Mom in Va. who lived through Cultural Revolution addresses school board regarding Critical Race Theory

[Sneezyone]

15 minutes ago, LucyStoner said:

The fact that advocating for non-violence, something that used to be pretty radical, has become increasingly seen as being milquetoast moderate fence sitting at best if not flat out racist is exactly what I am finding problematic about the shift I have perceived from my admittedly very lefty city.  

Seattle is a whole other animal. As you know, my family and formative years were spent in the PNW and I can’t hang with their brand of liberalism. We’ve lived in WA, HI, CA, IL, AR, RI, VA, and Bahrain and have found ourselves positioned differently everywhere. By far, the most challenging space for me was WA (as an adult). I wanted to strangle every well meaning person who helpfully presumed something totally off base. It was all I could do not to rattle off my local ‘pedigree’. My daughter calls it my ‘Inner Karen’. 🤣

Edited June 12, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Condessa]

3 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

RE the bolded - yes this could actually be racist. I've heard people advocate for more immigration from Latin America because they are Christian. These people prefer Latin American immigrants to Muslim or Hindu immigrants. That is racist. 

Also, it could be racist if there was a preference for Latin American immigrants of European descent. 

But this was not the position on immigration that my post described, that you responded to with “It can be an excuse for anti-Latino racism. . .”

The position was “make it a whole lot easier for people to come here legally, offer a one-time path to citizenship for people already here, and then crack down hard on further illegal immigration”.  This is, word for word, what you said “can be an excuse for anti-Latino racism”.  Not ‘make it a whole lot easier for certain people to come here legally while instituting policies to keep undesirables out.’

 

It’s this tendency of some on the left, like my relative, to insinuate racist motives without reason, that I believe feeds the growing willingness of some in the population  to listen to racists.  Because when they hear them called racist, they are thinking, “But are they really?  Some people call everyone who disagrees with them racist, whether it’s true or not.” 

[Sneezyone]

3 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

How do we expect people to react when they realize that their causes can't be addressed through the political system? I'm not going to hand-wring about violence being a possibility. It would be terrible. But what other option do people have? Political decisions about access to healthcare is literally life and death decisions. There are places where there isn't enough water for the people living there and it's only going to get worse. Decisions about how to respond to disasters that result from climate change have life and death consequences. These are the result of political decisions. 

 

 

 

🤷🏽‍♀️ I don’t know. I really don’t know.

[Scarlett]

From the time I was a small child inequality has always bothered me.  On both ends….both upsetting to me that some people had so much less than me t others had so much more.  
 

So all of this topic still upsets me. It is so political though,  and honestly I hate to tell y’all this but there is not a solution humans are going to be able to implement. I have lived my life, and taught by my mother, to better myself within the system I live and not try to change a broken system.  
 

So to that end, I really don’t belong in this discussion, but I would like to know if you guys WANT public school system teaching ethics and morals to your kids.  That is not where I learned mine, and I did not send my son to public school….and it feels like it has gotten worse instead of better.  

[LucyStoner]

10 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

But that survey does not mean that they advocate for a revolution. They responded that they feel justified in using violence to achieve a political goal. The "yes" bucket included people who responded "a little" violence is justified. That doesn't mean a revolution. What is meant by violence? Could it include destruction of property? Does it mean protecting yourself against a violent attack? 

There is no way that 1/3rd of Americans, on both the right and the left, advocate for a revolution. 

I push back against the idea that politics does not matter and everyone should be civil. That's only possible when people don't have anything at risk. 

 

I didn't say that 1/3 were advocating for a revolution.  My concern is a willingness to rationalize violence.  When just a few years ago the same number was under 10% for at least some degree tolerance for political violence, something is shifting. It didn't really shock me to see these numbers because of what I have seen and heard with my own eyes.  

Valuing non-violence is not one and the same with saying nothing matters save for civility.  Non-violent civil disobedience is not a theoretical concept for me.  I grew up at political protests and organizing meetings. I have my ear pretty close to the ground on a swath of the left- I am definitely not forming my opinions of where the left has been and seems to be going based on conservative created propaganda or buying into scare tactics.  The illiberal tendencies I am seeing aren't imaginary.  

Politics matter deeply to me.  My life, down to my access to food housing as a child, has been shaped by very identifiable political policies.  If you are pushing back against "the idea that politics does not matter and everyone should be civil", you aren't getting that from my words or actions.  

[Sneezyone]

10 minutes ago, Condessa said:

But this was not the position on immigration that my post described, that you responded to with “It can be an excuse for anti-Latino racism. . .”

The position was “make it a whole lot easier for people to come here legally, offer a one-time path to citizenship for people already here, and then crack down hard on further illegal immigration”.  This is, word for word, what you said “can be an excuse for anti-Latino racism”.  Not ‘make it a whole lot easier for certain people to come here legally while instituting policies to keep undesirables out.’

 

It’s this tendency of some on the left, like my relative, to insinuate racist motives without reason, that I believe feeds the growing willingness of some in the population  to listen to racists.  Because when they hear them called racist, they are thinking, “But are they really?  Some people call everyone who disagrees with them racist, whether it’s true or not.” 

I don’t think we can blame outliers for our respective willingness/unwillingness to adopt their view of the world. That’s lazy. Why should they get to set the narrative?

[LucyStoner]

31 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Seattle is a whole other animal. As you know, my family and formative years were spent in the PNW and I can’t hang with their brand of liberalism. We’ve lived in WA, HI, CA, IL, AR, RI, VA, and Bahrain and have found ourselves positioned differently everywhere. By far, the most challenging space for me was WA (as an adult). I wanted to strangle every well meaning person who helpfully presumed something totally off base. It was all I could do not to rattle off my local ‘pedigree’. My daughter calls it my ‘Inner Karen’. 🤣

Oh, for sure.  We are somewhat place bound  (besides my son's support systems, I feel a tremendous obligation to family members I can't just pack up and move with us) but most days I would love to be out of here.  That said, I think a lot of what we see in, say, Seattle or SF filters out to other places.  Stupid Seattle ideas are spreading, LOL.  ETA:  I understand wanting to strangle the well meaning here.  I have to be committed to non-violence or else I would be in prison for strangling too many people.  

 

Edited June 12, 2021 by LucyStoner

[Condessa]

2 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

You have provided ZERO evidence of the bolded actually happening. What is the point of arguing about something for which there is no support, only conjecture?

Well, she did provide many examples of curriculum, books, and parents and students telling how it was taught in their actual classrooms.  Such as the Nevada mom talking about her teenaged biracial son who was being denied graduation for having failed the class in which he refused to publicly identify his oppressor/oppressed heritage.

I suppose you could argue that oppressor/oppressed doesn’t mean bad/good, but one of those definitely means something we all think is bad.
 

Here’s a few examples of Plum giving evidence of specific programs and family reports on how it was implemented:

On 6/10/2021 at 3:20 PM, Plum said:

Ok after doing some homework here’s what I found. 
 

80% of the country has never heard of CRT-USA Today

CRT grew from Critical Legal Studies (CLS), which argued that the law was not objective or apolitical. CLS was a significant departure from earlier conceptions of the law (and other fields of scholarship) as objective, neutral, principled, and dissociated from social or political considerations. Like proponents of CLS, critical race theorists recognized that the law could be complicit in maintaining an unjust social order. Where critical race theorists departed from CLS was in the recognition of how race and racial inequality were reproduced through the law. Further, CRT scholars did not share the approach of destabilizing social injustice by destabilizing the law. Many CRT scholars had witnessed how the law could be used to help secure and protect civil rights. Therefore, critical race theorists recognized that, while the law could be used to deepen racial inequality, it also held potential as a tool for emancipation and for securing racial equality. American Bar Association Civil Rights 

There are five major components or tenets of CRT: (1) the notion that racism is ordinary and not aberrational; (2) the idea of an interest convergence; (3) the social construction of race; (4) the idea of storytelling and counter-storytelling; and (5) the notion that whites have actually been recipients of civil rights legislation.
 

1)The idea of color-blindness (something Gen X will recognize) and meritocracy are inherently racist 

2)Change only happens when there’s something in it for whites

4) This dichotomy—storytelling and counter-storytelling—is predicated upon the belief that schools are neutral spaces that treat everyone justly; however, close examination refutes this: simply evaluating graduation rates accomplishes this. School curricula continue to be structured around mainstream white, middle-class values. There continues to be a widening of the racial achievement gap (the separation of students of color’s achievement and the achievement of Anglo-Americans). Whose needs do these values and curricula serve? It is not students of color?

5) affirmative action best serves whites

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED506735.pdf
 

Examples in the news…is this or is this not CRT?

The Madison School District has made numerous changes to learning in the district, all in the name of CRT and equity. In high school, the lowest score you will receive on an assignment is a 50, even if you have earned a lower score than 50 or if you fail to turn in the assignment altogether. Most recently, a high school student that fails will no longer receive an F, but instead will receive a “No Pass” which will not count towards their cumulative Grade Point Average (GPA). The District is also debating right now the end to honors classes, which allow children advanced in a subject matter to dive deeper into that subject, because of the “disparities in the demographics of standalone honors” classes.

 

 

In October, Seattle Public Schools unveiled a “framework” to inject “math ethnic studies” into all K-12 math classes, teaching “how math has been and continues to be used to oppress and marginalize people and communities of color.”

Students will be asked to “identify the inherent inequities of the standardized testing system used to oppress and marginalize people and communities of color” and “explain how math dictates economic oppression.”

 

In the nation’s largest school system, a panel appointed by the mayor proposed in August to eliminate the city’s gifted and talented schools and programs in the service of racial integration garnered front-page New York Times coverage.

The proposal would end the practice of gifted and talented schools screening students by exams and grades—and even block considering students’ attendance records at their previous schools.

It also said it was unfair that students who were not fluent in English were “underrepresented” in the most rigorous academic programs.
 

Critical race theorists, analysts and educators say the discipline does not attack individual students for their privileges, but rather, it makes them aware of how different systems in the U.S. discriminate against others.

"If a kid is being taught that they're an oppressor, that means that the person who's doing the teaching is not explaining the difference between people and systems," Bolgatz said. "Racism is a system. ... People are prejudiced, and we can work on our own individual prejudice, but we have to also work on the systems that discriminate writ large." ABC

———

thats all I can post for now for fear of losing it

i think the bolded at the end is the most important thing I’ve read so far. We’re trusting educators and administrators to be able to teach this without making one side a victim and one side an oppressor. I think that’s asking too much. I do not believe they can possibly have a firm grasp of what and how to teach a concept like this in K-12. 

 

On 6/10/2021 at 5:30 PM, Plum said:

Oh snap! That’s my school district! It’s a charter school here.  Wow. ☹️
 

The lawsuit centers around Sociology of Change, a yearlong mandatory class for seniors at Democracy Prep. The Clarks allege that assignments in the course required students to reveal their race, gender, sexual orientation and disabilities and then determine if privilege or oppression is attached to those identities. The class, which was conducted virtually due to the ongoing pandemic, also included breakout discussions which the plaintiffs say students could opt out of but still created a “psychologically abusive dilemma” and a “hostile educational environment.”

“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,” reads the court filing.

O’Brien calls it “coercive.”

“It serves no apparent pedagogical purpose,” he says.

William Clark is described in the lawsuit as having “green eyes and blondish hair” and “generally regarded as white by his peers.” William’s mother, Gabrielle, is Black and his deceased father was white, according to court documents.

Kathryn Bass, the Democracy Prep Sociology of Change teacher, is white, according to a classroom slide included in court documents.

Democracy Prep’s student body is 63.8 percent Black, 30.2 percent Hispanic and 2.2 percent white, according to the state’s K-12 data portal.
 

 

At immediate stake is William Clark’s graduation.

The Clarks accuse Democracy Prep of refusing to accommodate the student’s “conscientious objection” to the course material by changing his grade or allowing him to take an alternative course. The plaintiffs are asking for the court to enjoin the school from denying William a high school diploma and accommodate him with “an alternative non-discriminatory, non-confessional class.”

They also want the court to declare that requiring students to reveal racial, sexual, gender and religious identities in a public-school classroom and in graded assignments is unconstitutional.

https://www.nevadacurrent.com/2021/01/21/las-vegas-charter-school-sued-for-curriculum-covering-race-identity/

 

22 hours ago, Plum said:

Actually, my post downthread is a better example. This took up a lot of space. I kept the link in case you are interested in another K-2 lesson plan. 

Connection to anti-bias education
Challenge the Text places an anti-bias lens on the literacy experience. Students generate and respond to critical questions, raising issues related to power within the social contexts of race, class, gender, sexual orientation, etc. This method gives voice to marginalized perspectives and alternative readings of dominant texts, embedding critical literacy practices into the Perspectives curriculum. 

https://www.learningforjustice.org/classroom-resources/teaching-strategies/responding-to-the-readaloud-text/challenge-the-text

 

 

22 hours ago, Plum said:

Found another K-2 using their approved texts and examples. This is still looking like the next Common Core to me. A framework that is widely misunderstood, poorly implemented, and getting lots of parents mad. The problem is this isn't just standards. It's an ideology that schools are pushing onto students. Schools might have all the best intentions here, but it looks like this could end really badly. 

Cracking the Code
RESPONDING TO THE READ-ALOUD TEXT
GRADE LEVEL K-2

What?
During Cracking the Code, students examine texts for bias related to race, gender, class, religion, age and sexual orientation, among other identity categories.
When?

During and after reading
 
Why?
As noted in the Common Core, critical literacy means more than identifying words, enjoying illustrations and following story lines. Children need to be critical consumers of  media and able to identify stereotypes or biased representations of groups. Cracking the Code provides practice identifying both overt and covert messages.
 
How?
Select a central text and a variety of print and television advertisements. Ideally, select ads for products with which your students will be familiar and those that illustrate the strategy well.

<insert a lot of Common Core + CRT type questions>

Connection to anti-bias education
Discussions about bias and stereotype are critical to anti-bias education. Cracking the Code helps students critically examine representation in texts and encourages them to assess the messages being transmitted in those representations.

https://www.learningforjustice.org/classroom-resources/teaching-strategies/responding-to-the-readaloud-text/cracking-the-code

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Plum said:

@ktgrok

They used this book. .

Some of the articles mirror the sentiment from the OP since the school is a high majority Asian. 

 

[Spy Car]

29 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

How do we expect people to react when they realize that their causes can't be addressed through the political system? I'm not going to hand-wring about violence being a possibility. It would be terrible. But what other option do people have? Political decisions about access to healthcare is literally life and death decisions. There are places where there isn't enough water for the people living there and it's only going to get worse. Decisions about how to respond to disasters that result from climate change have life and death consequences. These are the result of political decisions. 

 

 

 

Peoples' causes can be addressed through the political process in a liberal society.

Those who tell people that's not true and that violence is a legitimate means to power are populist demagogues. Empowering such people is a huge mistake. It is the path to authoritarianism/totalitarianism.

Populism is the biggest threat of our age (worldwide). 

Bill

 

Edited June 12, 2021 by Spy Car

[Sneezyone]

9 minutes ago, Condessa said:

Well, she did provide many examples of curriculum, books, and parents and students telling how it was taught in their actual classrooms.  Such as the Nevada mom talking about her teenaged biracial son who was being denied graduation for having failed the class in which he refused to publicly identify his oppressor/oppressed heritage.

I suppose you could argue that oppressor/oppressed doesn’t mean bad/good, but one of those definitely means something we all think is bad.
 

Here’s a few examples of Plum giving evidence of specific programs and family reports on how it was implemented:

 

 

 

 

 

These are links to someone’s thesis (a literature review) and parental/observer opinions. There’s no independent research there, no classroom observation, no quote from a teacher about oppression, nada.

If you ask my kids to identify which aspects of their lives afford them privilege they’d have zero problems identifying them. Like, it’s a non-issue. It’s not something to be upset or feel guilty about. It’s part of them.

Edited June 12, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Condessa]

1 hour ago, Plum said:

I am genuinely stunned and saddened.

I started out yesterday with an open mind, read up on the history, discovered my own school district had a lawsuit about this, and have posted a bunch of examples mostly from the lowest grades because I found that to be more important than the high school level. I said early on that it would be fine as a high school elective. I took peer counseling in high school and was prepared for that level of self-reflection and confidentiality. I said racism should be covered in history class, just not every class and especially not at the elementary level. Core subjects that should be the focus at that level. 

I have really tried to discover the real truth here. Every time I post something or answer a question I get that's not CRT or I don't see the problem. In some cases I was only reporting what I found, but in others it's obvious there is a theme here. 

Or maybe I'm just talking to myself and you all think it's NBD and I'm clutching my pearls over this. It's only fitting I posted this on the first page. Like why do I bother?

I’ve really appreciated your input here.

This board is not especially left-leaning as a whole, but there are some left-leaning posters here who really jump on certain viewpoints, and hold posts on opposing ideas and topics to a much higher standard of evidence.  It makes it feel like a more polarized place, because of the vocality of one side.

Don’t give up.  We all stand to benefit when our ideas are challenged by a variety of well thought-out perspectives and a willingness to ask questions.

Edited June 12, 2021 by Condessa

[PaxEtLux]

2 minutes ago, Condessa said:

Here’s a few examples of Plum giving evidence of specific programs and family reports on how it was implemented:

 

But none of these are from the actual school in the original post.  Not one post has said, what, exactly, this school district is doing that is supposed to cause us such outrage. Scatterings of programs from all over the country are mentioned, but they are irrelevant to the original rant.  WTM forums aren't exactly a hotbed of public school apologism, I don't there there's any pro public school bias here, but there needs to be something tangible other than "other people are upset".

[Condessa]

4 minutes ago, PaxEtLux said:

But none of these are from the actual school in the original post.  Not one post has said, what, exactly, this school district is doing that is supposed to cause us such outrage. Scatterings of programs from all over the country are mentioned, but they are irrelevant to the original rant.  WTM forums aren't exactly a hotbed of public school apologism, I don't there there's any pro public school bias here, but there needs to be something tangible other than "other people are upset".

This response wasn’t about the original post.  It was in response to this post:

2 hours ago, Plum said:

So far I've posted a bunch of examples that have been dismissed.

I see a fundamental disagreement with defining the role of school. I don't think it is the school system's place to teach ideology, morals, character. I see that as the parent's role.

If the parent is sending their kid to school hungry, unclothed, with bruises or obvious signs of abuse and neglect, then of course the school should step in and notify the authorities because really it's the county or state's job to ensure the child is not being abused or neglected and to get them in to programs if they can. 

Teaching that one race is better or worse than another is in fact racist. Forcing a child to hang all of their family "baggage" onto their shoulders year after school year is detrimental to their whole being. I don't see how anyone can not see that. A child born into "privilege" didn't ask for any of it and the same goes the other way. Those example paragraphs didn't take into account where their family came from, their work ethic, their values...it only labeled and sorted them out as if they were something that could be weighed and measured. 

(Bolding Sneezyone’s to emphasize what her response was to.)

[Condessa]

8 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

These are links to someone’s thesis (a literature review) and parental/observer opinions. There’s no independent research there, no classroom observation, no quote from a teacher about oppression, nada.

If you ask my kids to identify which aspects of their lives afford them privilege they’d have zero problems identifying them. Like, it’s a non-issue. It’s not something to be upset or feel guilty about. It’s part of them.

There was the teacher from Dwight-Englewood school.  I’m sorry, I don’t have time to find the post now.  I have to go.

[Farrar]

14 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

So what do you plan to tell people in 2024 when the GOP takes the Senate (with less than 50% of the votes cast for Republican candidates) and the House (again, with less than 50% of the votes cast for Republican candidates)? And then the Senate refuses to certify the election of the Democratic presidential candidate and the Supreme Court (with the majority of justices appointed by presidential candidates who earned less 50% of the votes) refuses to get involved? 

Will you tell people that their causes can be addressed through the political process? 

How is the scenario that I just described (completely legal, BTW) not also a path to authoritarianism and totalitarianism? 

Do you think that congress and president (elected by a minority of voters) will advance the causes of the majority who voted for the other political party? 

Are the people warning of this possibility populist demagogues? 

This is so totally where I'm at.

And adding. I DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE FOR CONGRESS despite being a citizen. It's just nigh on impossible to have a sense that the system is fair when you live as someone literally disenfranchised.

[Sneezyone]

43 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

So what do you plan to tell people in 2024 when the GOP takes the Senate (with less than 50% of the votes cast for Republican candidates) and the House (again, with less than 50% of the votes cast for Republican candidates)? And then the Senate refuses to certify the election of the Democratic presidential candidate and the Supreme Court (with the majority of justices appointed by presidential candidates who earned less 50% of the votes) refuses to get involved? 

Will you tell people that their causes can be addressed through the political process? 

How is the scenario that I just described (completely legal, BTW) not also a path to authoritarianism and totalitarianism? 

Do you think that congress and president (elected by a minority of voters) will advance the causes of the majority who voted for the other political party? 

Are the people warning of this possibility populist demagogues? 

This is a hard scenario to acknowledge, wrap my head around but certainly possible. I'm not sure it's related to the current outrage over the as yet undefined "CRT" tho.

[Farrar]

5 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

This is a hard scenario to acknowledge, wrap my head around but certainly possible. I'm not sure it's related to the current outrage over the as yet undefined "CRT" tho.

I think it's all a piece. The scenario that Ordinary Shoes is describing is honestly pretty likely. The GOP absolutely will take the Senate and it absolutely will be with a lot fewer votes than the Dem candidates receive. They are very likely to take the House as well. The presidency I'm less sure about because it's a little harder to gerrymander, but given how many still believe the Big Lie, I think it's not crazy to believe that this could easily happen. These things are just all in motion. And part of why they're in motion is that a certain sort of core conservative believes that things like CRT (among many others like decreasing police funding and increasing taxes on the wealthy and so forth...) are so deeply anti-democratic, anti-American, and dangerous to our liberties that it's necessary to prevent them by seizing power through any means the system will let them. The greater ethical responsibility is not to "play fair" but to prevent the people who would support such evil policies from gaining power.

[Melissa Louise]

False binaries being set up. 

We can't listen to parent/student/teacher complaints and correct for over-zealous implementation, because that will mean denying racism even exists!

 

 

[Spy Car]

1 hour ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

So what do you plan to tell people in 2024 when the GOP takes the Senate (with less than 50% of the votes cast for Republican candidates) and the House (again, with less than 50% of the votes cast for Republican candidates)? And then the Senate refuses to certify the election of the Democratic presidential candidate and the Supreme Court (with the majority of justices appointed by presidential candidates who earned less 50% of the votes) refuses to get involved? 

Will you tell people that their causes can be addressed through the political process? 

How is the scenario that I just described (completely legal, BTW) not also a path to authoritarianism and totalitarianism? 

Do you think that congress and president (elected by a minority of voters) will advance the causes of the majority who voted for the other political party? 

Are the people warning of this possibility populist demagogues? 

I'd tell them to get out and vote and to organize/mobilize to make positive change. And not to turn to violence.

And certainly not to embrace to populist demagogues as "saviors." Because populist demagoguery is a very bad path. Never turns out well.

Bill

[Melissa Louise]

1 hour ago, Scarlett said:

From the time I was a small child inequality has always bothered me.  On both ends….both upsetting to me that some people had so much less than me t others had so much more.  
 

So all of this topic still upsets me. It is so political though,  and honestly I hate to tell y’all this but there is not a solution humans are going to be able to implement. I have lived my life, and taught by my mother, to better myself within the system I live and not try to change a broken system.  
 

So to that end, I really don’t belong in this discussion, but I would like to know if you guys WANT public school system teaching ethics and morals to your kids.  That is not where I learned mine, and I did not send my son to public school….and it feels like it has gotten worse instead of better.  

We have explicit ethics teaching here. It's for the kids in public school who don't want the explicit religious instruction! 

You can't not incorporate some ethics into education. Everytime you explain to a Kindy kid that at school, we don't hit others when we're angry and why, we are issuing ethical advice - here just a Golden Rule variation. How would you feel if Daniel hit you? Some of our SEL covers issues of exclusion and bullying on the basis of skin colour, among other things. Education here still promotes multiculturalism. 

CRT isn't ethics. It's a particular academic lens through which to analyse racial inequality. 

You can have an ethical curriculum that teaches an accurate and full national and state history, that doesn't use CRT. 

You can have an unethical CRT framing. 

You can have a CRT framing that is not historically sound.

You can have an ethical CRT framework that is historically sound. 

People will object to students feeling compelled to adopt a specific academic framework to consider their own identities. They just will. That's very different to objecting to learning about (idk what it would be for you guys - Tulsa?)

I've taught my own kids about local massacres. Zero objection to covering this content. Took niece to an exhibition that was particularly open about settler violence recently. I didn't need to introduce her to the power wheel first. I don't have an investment in that she learns she is complicit by virtue of her race.  She's 9. She has no complicity. She was ready for the content. It made her mad and also feel empathy. Some of her classmates are not ready for the same content. None of them need to encouraged to view themselves or others in primarily racial, gender or other 'identities'. 

In the end, complaints don't come out of nowhere. Is it possible it's all a Republican set up job? I guess. Is it likely? Why wouldn't one want to be curious about why a survivor of communism is getting triggered? Or why a biracial boy felt demeaned or punished? Or why a humanist teacher is resigning? 

[Melissa Louise]

And yeah, incitement to violence from any direction is a hard no from me. Saw the errors of my way on that one.

Violence doesn't become noble in the right hands. It occasionally becomes necessary ( self defence) but it remains ethically murky, unpredictable, and damaging to the most vulnerable. 

What's that saying about democracy? It's the worst form of government. Except for all the others. 

 

[Spy Car]

25 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

 

Yeah, but what if they can't vote because their name is stricken from the voter rolls or they don't have an ID or whatever? 

And even if they do get out and vote, what difference will it make if their votes are gerrymandered away? The majority of votes already go to Democratic congressional and senatorial candidates but the Democrats do not always control congress. 

My and my DH's ballots are being "audited" by a bunch of crazy people looking for bamboo fibers. That doesn't make me feel very confident in the democratic process. Our county went for Biden but there's been relentless attacks on the integrity of the vote since November. 

So would you tell an African American man in 1900 to "get out and vote" and organize to end Jim Crow? That might get him killed. 

And there was more to the Civil Rights movement than non-violence. 

 

How 'Crazy Negroes' With Guns Helped Kill Jim Crow

Sounds like a lot of "whataboutism."

The Civil Rights movement advanced through non-violence and winning over hearts and minds. It did not advance through violence on the part of those on the right side of justice.

We do need to work towards fairer elections--as Stacey Abrams showed in the last election cycle in Georgia--by getting active, organized, and getting out the vote, not through resort to violence. 

Appeals to violence are precisely the wrong path is one is in favor of progress. It is a regressive tendency.

There are always demagogues who will push violence and populism for their own political ends. It never works out well.

Bill

 

[LucyStoner]

1 hour ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

The presidency is less likely than the rest of it. But even if a democratic president is elected his/her power will be limited by a Republican congress. Look at what's happening in states with Democratic governors. 

And I don't think this is because of core conservatives believing in the "evils" of CRT. It's much more likely based on ordinary moderate people becoming concerned about CRT and the illiberalism of the Left. 

Yeah, but what if they can't vote because their name is stricken from the voter rolls or they don't have an ID or whatever? 

And even if they do get out and vote, what difference will it make if their votes are gerrymandered away? The majority of votes already go to Democratic congressional and senatorial candidates but the Democrats do not always control congress. 

My and my DH's ballots are being "audited" by a bunch of crazy people looking for bamboo fibers. That doesn't make me feel very confident in the democratic process. Our county went for Biden but there's been relentless attacks on the integrity of the vote since November. 

So would you tell an African American man in 1900 to "get out and vote" and organize to end Jim Crow? That might get him killed. 

And there was more to the Civil Rights movement than non-violence. 

 

How 'Crazy Negroes' With Guns Helped Kill Jim Crow

I’ve read This Non-violent Stuff’ll Get You Killed. I actually think I see the spine of that book in a stack of books next to our piano right now.    It’s a good book.  The author makes the point that non-violence has merit/a time and place but was effectively complimented by *armed self/community defense*.  Being ready and willing to act in defense of yourself and others isn’t the same thing as using violence to advance ones political objectives.  It’s a nuanced difference but it’s a difference.  I don’t have an issue with people being prepared to stand up for themselves.  I can think of many examples of groups banding together for protection that I think make a lot of sense.  There is always going to be power in numbers and the ability to defend each other and our families.  

In my view, “Come for me and mine and be prepared to regret it” is way different than “let’s go shoot some Congressmen who’ve cast shitty votes.”  The later scenario also tends to take out bystanders.  
 

ETA:  Charles Cobb also wrote Radical Equations, which is an amazing book.  Incidentally, that is a book that should be in professional development programs for teachers.  

Edited June 12, 2021 by LucyStoner

[Condessa]

1 hour ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

The presidency is less likely than the rest of it. But even if a democratic president is elected his/her power will be limited by a Republican congress. 

Isn’t this what is supposed to happen?  Most of the time, we wind up with opposing sides holding power over different branches of government, and that’s by design, right?  So they can be a check on one another, and force compromise, unless there is so much consensus in the population as to provide one party with multiple branches, super majorities, etc.  

 

ETA: I do think that term limits on the Supreme Court would be a very good idea, so that the judiciary branch will also fit into this natural check better, rather than a party that was voted more power at some point possibly many years ago determining this one.  Term limits would cause the Supreme Court to more closely follow the people's voting patterns.

Edited June 12, 2021 by Condessa

[LucyStoner]

17 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

But don't think that people answering a survey might be thinking of armed self defense as "violence?" If I was asked the question whether I thought violence was justified, I think I would include self defense. 

I’d have to see the survey questions to delve into that more but for me, violence to achieve political aims sounds more like the IRA blowing up Mountbatten’s boat (and killing his grandchildren) than a community refusing to let a man be lynched.

I think self defense and defense of others is something that enjoys nearly universal support.  Violence to achieve political ends  clearly does not (33-36% inclusive of mild support).  So my guess is these are different things in most people’s minds.  

Edited June 12, 2021 by LucyStoner

[Spy Car]

14 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

It's not even remotely whataboutism. Whataboutism is intended to deflect criticism by pointing to someone else and saying, "what about that person who did..." It's not discussing historical facts. 

What you say about the Civil Rights movement is the same thing that people opposed to kneeling during the National Anthem say. It's very white-washed. 

And you didn't answer my question about what you would tell people who are disenfranchised. Do you not believe it's a possibility? Or is it that it doesn't really matter to you because you'll be fine no matter who is in the White House? 

 

No. What you are saying is false. There is no valid analogy between the accomplishments of the largely non-violent Civil Rights movement and the criticisms from some quarters about the non-violent kneeling during the National Anthem. Kind of off the wall, frankly.

The comments about not caring about who is in the White House is insulting. I care very much and I've been very active my whole life in working towards progress. What I won't do is latch onto political violence and take up populist extremism. That's a deplorable path.

Perhaps it is you who doesn't care if we live under populist demagogue, but it sure ain't me. Count on it.

Bill

[SKL]

5 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

So what do you plan to tell people in 2024 when the GOP takes the Senate (with less than 50% of the votes cast for Republican candidates) and the House (again, with less than 50% of the votes cast for Republican candidates)? And then the Senate refuses to certify the election of the Democratic presidential candidate and the Supreme Court (with the majority of justices appointed by presidential candidates who earned less 50% of the votes) refuses to get involved? 

Will you tell people that their causes can be addressed through the political process? 

How is the scenario that I just described (completely legal, BTW) not also a path to authoritarianism and totalitarianism? 

Do you think that congress and president (elected by a minority of voters) will advance the causes of the majority who voted for the other political party? 

Are the people warning of this possibility populist demagogues? 

I think that in most truly democratic countries, it is quite normal for the winners of elections to have received less than 50% of the vote, because there aren't usually only 2 mega parties.  In those cases, it seems the process is even more democratic than here, because the parties have no choice but to negotiate with each other over everything.  Not like our system where the winning party gets to ram its own agenda through while the losing party only gets to make a lot of noise about it.

[Frances]

33 minutes ago, SKL said:

I think that in most truly democratic countries, it is quite normal for the winners of elections to have received less than 50% of the vote, because there aren't usually only 2 mega parties.  In those cases, it seems the process is even more democratic than here, because the parties have no choice but to negotiate with each other over everything.  Not like our system where the winning party gets to ram its own agenda through while the losing party only gets to make a lot of noise about it.

But here this really now only happens in one direction (to the right) due to the electoral college, the structure of the Senate, gerrymandering, voter suppression, rural/urban divide, etc. 

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/advantage-gop/

I do agree the process is not as Democratic here and is becoming less so. More and more we see a minority ruling the majority. It does not seem sustainable to me.

[KSera]

 

10 hours ago, Penelope said:

Maybe. Sometimes. It’s also the way straight into groupthink. 
“That statement is bad because it is something someone on the right (or the left) said.” No, I don’t think so. 

I don’t worry about it at all when I find myself occasionally agreeing with someone on the far left or far right on some aspect of an issue. It happens when you try to think critically. 

Agree. I think it's problematic to think a view is wrong by virtue of it being held by people you disagree strongly with. And I agree that way of thinking can lead to groupthink.

10 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

It’s one kind of check but it also depends on your perception of the thought spectrum. For me, it’s a circle, not a line. People on the far left and far right often share similar views. Even on this forum you can see the overlap. That overlap doesn’t just happen because of critical thinking.

In addition to the circle thing happening, there are also views that meet somewhere in the middle.

8 hours ago, Plum said:

So far I've posted a bunch of examples that have been dismissed.

 

Teaching that one race is better or worse than another is in fact racist. Forcing a child to hang all of their family "baggage" onto their shoulders year after school year is detrimental to their whole being. I don't see how anyone can not see that. A child born into "privilege" didn't ask for any of it and the same goes the other way. Those example paragraphs didn't take into account where their family came from, their work ethic, their values...it only labeled and sorted them out as if they were something that could be weighed and measured. 

I have appreciated your contributions to this thread, even if I haven't agreed with them all. It's been clear that you are putting thought and effort into it, and not just listening to what people on TV or talk radio or social media are telling you to think. In your last paragraph above, putting aside that while you have provided a lot of examples of really bad implementation of teaching about race that I don't support, I still haven't seen much that is explicitly teaching that one race is better than another, more than that, I think that's not taking into account that not talking about it doesn't remove racial "baggage" that kids may may carry around. It's not the talking about it that creates it. I do disagree with kids having to claim a particular identity and share that with the class and anything of that nature, but ignoring teaching about race and the way it impacts people doesn't make it go away and not impact people all the same.

7 hours ago, SKL said:

Interesting that many of the loudest voices against this are parents of color.

I don't believe this is actually true. Certain people are wanting to draw attention to parents of color who are upset about this for their own purposes. This is a common thing that is done where people select people to represent a group who are actually outliers in that group, and not a fair representation at all. We see this in the past year when people choose doctors with very fringe Covid ideas as an example of what doctors think about Covid, and it's very common with white people choosing to amplify a voice from a minority group that doesn't represent the most commonly held view within that minority group at all, but rather supports the white person's position.

6 hours ago, Condessa said:

I’ve really appreciated your input here.

This board is not especially left-leaning as a whole, but there are some left-leaning posters here who really jump on certain viewpoints, and hold posts on opposing ideas and topics to a much higher standard of evidence.  It makes it feel like a more polarized place, because of the vocality of one side.

Don’t give up.  We all stand to benefit when our ideas are challenged by a variety of well thought-out perspectives and a willingness to ask questions.

I've appreciated your input as well. Early in the thread, I felt like we were of very different minds on this issue, but I saw your position become more nuanced as the thread progressed. I actually think this has been a really good thread, and it (like many threads about deep subjects) keeps making me think how untrue the sentiment is that TWTM is an echo chamber. I think perhaps the prevalence of Covid threads over the past year has given that false impression, because there is a high percentage of people here who are on the side of truth and science, so the super majority have aligned as far as Covid goes. I see lots of people who align on that all over the board on a lot of other big topics we've been discussing lately. This thread shows clearly this is not an echo chamber.

 

4 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

In the end, complaints don't come out of nowhere. Is it possible it's all a Republican set up job? I guess. Is it likely? Why wouldn't one want to be curious about why a survivor of communism is getting triggered? Or why a biracial boy felt demeaned or punished? Or why a humanist teacher is resigning? 

I agree those are all things to be curious about, but at the same time don't believe for a second that's the primary motivation for this being so amplified right now. I think @Pam in CT's earlier post explained it best, with the comment from Christopher Rufo about how they have managed to weaponize CRT:

Quote

“We have successfully frozen their brand — ‘critical race theory’ — into the public conversation and are steadily driving up negative perceptions,” wrote Rufo, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank. “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.’”

Rufo has been a recent guest on Fox News, talking about the evils of CRT, and the frenzy about it seems to have intensified based on that. So, it's really not that there is nothing to criticize about the implementation of CRT in the schools (I expect there is plenty), but it really is that this  is quite clearly motivated by something other than people wanting their kids to be taught about race and racism in a better way.

[Eos]

2 hours ago, KSera said:

this  is quite clearly motivated by something other than people wanting their kids to be taught about race and racism in a better way.

It's the branding.  Like masks vs anti-masks, kneeling vs not kneeling,  "Black Lives Matter" vs "Cultural Marxism."  The Trumpist Republicans have done an excellent job defining their brand and know that it rallies their troops.  I don't believe that this means all Republicans agree, but the Trumpist wing is currently ascendant. 

In my opinion, CRT must show up across the curriculum.  The construct of White is legally favored by law, health care policy, education practices, policing and voting, commercial banking, real estate and lending, non-profit organization, environmental policies, and every other social scaffold.  To confine teaching about race to history is to miss the entire point.

I was taught to not be a bigot but didn't understand systemic racism until I began to think less about myself as a White person being an oppressor and more as a recipient of the good stuff that flows from these social scaffolds.

Edited June 12, 2021 by Harpymom

[Melissa Louise]

I think statements like the above really ask us to think about what the purpose of compulsory, institutional schooling is. 

The idea that compulsory schooling should be a CRT informed avenue for achieving racial justice across the curriculum (How? What's the mechanism here?) is one view. 

There are other views. 

And in a pluralistic society, surely we have to recognize a diversity of opinion on what school is for. 

And hopefully come to some compromise position. As long as most kids and families don't have the option to remove themselves from institutional learning, the school must be responsive to all stakeholders. 

Unfortunately, that will include people we disagree with. 

 

 

 

[Melissa Louise]

Maybe a better way to put the above, is what problems are we asking schools to solve? And with what resources? 

For me, I see K-6 as primarily designed to provide strong  literacy and numeracy skills, with exposure to interesting content in other areas. So, as an academic good. 

The chaplain at my school sees it as providing a safety net to children whose home lives are chaotic and for whom school means care, attention, food, play, clean clothes.  So, as a pragmatic social good. 

That's just two ways of conceptualizing school, two demands on finite resources allocated to us. 

I'm sure there are many ways to think about the question. 

Moving to the pragmatic, lessons focused on social justice take up time in the timetable. What gets ditched? 

It's not a simple matter of 'just incorporating'. 

I think about the small classes I teach, and we spend 95% of our time on direct instruction and practice of skills (5% on behaviour management). If I was expected to incorporate a focus on racialized identities into this class, when?  It can only be taken from the amount of direct instruction. In a 50 min class, there is no margin. 

 

 

 

[Fritz]

The following websites may be of interest to some on this thread. 

http:// manningvbsb.com/

Vicky Manning serves in the At Large seat on the Virginia Beach School Board

Her posting (with embedded links for groups she addresses) below may be of interest to some.

http://www.manningvbsb.com/blog/praising-marxism-virginia-inquiry-collaborative-virginia-beach-schools-joins-6-other-schools-across-the-state-to-rewrite-va-history-curriculum

https://defendinged.org/

 

https://noleftturn.us/about-us/

This group brought the lawsuit previously mentioned in this thread representing Gabrielle Clark and her son William in Nevada.

Nicole Solas (from RI) school board apparently discussed suing her for requesting documents pertaining to her kindergartener’s education regarding CRT.

https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/06/update-smear-of-mom-nicole-solas-was-prepared-by-public-relations-firm-hired-by-south-kingstown-ri-school-committee/

Gonzalez and Andrea Gross organized hundreds of parents to advocate for pro-human values at Columbus Academy in Ohio. The school called the police and brought in bomb-sniffing dogs.

 

https://procacoalition.com/ this link has a very short video of the two moms from mentioned above. It may be of interest as it does show (very briefly) what appears to be part of a middle school or high school syllabus regarding CRT assignments.

https://www.fairforall.org/  Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism

When I started this thread I truly had no idea that many of you had either never heard that this was being taught in school systems across the country, or where unaware of the controversy over it's implementation. I have been hearing about this for awhile now. Maybe because I do read/watch Fox news. 

I am grateful to Plum for all of her digging to find examples of CRT being taught and the controversy surrounding it. I don't have a dog in this fight (currently), as my children are grown but I want to know what's happening in schools for the sake of all children in this country and for my possible, maybe, it could happen, future grandchildren. I was fortunate to be able to homeschool my children. For the record I am for vouchers, charter schools and school choice. Make these schools compete for your children's attendance with proven results! Just because your home is located in x neighborhood your child should not be required to attend the x school, IMO.

Edited June 12, 2021 by Fritz

[LucyStoner]

19 minutes ago, Plum said:

 

Independent research? Complex intersections of race and class: Among social liberals, learning about White privilege reduces sympathy, increases blame, and decreases external attributions for White people struggling with poverty. - American Psychological Association

 

This is a good point- the data on what these trainings accomplish isn’t very encouraging as to their efficacy.  One of the main outcomes seems to be decreased sympathy or even awareness that poor people who aren’t black exist.  The attitude I have observed boils down to if you aren’t black or brown and you are poor, it’s your own fault since “you are playing life on the easiest difficulty setting”.   For people who actually do claim to embrace socialism, this is a puzzling attitude but I’ve definitely seen it.  

[Sneezyone]

1 hour ago, Plum said:

The issue I have with the Wheel is in the bolded. YOU have spoken to YOUR kids about this. This is a value judgement that the schools are either currently squeezing into their busy day or planning to. Not everyone is going to interpret this the same. I see this as taking on a huge risk with children's sense of self. Kids have had enough burdens placed on their shoulders this past year. We have a severe mental health crisis. It may seem benign to some, but to others there is potential to damage them for the rest of their lives. We're asking K-2 to label all of their identities as if it's something that will forever follow them. There's a lot on that wheel that can be overcome and I'd rather kids believe that those things are within their control. 

My kids haven't had any of these experiences either because they are homeschooled. This is a homeschool forum, so finding someone who has a similar instance of their own seems unlikely. 

To be fair, I posted that first long synopsis on my phone and feared losing the post to the forum gods. The thesis said exactly what the American Bar Association post did in that same post that @TechWifeshared later. So bad link but same info. 

Independent research? Complex intersections of race and class: Among social liberals, learning about White privilege reduces sympathy, increases blame, and decreases external attributions for White people struggling with poverty. - American Psychological Association

Anyone have any studies or links to the contrary?

Again if YOU ask your kids..would they have zero problems if they were asked to identify their wealth, mental health or abilities in front of a class of their peers?

 

The Cupertino Elementary School wasn't teaching this as a part of the formal curricula. The only way parents found out is because their kids brought it home. It's unlikely this elementary school is the only place that happens. The outrage from the parents is completely relevant to the OP because that school is majority Asian. I gave links to exactly what they used in school. Again, here is what the parents said, please compare that to the OP.

This of course enraged Asian-American parents. One parent explained this new type of “critical race theory” was reminiscent of the Chinese Cultural Revolution. “[It divides society between] the oppressor and the oppressed, and since these identities are inborn characteristics people cannot change, the only way to change it is via violent revolution,” the parent said. “Growing up in China, I had learned it many times. The outcome is the family will be ripped apart; husband hates wife, children hate parents. I think it is already happening here."

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.” This parent, who is Asian-American, rallied a group of a half dozen families to protest the school’s intersectionality curriculum. The group met with the school principal and demanded an end to the racially divisive instruction. After a tense meeting, the administration agreed to suspend the program. (When reached for comment, Jenn Lashier, the principal of Meyerholz Elementary, said that the training was not part of the “formal curricula, but the process of daily learning facilitated by a certified teacher.”).

https://www.asian-dawn.com/2021/01/15/asians-are-part-of-a-dominant-culture-and-needs-to-be-called-out/

These two moms that both left China, who live on opposite sides of the country, are sharing the same sentiments and there's nothing to that?

Not everyone WANTS to take the time to understand it, any of it. My position is both that we cannot afford not to devote some time to something and b) that efforts to educate people about the three Rs, yes, but also normative behavior is the role public education has always played. On this point, we will never agree. I do not think our education system is doing it’s job if it continues churning out students who lack a good understanding of the many ways our systems and lives are impacted by the privileges afforded or denied various groups over time. Shoddily watching for icebergs above the surface and ignoring what lies below will sink the whole Democratic enterprise.
 

The example you’ve highlighted, again, represents 6 (half dozen) families out if an entire school and from that were supposed to assume the majority agrees? The people Fox usually brings to the fore are used as tokens. They do not represent a majority position on this issue, although I’ll grant you that they are an extremely noisy one. The article you linked goes, surprise surprise, right back to Christopher Rufo’s blog.

Edited June 12, 2021 by Sneezyone

[LucyStoner]

3 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

The example you’ve highlighted, again, represents 6 (half dozen) families out if an entire school and from that were supposed to assume the majority agrees? The people Fox usually brings to the fore are used as tokens. They do not represent a majority position on this issue, although I’ll grant you that they are an extremely noisy one. 

I agree with you that education is about more than the 3 Rs.  I absolutely want students to learn about these topics in school. I don’t want it done in a way that causes more harm than good and I don’t want it done in a way that leads teachers to decide their anti-racist position is to lower the bar (job corps for a black male at 14; asking why a 19 year old black girl is bothering to take calculus).

I do have to point out though that it is not easy to speak out on these topics and the fact that only a handful in a school or a district are doesn’t mean that only that handful are unhappy or have concerns in that district. In constituent relations it’s usually thought that each phone call, each letter, each person signing up to testify is associated with a multiplier of people who hold the same opinion but who for whatever reason don’t take action. Lower multiplier signing an online petition or sending a form letter, larger for a personal letter or phone call, largest for testifying or setting up a meeting.  

[Fritz]

59 minutes ago, Plum said:

Interracial couple, both teachers in the Chicago Public School System are against CRT. 

This is a long and neutral discussion about CRT in one family and community. Don't let the Fox News icon keep you from clicking. 😉

 

Paraphrasing from the video, "If you believe in kids and teach them to believe in themselves they will rise to the occasion and succeed." IMO, that's the secret sauce no matter gender, race, or sex! This starts at home with the parents. I realize not every kid gets that from their parents. Having the schools do a better job of this rather than studying the wheel of privileges' or focusing on our perceived differences based on race seems likely to bring about a better outcome for all kids. 

[Sneezyone]

 

5 minutes ago, LucyStoner said:

I agree with you that education is about more than the 3 Rs.  I absolutely want students to learn about these topics in school. I don’t want it done in a way that causes more harm than good and I don’t want it done in a way that leads teachers to decide their anti-racist position is to lower the bar (job corps for a black male at 14; asking why a 19 year old black girl is bothering to take calculus).

I do have to point out though that it is not easy to speak out on these topics and the fact that only a handful in a school or a district are doesn’t mean that only that handful are unhappy or have concerns in that district. In constituent relations it’s usually thought that each phone call, each letter, each person signing up to testify is associated with a multiplier of people who hold the same opinion but who for whatever reason don’t take action. Lower multiplier signing an online petition or sending a form letter, larger for a personal letter or phone call, largest for testifying or setting up a meeting.  

Maybe so, but there’s no question in my mind that the intersection of wealth is a major issue in some of these communities. The assignments being highlighted aren’t even all about race. Plum posted one that didn’t even mention race at all. It’s as if the very notion of introspection is taboo. That’s ridiculous on it’s face.

Edited June 12, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Condessa]

7 hours ago, KSera said:

not talking about it doesn't remove racial "baggage" that kids may may carry around. It's not the talking about it that creates it. I do disagree with kids having to claim a particular identity and share that with the class and anything of that nature, but ignoring teaching about race and the way it impacts people doesn't make it go away and not impact people all the same.

 I don’t think that anyone in this thread has advocated for ignoring teaching about race and the way it impacts people.  There have been people against the new changes to how that is being done, and one person who claimed that the new law in her state was going to be used this way, but no one who has suggested it.

I don't believe this is actually true. Certain people are wanting to draw attention to parents of color who are upset about this for their own purposes. This is a common thing that is done where people select people to represent a group who are actually outliers in that group, and not a fair representation at all.

Of course, what else possibly could be the result?  On any topic where the opinions of some group identities are listened to more seriously while others are given far less weight, for whatever reason, it amplifies the opinions of members of those group identities over those of others on both sides of the issue.  The ‘selecting’ occurs when those news stories and those parents’ addresses to the school board get passed along more, because in general the public cares more about what they think on this issue than what white students and kids think.  It’s the natural result any time group identity is a factor in how we weight arguments.

I agree those are all things to be curious about, but at the same time don't believe for a second that's the primary motivation for this being so amplified right now. I think @Pam in CT's earlier post explained it best, with the comment from Christopher Rufo about how they have managed to weaponize CRT:

This Rufo guy sounds like a nut job with an intention to manipulate public opinion on this matter to his own ends.  It doesn’t follow that this is the primary motivation for the vast majority of people concerned about it, especially in the case of parents and students and teachers who are actually experiencing it.

 

[Sneezyone]

20 minutes ago, LucyStoner said:

 

I do have to point out though that it is not easy to speak out on these topics and the fact that only a handful in a school or a district are doesn’t mean that only that handful are unhappy or have concerns in that district. In constituent relations it’s usually thought that each phone call, each letter, each person signing up to testify is associated with a multiplier of people who hold the same opinion but who for whatever reason don’t take action. Lower multiplier signing an online petition or sending a form letter, larger for a personal letter or phone call, largest for testifying or setting up a meeting.  

Sure but we have NO IDEA how the district is handling this, whether it was a teacher gone rogue or some deeper effort school-wide, or what their goals were/are because it hasn’t actually been reported on in any depth by local journalists. Best I can tell, there are quotes reported on a blog by an agent provocateur that spread through the right wing ecosystem. They all repeat the same text. I have no idea what undergirds any of it. If I search Cupertino CRT I find astroturf blogs and a single opinion piece. That’s it.

Edited June 12, 2021 by Sneezyone

[LucyStoner]

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

How do you draw that broad conclusion from a study that shows what happens to white liberals? Is that a representative  sample of the nation?

 

Maybe so, but there’s no question in my mind that the intersection of wealth is a major issue in some of these communities. The assignments being highlighted aren’t even all about race. Plum posted one that didn’t even mention race at all. It’s as if the very notion of introspection is taboo. That’s ridiculous on it’s face.

There’s a lot of research on the outcomes of anti-bias trainings- I don’t draw my conclusions from a singular source.  

I’ve also sat in many such trainings myself over the years and watched what happens to the organization after.  Sometimes it’s positive, sometimes it’s very negative and most of the time, it seems like nothing changes.  One time my brother was in such a training and the trainer who was very much in a CRT framework communicated a message that not only seriously turned him off (who was very much part of the choir before the training) but was also borderline sociopathic- basically my brother, then a low wage frontline worker at a Seattle non-profit, was told that when our family was targeted my skinheads for ongoing harassment, that that didn’t really affect any of the white family members.  Generalizations like that lead to some pretty wack-a-doodle conclusions.  

I don’t want to avoid introspection or see schools avoid it.  To me part of that introspection for school staff is working to deliver a higher quality lesson than the ones I am seeing and hearing about.  One of the links in this thread is our school district.  Like I said before, nothing I would yank my kids over but it’s definitely stuff that requires contextualization for my literal minded autistic 12 year old son who earlier this year after school announced that boys were bad and I had to figure out how to communicate to him that that (hopefully) wasn’t what the teacher was trying to communicate.   

[Carol in Cal.]

15 hours ago, LucyStoner said:

Agreed. 

The fact that advocating for non-violence, something that used to be pretty radical, has become increasingly seen as being milquetoast moderate fence sitting at best if not flat out racist is exactly what I am finding problematic about the shift I have perceived from my admittedly very lefty city.  Violence is also used as justification for backlash- we can see that from looking at the points when non-violent street protests are discredited because of outbreaks of rioting or looting.  

Here in Silicon Valley, too.

[Halftime Hope]

16 hours ago, LucyStoner said:

I don't think they are the same, that said, I also don't know how different the most extreme ends of the political spectrum are from each other.  It's interesting to me that the measure is more or less the same between parties.  

You are right that it is largely empty rhetoric but it does give me pause.  My older son remarked that it was a form of American exceptionalism for Americans to believe that America is somehow, when compared to the rest of the world, uniquely bad or in a singular category of awful.  The same thing but flipped as those who think America is uniquely good.  A friend commented to me that our most lefty of friends who love to talk about REVOLUTION had to be extraordinarily privileged if they think that what average, everyday people in the states are experiencing (even average people living at the margins or furthest out on that intersectionality wheel) is actually bad enough for them to be willing to see their kids die in a civil war. 

Violence is a symptom, not a cure.  

Equal sentiment for those who say to tear/burn the systems down. Perhaps they'd like to go live somewhere where there has been a power vacuum, and then report back on what ensued. 

 

[Condessa]

6 hours ago, Harpymom said:

In my opinion, CRT must show up across the curriculum.  The construct of White is legally favored by law, health care policy, education practices, policing and voting, commercial banking, real estate and lending, non-profit organization, environmental policies, and every other social scaffold.  To confine teaching about race to history is to miss the entire point.

See, even if a lesson doesn’t go as far as making kids identify themselves as oppressed/oppressor, things like this connected to CRT are going to be a big problem for a lot of people.  These are exactly the type of claims that are made without evidence other than disproportionate outcomes and expected to be accepted that make the less extreme implementations of CRT still a big problem for many people.

Commercial banking, real estate and lending were racist, and that suppressed the development of generational wealth in minority communities.  But is it racist now?  Are these industries still placing roadblocks to minorities?  

Voting access had racial roadblocks placed for many years, but does it now?  A certain position makes claims about ID requirements and policies against handing out water in line as racist policies, but the only way that holds up is if you honestly believe minorities are less capable of acquiring an ID or bringing their own water.  Are there any actual racist roadblocks to voting access now?  

In education practices, the most common form of racist practice seems to be of the lessened expectation type (which is actually pushed by some proponents of CRT, such as in this math educator course promoted by the OR department of education https://equitablemath.org/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery that says making kids do independent work and show their work in math class are symptomatic of white supremacy).  In higher education, actual concrete policies at many schools favor most minorities while impeding Asian students with an actual racist policy.  Are there policies or practices in place in our country actually seeking to impede other minorities’ educational progress?

 We cannot logically assume that anytime there are disparate outcomes between races, it must be caused by racism.  Correlation does not indicate causation.  If it did, disproportionate rates of incarceration between genders would indicate that men are being overwhelmingly oppressed with unjust mass imprisonment, which is ridiculous.  This doesn’t mean that the cause isn’t racism, either, but we have to actually show evidence of that, not just teach it as gospel to be accepted on faith.  

Correlation can also be caused by other factors; for example, the strongest statistical correlation between an environmental factor and poor educational outcomes, juvenile delinquency, criminal behavior, and incarceration is the lack of an intact family with the biological father in the home.  Doesn’t it stand to reason, then, that communities where this home situation is less common would have higher rates of these problems?

 

Edited June 12, 2021 by Condessa

[HeartString]

49 minutes ago, Condessa said:

See, even if a lesson doesn’t go as far as making kids identify themselves as oppressed/oppressor, things like this connected to CRT are going to be a big problem for a lot of people.  These are exactly the type of claims that are made without evidence other than disproportionate outcomes and expected to be accepted that make the less extreme implementations of CRT still a big problem for many people.

Commercial banking, real estate and lending were racist, and that suppressed the development of generational wealth in minority communities.  But is it racist now?  Are these industries still placing roadblocks to minorities?  
Voting access had racial roadblocks placed for many years, but does it now?  A certain position makes claims about ID requirements and policies against handing out water in line as racist policies, but the only way that holds up is if you honestly believe minorities are less capable of acquiring an ID or bringing their own water.  Are there any actual racist roadblocks to voting access now?  

In education practices, the most common form of racist practice seems to be of the lessened expectation type (which is actually pushed by some proponents of CRT, such as in this math educator course promoted by the OR department of education https://equitablemath.org/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery that says making kids do independent work and show their work in math class are symptomatic of white supremacy).  In higher education, actual concrete policies at many schools favor most minorities while impeding Asian students with an actual racist policy.  Are there policies or practices in place in our country actually seeking to impede other minorities’ educational progress?

 We cannot logically assume that anytime there are disparate outcomes between races, it must be the outcome of slavery.  Correlation does not indicate causation.  If it did, disproportionate rates of incarceration between genders would indicate that men are being overwhelmingly oppressed with unjust mass imprisonment, which is ridiculous.  This doesn’t mean that the cause isn’t racism, either, but we have to actually show evidence of that, not just teach it as gospel to be accepted on faith.  

Correlation can also be caused by other factors; for example, the strongest statistical correlation between an environmental factor and poor educational outcomes, juvenile delinquency, criminal behavior, and incarceration is the lack of an intact family with the biological father in the home.  Doesn’t it stand to reason, then, that communities where this home situation is less common would have higher rates of these problems?

Real estate…

Quote

Black homeowner had a white friend stand in for third appraisal. Her home value doubled.

(why a box🤷‍♀️)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.indystar.com/amp/4936571001

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/mortgage-discrimination-black-and-latino-paying-millions-more-in-interest-study-shows/

 

Voting …

 

(Edit)Gun permits are acceptable ID but not tribal cards.  Make that make sense. 
 

Why do black people need to bring water to vote in the first place?  Fewer polling places. 
https://www.npr.org/2020/10/17/924527679/why-do-nonwhite-georgia-voters-have-to-wait-in-line-for-hours-too-few-polling-pl

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/02/texas-polling-sites-closures-voting

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/1774221002
Counties with larger minority populations – most of them the urban centers of large metropolitan areas – were left with fewer polling sites and poll workers per active voter,

 

schools…

Minority school get $23 BILLION less in funding yearly.  
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/1774221002
The researchers at EdBuild calculated that racially concentrated non-white districts receive, on average, only $11,682 of funding per student, in comparison to $13,908 for racially concentrated, white districts. Collectively, this means that, as EdBuild notes, "nonwhite school districts receive $23 billion less than white districts, despite serving the same number of students."

 

At some point enough “coincidences” add up to something more.  
 

 

 

Edited June 12, 2021 by HeartString

[Sneezyone]

1 hour ago, LucyStoner said:

There’s a lot of research on the outcomes of anti-bias trainings- I don’t draw my conclusions from a singular source.  

I’ve also sat in many such trainings myself over the years and watched what happens to the organization after.  Sometimes it’s positive, sometimes it’s very negative and most of the time, it seems like nothing changes.  One time my brother was in such a training and the trainer who was very much in a CRT framework communicated a message that not only seriously turned him off (who was very much part of the choir before the training) but was also borderline sociopathic- basically my brother, then a low wage frontline worker at a Seattle non-profit, was told that when our family was targeted my skinheads for ongoing harassment, that that didn’t really affect any of the white family members.  Generalizations like that lead to some pretty wack-a-doodle conclusions.  

I don’t want to avoid introspection or see schools avoid it.  To me part of that introspection for school staff is working to deliver a higher quality lesson than the ones I am seeing and hearing about.  One of the links in this thread is our school district.  Like I said before, nothing I would yank my kids over but it’s definitely stuff that requires contextualization for my literal minded autistic 12 year old son who earlier this year after school announced that boys were bad and I had to figure out how to communicate to him that that (hopefully) wasn’t what the teacher was trying to communicate.   

But since when are wealthy districts like Cupertino and Seattle And Loudon county representative of what’s happening all over. Far more often I see reports of teachers holding slave auctions and asking students to pick cotton. It doesn’t make me want to educate LESS, but MORE and differently.

Edited June 12, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Sneezyone]

The bigotry of low expectations isn’t confined to or even primarily shared by CRT advocates. I can only assume people saying that have never been subject to it because it is a view equally prevalent on the right for different reasons. I saw it in Arkansas. I saw it in Seattle. It’s everywhere.

[pinball]

14 minutes ago, HeartString said:

Real estate…

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.indystar.com/amp/4936571001

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/mortgage-discrimination-black-and-latino-paying-millions-more-in-interest-study-shows/

 

Voting …

 

NRA cards are acceptable ID but not tribal cards.  Make that make sense. 
 

Why do black people need to bring water to vote in the first place?  Fewer polling places. 
https://www.npr.org/2020/10/17/924527679/why-do-nonwhite-georgia-voters-have-to-wait-in-line-for-hours-too-few-polling-pl

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/02/texas-polling-sites-closures-voting

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/1774221002
Counties with larger minority populations – most of them the urban centers of large metropolitan areas – were left with fewer polling sites and poll workers per active voter,

 

schools…

Minority school get $23 BILLION less in funding yearly.  
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/1774221002
The researchers at EdBuild calculated that racially concentrated non-white districts receive, on average, only $11,682 of funding per student, in comparison to $13,908 for racially concentrated, white districts. Collectively, this means that, as EdBuild notes, "nonwhite school districts receive $23 billion less than white districts, despite serving the same number of students."

 

At some point enough “coincidences” add up to something more.  
 

 

 

What state allows NRA cards?

what state allows NRA cards but NOT tribal IDs?

Texas lets you use a state issued hand gun permit

I saw Texas allows voters to use a state issued handgun license as well as several other options

Edited June 12, 2021 by pinball
Forgot “permit”

[stripe]

4 minutes ago, pinball said:

What state allows NRA cards?

what state allows NRA cards but NOT tribal IDs?

North Dakota did not allow tribal IDs in 2018. Supreme Court refused to hear the case.

https://www.npr.org/2018/10/13/657125819/many-native-ids-wont-be-accepted-at-north-dakota-polling-places

Follow up from 2020

https://www.npr.org/2020/02/14/806083852/north-dakota-and-native-american-tribes-settle-voter-id-lawsuits

I don’t know about NRA cards, but gun permits are allowed in Texas but not state university student IDs.

Here is an article explaining why IDs can be hard for some people to obtain. It sites over 600,000 registered voters in Texas alone who don’t have the required ID. It also says 11% of Americans have no photo ID.

Edited June 12, 2021 by stripe
add

[stripe]

Here’s one — two black girls were declared valedictorian and salutatorian of their high school. They had high GPAs due to AP and Honors courses. Parents, including from the main family in town, who are white, insisted the handbook did not include the extra points in calculating valedictorian/salutatorian, and pressured the school to install two other (white) kids as well., who had the same UNweighted GPA but a lower weighted GPA. This is in Mississippi, where other young black women have sued, alleging their schools are calculating erroneously and this excluding them as valedictorians.