule saying instruction “may not suppress or distort significant historical events, such as the Holocaust”... it specifically adds “slavery, the Civil War and Reconstruction, the civil rights movement and the contributions of women, African American and Hispanic people to our country.”

I don't really object to that. You should teach all those things and not distort them.


There is some more new language, though.

"Examples of theories that distort historical events and are inconsistent with State Board approved standards include the denial or minimization of the Holocaust, and the teaching of Critical Race Theory, meaning the theory that racism is not merely the product of prejudice, but that racism is embedded in American society and its legal systems in order to uphold the supremacy of white persons. Instruction may not utilize material from the 1619 Project"

So this is interesting. You cannot teach that racism is anything other than prejudice. But, if I call the continued effects of racial discrimination in US society by another name, could I teach it?

Also, how can you teach "slavery, the Civil War and Reconstruction, the civil rights movement" and not discuss that the legal system itself was biased against non-whites?

Bannon the 1619 Project is just typical GOP censorship but ultimately minor. That's just there for the scared Fox News demographic, since you can get all the same information from other sources.

Critical race theory has been taught in colleges and universities since the early 1990's. It's not anything new. People know what its about. Its rooted in Marxist theory - they've just substituted race for class. It has no place in public schools period.

 

[mandrill]

Critical race theory has been taught in colleges and universities since the early 1990's. It's not anything new. People know what its about. Its rooted in Marxist theory - they've just substituted race for class. It has no place in public schools period.

Why, Kirk?

You think that no high schools anywhere have been taught anything about Marxism and the theory of class warfare? I can think of lots of schools that get taught that. My grade 11 class in the UK taught about socialism, Marx and the trade union movement in a 19th Century British history course. My grade 13 class in Toronto did a survey of major political beliefs, including Marxism. And fascism. I didn't turn into a Nazi because my high school teacher explained fascism for 15 minutes in a classroom 1 day.

Why can't kids get taught this stuff? It's not as though they're going to get indoctrinated. It's just a set of opinions. You can take them or leave them, even if you're 16 years old.

What gets indoctrinated is hardcore establishment beliefs like Catholicism in Ontario Catholic schools. Or right wing super-patriotism in pretty much any red state high school. That's what really fucks kids up for the rest of their life. Teaching a bunch of 16 year olds that there are some people out there who think that anti Black racism is hard-baked into the US social and legal system isn't going to do that. Most white kids are going to resist that point of view anyway. And the Black kids already know it's true.

When some GOP dick publicly demands that a Muslim kid be arrested and prosecuted for changing the work "god" in the pledge of allegiance to "Allah" because that personally means more to her, that does way more damage than letting high school kids know that some people think that racism is ingrained into American society. Even though they both pretty much prove the same thing, don't they?

What are you guys so afraid of? That people are going to take to the streets and protest the next time another George Floyd is killed because "racism doesn't really exist in America"?

Are you scared because you know damn well that the US really IS an incurably racist society, but you keep it as some sort of secret, just like when Uncle Jimmy secretly wears his wife's clothes when he thinks no one else is around?

 

[JohnLarue]

Why can't kids get taught this stuff? It's not as though they're going to get indoctrinated. It's just a set of opinions. You can take them or leave them, even if you're 16 years old.?

The objective behind teaching it in high school is indoctrination
Plain and simple

Its not like kids are not aware of racist people to begin with
The media, history and Hollywood make sure of that

What are you guys so afraid of? That people are going to take to the streets and protest the next time another George Floyd is killed because "racism doesn't really exist in America"?

The protests which turned into destructive riots
ANTIFA - a bunch of nuts who have been given an excuse to break the law ..... because they have been indoctrinated into believing the law is systematically racist and therefore unjust and invalid.

CRT will just lead to further racial division, violence and chaos

 

[K Douglas]

Why, Kirk?

You think that no high schools anywhere have been taught anything about Marxism and the theory of class warfare? I can think of lots of schools that get taught that. My grade 11 class in the UK taught about socialism, Marx and the trade union movement in a 19th Century British history course. My grade 13 class in Toronto did a survey of major political beliefs, including Marxism. And fascism. I didn't turn into a Nazi because my high school teacher explained fascism for 15 minutes in a classroom 1 day.

Why can't kids get taught this stuff? It's not as though they're going to get indoctrinated. It's just a set of opinions. You can take them or leave them, even if you're 16 years old.

What gets indoctrinated is hardcore establishment beliefs like Catholicism in Ontario Catholic schools. Or right wing super-patriotism in pretty much any red state high school. That's what really fucks kids up for the rest of their life. Teaching a bunch of 16 year olds that there are some people out there who think that anti Black racism is hard-baked into the US social and legal system isn't going to do that. Most white kids are going to resist that point of view anyway. And the Black kids already know it's true.

When some GOP dick publicly demands that a Muslim kid be arrested and prosecuted for changing the work "god" in the pledge of allegiance to "Allah" because that personally means more to her, that does way more damage than letting high school kids know that some people think that racism is ingrained into American society. Even though they both pretty much prove the same thing, don't they?

What are you guys so afraid of? That people are going to take to the streets and protest the next time another George Floyd is killed because "racism doesn't really exist in America"?

Are you scared because you know damn well that the US really IS an incurably racist society, but you keep it as some sort of secret, just like when Uncle Jimmy secretly wears his wife's clothes when he thinks no one else is around?

Marxist socialism and the trade union movement are rightly taught because they are part of history and based on facts.
Critical race theory is a doctrine that is not rooted in historical facts. Its an interpretation and its being used as a tool of social engineering.

 

[mandrill]

Marxist socialism and the trade union movement are rightly taught because they are part of history and based on facts.
Critical race theory is a doctrine that is not rooted in historical facts. Its an interpretation and its being used as a tool of social engineering.

Why would you make the distinction?

And last post you were claiming Marxism shouldn't be taught in schools because it's some sort of evil thing.

 

[toguy5252]

Marxist socialism and the trade union movement are rightly taught because they are part of history and based on facts.
Critical race theory is a doctrine that is not rooted in historical facts. Its an interpretation and its being used as a tool of social engineering.

It is always easier to deney that problems exist than to tray and eal with them. That is now the GOP mantra.

 

[Valcazar]

Why would you make the distinction?

And last post you were claiming Marxism shouldn't be taught in schools because it's some sort of evil thing.

I think his argument is that you can teach Marxism as long as you make sure to interpret it correctly and teach that Marxism is wrong.
But you can't teach Critical Race Theory because it is "an interpretation" and that would be a tool of social engineering.

In other words, as has been mentioned before, they aren't talking about Critical Race Theory being taught.
They are talking about the idea that you might teach "the wrong interpretation of history" (i.e. - anything other than "there were some bad people who did some racisms but that is over now".)

 

[mandrill]

I think his argument is that you can teach Marxism as long as you make sure to interpret it correctly and teach that Marxism is wrong.
But you can't teach Critical Race Theory because it is "an interpretation" and that would be a tool of social engineering.

In other words, as has been mentioned before, they aren't talking about Critical Race Theory being taught.
They are talking about the idea that you might teach "the wrong interpretation of history" (i.e. - anything other than "there were some bad people who did some racisms but that is over now".)

No, his distinction is that teaching historical chronology is fine; but teaching "interpretation" and theory is bad.

Of course, the comeback is that the GOP-favoured approach that racism was just "bad people" or - more probably, given the GOP - "good people at a bad time" is equally as theoretical as Critical Race Theory. They are both alternate attempts to explain the phenomenon of racial inequality in the US. And there are probably a few other theoretical explanations of the same issue. And the issue has to be dealt with in some way because inequality sure as fuck happened, was happening as late as the 70's (by consensus) and arguably is still happening and it's a fundamental issue in US History. So you better start talking about it and start explaining it, even at a high school level.

Kirk just thinks the GOP-favoured theory is preferable because it's the one he was taught as a kid and socialized as an adult to believe is normative and that makes the other theory false and subversive and unacceptable. And he likes the mindset that ideas which are annoying can be banned "to protect society".

Kirk would be onside with other ideas being banned to protect society - like the Spanish Inquisition torturing anyone who wasn't a devout Catholic.

 

[kherg007]

I do watch Fox on occasion and they've routinely misdescribed everything from the duties of the US attorney General (not the presidents lawyer) or socialism (they actually describe communism, not socialism), green new deal (nowhere does it ban airplanes) what unindicted co-conspirator means (does not mean you wont be charged) and I see CRT in that same vein. Many US laws - particularly around voting - were race based. The question is how much, how many, but clearly racism was a driving force in ways not always appreciated. If you claim everything was race based, then ya lose me. But to claim race had only a tiny, tiny effect is also wrong.

 

[Platon]

I think we can benefit from a definition as can be read on wikipedia (it doesn't come from NYT or CBC but I think it should still be close to what it really is )

Critical race theory (CRT) examines social, cultural and legal issues as they relate to race and racism.[1][2] It is an academic discipline composed of civil-rights scholars in the United States who seek to critically examine the law to show, first, that it maintains white supremacy, white power, and enforces societal or structural racism;[3] and, second, that transforming the relationship between law and racial power, and also achieving racial emancipation and anti-subordination more broadly, is possible.

Reading above one might easily come to conclusion that CRT itself is racist. The situation is obviously highly problematic with slavery and the legacy it left but things have been moving in the right direction for the past 60 or so years. I just don't understand why do people want to go from one extreme to another? I don't understand why would any sane person support this, what about those who came here some time after the 60s from places without slavery built a life here and all of a sudden their kids/grandkids are labeled white supremacists in classroom?

 

[JohnLarue]

I do watch Fox on occasion and they've routinely misdescribed everything from the duties of the US attorney General (not the presidents lawyer) or socialism (they actually describe communism, not socialism)

,

green new deal (nowhere does it ban airplanes)
Green New Deal's Plan For Planes, Trains, And Automobiles Won't Work (forbes.com)

Totally overhaul transportation by massively expanding electric vehicle manufacturing, build charging stations everywhere, build out highspeed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary, create affordable public transit available to all, with goal to replace every combustion-engine vehicle”

Yeah, they want to eliminate air travel alright, however if you want to say it is not an explicit ban, better cross your fingers when stating that

what unindicted co-conspirator means (does not mean you wont be charged)

It means you have not been indicted .............yet
It usually is in the context of describing someone who is giving testimony (often in exchange for not being indicted)

and I see CRT in that same vein.

0 for 3 and you see it in the same vein?
Murky at best

Many US laws - particularly around voting - were race based.

Requiring people to register in order to vote is not race based
Democrats support a vaccine passport to fly but view registering to vote as asking too much?

To be fair I will concede some nasty, evil and down right illegal things have been done in the US to intimidate / persuade voters and a lot of it historically has been race oriented
However the mob and unions have been (still are) very influential in swaying elections, particularly at the municipal level and that is not race based, that is corruption based
Apparently JFK's slim victory in 1960 was in part a result of Sam Giancana efforts to deliver key Chicago area electoral votes

If you claim everything was race based, then ya lose me.

CRT claims American institutions are racists
It is an unsubstantiated claim
This is not something that should be taught to kids

But to claim race had only a tiny, tiny effect is also wrong.

Its not like kids are not aware of racist people to begin with
The media, history and Hollywood make sure of that

 

[Valcazar]

How Past Panics Over Textbooks Set the Stage for the “Critical Race Theory” Freakout

slate.com

 

[Valcazar]

Kirk just thinks the GOP-favoured theory is preferable because it's the one he was taught as a kid and socialized as an adult to believe is normative and that makes the other theory false and subversive and unacceptable. And he likes the mindset that ideas which are annoying can be banned "to protect society".

Yes, his stuff is "facts" and their stuff is "intepretation".
None of this has anything to do with Critical Race Theory, though - it is just the current name for "teaching stuff I don't want taught".

I think we can benefit from a definition as can be read on wikipedia (it doesn't come from NYT or CBC but I think it should still be close to what it really is )

That doesn't really help though, since that isn't what they are talking about as evidenced by the the laws they are passing, the discussion they have about it, and - of course - Rufo's own comments and tweets on the subject.

We have successfully frozen their brand—"critical race theory"—into the public conversation and are steadily driving up negative perceptions. We will eventually turn it toxic, as we put all of the various cultural insanities under that brand category.

The goal is to have the public read something crazy in the newspaper and immediately think "critical race theory." We have decodified the term and will recodify it to annex the entire range of cultural constructions that are unpopular with Americans.

That kind of spin is how you go from reading the definition you posted and saying it means "their kids/grandkids are labeled white supremacists in classroom".

Requiring people to register in order to vote is not race based
Democrats support a vaccine passport to fly but view registering to vote as asking too much?

I always struggle with whether you just can't reason well and so say these things thinking they are clever or just know they are dumb but they are the relevant talking points.
It's the dramatic non-sequiturs that make them so interesting.
"There is a history of racism connected to voting laws"
"Making people register to vote isn't racist. Also vaccine passports! And the MOB! Checkmate libs!"

CRT claims American institutions are racists
It is an unsubstantiated claim

Just marvel at this statement. It's like a tiny gem of wrong.

Its not like kids are not aware of racist people to begin with
The media, history and Hollywood make sure of that

You seem very angry that kids are aware that people have been racist and bigoted.

 

[mandrill]

I think we can benefit from a definition as can be read on wikipedia (it doesn't come from NYT or CBC but I think it should still be close to what it really is )

Reading above one might easily come to conclusion that CRT itself is racist. The situation is obviously highly problematic with slavery and the legacy it left but things have been moving in the right direction for the past 60 or so years. I just don't understand why do people want to go from one extreme to another? I don't understand why would any sane person support this, what about those who came here some time after the 60s from places without slavery built a life here and all of a sudden their kids/grandkids are labeled white supremacists in classroom?

First of all, CRT is only 1 of a # of theories of how the law and race relations inter-relate. My issue is that the GOP have banned 1 potential interpretation and used it as a scare tactic for their rural, badly educated white base. I'm not sure that I'd agree - certainly not totally - w CRT. OTOH, I don't like the sound of it being banned and competing ideologies being allowed to flourish.

I am guessing that in the ultra religious South, the GOP favoured ideology will be something along the lines of "Jesus created the USA to be perfect. Some amazing patriotic, glorious Americans like Robert E Lee became a little confused one day and fought to preserve something called slavery, which was originally set up to take care of the Blacks, but got distorted a little. And then Jesus ended slavery and everything was OK, except the Blacks are really whiny now."

I can't see how even an extreme example of CRT would lead to little white kids being branded "white supremacists", although I'm sure a doltish, heavy-handed high school teacher could perhaps take it there.

And I don't see how CRT is racist. You might find it unconvincing; but that doesn't make it racist.

 

[kherg007]

,

green new deal (nowhere does it ban airplanes)
Green New Deal's Plan For Planes, Trains, And Automobiles Won't Work (forbes.com)


Yeah, they want to eliminate air travel alright, however if you want to say it is not an explicit ban, better cross your fingers when stating that




It means you have not been indicted .............yet
It usually is in the context of describing someone who is giving testimony (often in exchange for not being indicted)


0 for 3 and you see it in the same vein?
Murky at best


Requiring people to register in order to vote is not race based
Democrats support a vaccine passport to fly but view registering to vote as asking too much?

To be fair I will concede some nasty, evil and down right illegal things have been done in the US to intimidate / persuade voters and a lot of it historically has been race oriented
However the mob and unions have been (still are) very influential in swaying elections, particularly at the municipal level and that is not race based, that is corruption based
Apparently JFK's slim victory in 1960 was in part a result of Sam Giancana efforts to deliver key Chicago area electoral votes


CRT claims American institutions are racists
It is an unsubstantiated claim
This is not something that should be taught to kids




Its not like kids are not aware of racist people to begin with
The media, history and Hollywood make sure of that

Wow. There was a lot of goal post moving (they said ban airplanes on fox, you suggested it says make it unecessary - which is entirely different. You used a cartoon for socialism, yet the USA HAS socialism and those programs are amongst the most popular - e.g., social security, medicare - and you agree w me on unindicted co-conspirator (Tucker implies you wont be charged and its proof they are fbi informants) and then you say it's 0 for 3????? Wow.

 

[Platon]

I can't see how even an extreme example of CRT would lead to little white kids being branded "white supremacists", although I'm sure a doltish, heavy-handed high school teacher could perhaps take it there.
And I don't see how CRT is racist. You might find it unconvincing; but that doesn't make it racist.

Well, then I can't help you. You must have missed all the cases of mothers standing up to teachers who make white kids apologize (but it wasn't on CBC so it's probably fake, must be Trump dollars at work eh). One day you're going to wake up to a knock on your door (assuming you're white), the woman in charge will tell you that the two brothers from the hood you see will from now on live in your big house (because you have too much of it and it's not fair since you got it as a beneficiary of white supremacy, the theory says so clearly, to avoid being labeled white supremacist you will have to agree and give up your possessions), they will call this process Compacting! That's exactly what they did in Soviet Union at its inception, people were compacted. But hey, based on what you have in your head you might even like it. Some people in Soviet Union did, until they didn't that is.

 

[Liminal]

I think we can benefit from a definition as can be read on wikipedia (it doesn't come from NYT or CBC but I think it should still be close to what it really is )

Reading above one might easily come to conclusion that CRT itself is racist. The situation is obviously highly problematic with slavery and the legacy it left but things have been moving in the right direction for the past 60 or so years. I just don't understand why do people want to go from one extreme to another? I don't understand why would any sane person support this, what about those who came here some time after the 60s from places without slavery built a life here and all of a sudden their kids/grandkids are labeled white supremacists in classroom?

Don’t get so worked up. The history of ideas and interpretation is as real as the mundane history of external events, which many romantically and naively embrace as the only “real” history.

When I read that Critical Race Theory definition, it remindEd me of the early Feminist writings that were predicated on the belief that there was a male dominated power structure. That enraged a lot of people but they were right. It was uncomfortable but we are better for it.

On a more esoteric level, when I was in university (about 200 years ago!) , there was a controversy about a new theory of historical analysis called the Annales School, that favoured a long term social history over the great person, great event model of history that most of us were taught. It eventually took hold, was superseded by newer school of thought and no one is bothered by it anymore, but we wouldn’t have the social gains we have now without it. By that I mean feminist history or critical race theory.

 

[mandrill]

Well, then I can't help you. You must have missed all the cases of mothers standing up to teachers who make white kids apologize (but it wasn't on CBC so it's probably fake, must be Trump dollars at work eh). One day you're going to wake up to a knock on your door (assuming you're white), the woman in charge will tell you that the two brothers from the hood you see will from now on live in your big house (because you have too much of it and it's not fair since you got it as a beneficiary of white supremacy, the theory says so clearly, to avoid being labeled white supremacist you will have to agree and give up your possessions), they will call this process Compacting! That's exactly what they did in Soviet Union at its inception, people were compacted. But hey, based on what you have in your head you might even like it. Some people in Soviet Union did, until they didn't that is.

Seriously, dude!

Enough of the comparisons between the current West and the Soviet Union under Stalin.

 

[JohnLarue]

Wow. There was a lot of goal post moving (they said ban airplanes on fox, you suggested it says make it unecessary - which is entirely different.

Don not fool yourself into thinking the nutjobs behind the GND do not want to eliminate air travel.
They plan to make it so expensive it will essentially be a ban for 90-99% of the population

You used a cartoon for socialism, yet the USA HAS socialism and those programs are amongst the most popular - e.g., social security, medicare -

The cartoon describes it accurately
Communism is a dirty word, so it has just been rebranded as socialism
Russia, China, Cuba, Venezuela all started with the intent to make life better for the common people, via increased government & wealth redistribution.
All wound up with as autocratic dictatorships, suppression of freedoms and hundreds of millions of dead people..
How many dead bodies are required for you to see the experiment has failed?

and you agree w me on unindicted co-conspirator (Tucker implies you wont be charged and its proof they are fbi informants) and then you say it's 0 for 3????? Wow.

I read

what unindicted co-conspirator means (does not mean you wont be charged)

,
as a question, implying you felt it was ambiguous in some undefined context

So no, I did not agree with you and as stated........ 0 for 3

your post was an incoherent word salad
Exactly how unindicted co-conspirator , socialism and the GND's plan to eliminate air travel all tie to CRT is still a mystery
So whos fault is it if your message was not understood?