CRT (now rebranded as Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion DEI) and DOJ involvement in school board meetings

[goldberry]

28 minutes ago, Fritz said:

I think it's pretty clear that CRT played a part in Youngkin's victory in Va.  McAuliffe bringing in Randi Weingarten the night before seems completely tone deaf. 

Do you have an example that CRT was actually being taught to any student K12 in Virginia?  The examples I saw involved CRT being discussed with teachers or listed as resources (along with many other resources) for teacher education.  

 

Edited November 3, 2021 by goldberry

[rebcoola]

1 hour ago, goldberry said:

 

The new board members were backed with lots of money from the local Republican group.  They ran as a block

 

Same thing happened here. 

[Fritz]

9 minutes ago, goldberry said:

Do you have an example that CRT was actually being taught to any student K12 in Virginia?  The examples I saw involved CRT being discussed with teachers or listed as resources (along with many other resources) for teacher education.  

 

You can plow through the old thread for yourself to find examples of this being taught in Virginia and elsewhere.

[SoCal_Bear]

On 10/16/2021 at 12:27 PM, felicity said:

As I said above, schools in CA get the same amount per student. It follows the student if they go to a charter or stays at their neighborhood schools. The difference comes with fundraising. Schools with wealthier people can fundraise more and do more. Other schools have to make do with what the school gets per student. Which means they have to make tougher choices. Until school fundraising is equalized, schools won't be equal.

Charter schools in CA do not receive the same funding. It is usually somewhere between 5 to 7% less.

[goldberry]

6 minutes ago, Fritz said:

You can plow through the old thread for yourself to find examples of this being taught in Virginia and elsewhere.

No.  I have not found any example in Virginia at all.  I found that CRT was mentioned on education websites, again as a resource for teachers among other resources.  

I found this argument:

"So yes, fifth graders aren’t hearing graduate-level seminars on racial identity and intersectionality, but all of the same concepts are still there — deconstructing "whiteness," institutional racism, white privilege, and all of the other concepts that everyone (except the media) commonly associates with CRT," the outlet noted.

So discussions about race, or institutional racism are banned as well as CRT?  How should the role that race played in our history be discussed, since it can't really be ignored and still discuss accurate history, yes?  Are there certain terms that are banned or the whole discussion?  Can you discuss the ways that white people benefited from certain historical facts without calling it white privilege?  Would you prefer that not be discussed at all?  I'm asking honestly, because I don't see how history can be discussed and processed without these conversations.  I'm curious how you envision them being discussed in a way that would be satisfying.

I would also ask, "concepts that everyone commonly associates with CRT"...why?  Why do people "commonly associate"?  Isn't that only because certain people are telling people these are the same thing?  An obscure legal theory has come to envelope any conversation related to race, as far as I can tell.  If that is not really the case, can you explain the difference to me?

[prairiewindmomma]

2 hours ago, goldberry said:

 

The new board members were backed with lots of money from the local Republican group.  They ran as a block.

 

 

Same thing happened in my district this past year.  A district to the south of us had a takeover; in our district they didn't do a clean sweep of the seats even though they ran as a block, had the same website and flyer designers, and used the same pool of funds for signs.  The candidates all were from the same church affiliation also, but that wasn't widely known. 

[BusyMom5]

I'm always hesitant to jump into discussions about CRT bc its so hard to discuss end explain fully what I mean.  I will say this- I do not support any effort towards top-down education in this country.  What that means is that if people who are not teachers in classrooms with kids are trying to tell teachers what and how to teach,  on a state or national level, I do not support that.  This includes things like Common Core- which has its heart in the right place, but is not always developmentally appropriate.   It includes CRT- which probably also has its heart in the right place, but does seem to understand developmentally appropriate strategies.   I'm sure all of us can remember times when we taught something and our kids heard something else.  Talking about things that are way beyond a kids comprehension level- like systemic racism- can be dangerous,  it can do the exact opposite of what was intended- and I feel like thats what CRT is doing, unfortunately.   I do believe in teaching what happened in history,  at an age appropriate level.  I believe classroom teachers usually know what kids are understanding and what they need, but we haven't been encouraging good teaching for decades!  Instead we have been pushing box-checkers who teach to a test.  

One thing I did not see mentioned at all on the left-wing news I was watching last night,  as they talked about school boards and CRT- not one single person mentioned the biological male who was gender fluid and allowed into the girls restrooms- where he raped a 14 year old.  As they were talking about how the women's vote swung so far from last November, not one single person mentioned how it may be that women are feeling vulnerable by the growing push for biological males in women's safe spaces.   CRT is getting the spotlight,  but I think we fool ourselves if we think that the father complaining, and getting arrested in this case was not a big factor.

[goldberry]

15 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

Same thing happened in my district this past year.  A district to the south of us had a takeover; in our district they didn't do a clean sweep of the seats even though they ran as a block, had the same website and flyer designers, and used the same pool of funds for signs.  The candidates all were from the same church affiliation also, but that wasn't widely known. 

One of the new board members actually organized a new charter school opening last year and her kids go there, not the public schools. 

[Sneezyone]

For the love of all that is good and ACCURATE, there is no “CRT” in Virginia public schools. The Governor-elect featured a tearful white mom upset that her precious was required to read Beloved (a Pulitzer winning book of fiction) in AP Lit class and claimed he had nightmares. Beloved is their working definition of CRT.
 

The ‘trans’ student story was similarly misrepresented. The girl in question invited the cross dressing boy into the bathroom for sex previously (which went off without a hitch so she clearly knew he was hetero and had no objections to the scheme) and then when she invited him to meet up again, she said no to sex. The boy raped her in the bathroom. It wasn’t some rando attack on any girl in the vicinity and could easily have occurred anywhere else (car, parking lot, home, etc). It was a horrible attack. It wasn’t a ‘trans’ attack. The students involved were conspiring, together, to meet up for assignations. It doesn’t take much to provide white parents an excuse to throw every other kid’s education under the bus.

Edited November 3, 2021 by Sneezyone

[SanDiegoMom]

1 minute ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

What left-wing news did you watch? 

Maybe they didn't mention it because the story isn't true? The rape happened before the new policy allowing transgender students to use the bathroom of their choice. There is also no evidence that the rapist accessed the women's bathroom to target random students. 

Conservatives Wrongly Portrayed the Loudoun County Sexual Assault as a Transgender Bathroom Issue

 

The whole story has a lot of nuance that is left out of both left leaning and right leaning news.  The implication that I have gleaned is that the rape happened but the school did not want the news of it to get out because they wanted to get the bathroom bill passed.  Now I'm hoping it was more that it was more student confidentiality that was involved in the lack of news when the rape happened, however the fact remains that it happened and it plays in very nicely to the conservative view points of ideology overrunning the schools.  I am sure it played a part in the election.

 

 

[Fritz]

24 minutes ago, BusyMom5 said:

 

One thing I did not see mentioned at all on the left-wing news I was watching last night,  as they talked about school boards and CRT- not one single person mentioned the biological male who was gender fluid and allowed into the girls restrooms- where he raped a 14 year old.  As they were talking about how the women's vote swung so far from last November, not one single person mentioned how it may be that women are feeling vulnerable by the growing push for biological males in women's safe spaces.   CRT is getting the spotlight,  but I think we fool ourselves if we think that the father complaining, and getting arrested in this case was not a big factor.

And you won't hear it there ever. As you can see further down in this thread is victim blaming though. Truly sickening!

[Pawz4me]

20 minutes ago, BusyMom5 said:

 

One thing I did not see mentioned at all on the left-wing news I was watching last night,  as they talked about school boards and CRT- not one single person mentioned the biological male who was gender fluid and allowed into the girls restrooms- where he raped a 14 year old.

I have no idea why any news outlet would or should have mentioned it last night, unless they were using it as an example of how the right misconstrued the whole thing. This is an opinion piece, but from what I can tell it gives a pretty accurate recounting of what actually happened. I feel incredibly sorry for the young woman, but what happened certainly appears to be due to relationship violence and nothing at all to do with transgender issues. (I'm not quoting the pertinent parts of the article regarding what the young lady testified to in court last week about their sexual encounters and what happened during the rape because the description may be triggering for some.)

[Sneezyone]

2 minutes ago, SanDiegoMom said:

The whole story has a lot of nuance that is left out of both left leaning and right leaning news.  The implication that I have gleaned is that the rape happened but the school did not want the news of it to get out because they wanted to get the bathroom bill passed.  Now I'm hoping it was more that it was more student confidentiality that was involved in the lack of news when the rape happened, however the fact remains that it happened and it plays in very nicely to the conservative view points of ideology overrunning the schools.  I am sure it played a part in the election.

 

 

This is a lot closer to truth. The fact is some people will happily accept any excuse to trample on others…because they can. You know what else is happening in schools? Toilets ripped out of the wall and carted off just because. Fake blood plastered all over the walls. That’s happened just since September in this wealthy enclave. Parents are more concerned with providing a new Tesla or Mercedes and the custom parking lot paint jobs than the character of the children they send inside. 

[goldberry]

5 minutes ago, Fritz said:

And you won't hear it there ever. As you can see further down in this thread is victim blaming though. Truly sickening!

No one is blaming the victim.  Everyone has said it was horrible.  Telling the whole story to show that it was not connected to transgender bathroom usage is not blaming the victim.

[KSera]

1 hour ago, Fritz said:

I think it's pretty clear that CRT played a part in Youngkin's victory in Va.  

I’d be curious how many of those people for whom CRT played a part in voting for Youngkin could give an accurate explanation of what CRT is and how they believe it’s being taught in schools. I’ve seen and heard a whole lot of people who say things like “CRT is one of the biggest problems facing our nation” but are then unable to give any any definition or information about what CRT actually is—they just know it’s really bad and dangerous and are sure it’s being taught in schools. 

[goldberry]

26 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

For the love of all that is good and ACCURATE, there is no “CRT” in Virginia public schools. The Governor-elect featured a tearful white mom upset that her precious was required to read Beloved (a Pulitzer winning book of fiction) in AP Lit class and claimed he had nightmares. Beloved is their working definition of CRT.

That student was a senior as well as being in an AP Class.   I found that surprising as well.

[goldberry]

Just now, KSera said:

I’d be curious how many of those people for whom CRT played a part in voting for Youngkin could give an accurate explanation of what CRT is and how they believe it’s being taught in schools. I’ve seen and heard a whole lot of people who say things like “CRT is one of the biggest problems facing our nation” but are then unable to give any any definition or information about what CRT actually is—they just know it’s really bad and dangerous and are sure it’s being taught in schools. 

All I have seen is discussions about racism, some of which admittedly could have been handled better.  That doesn't make the discussion itself wrong or unnecessary.  The only firm definition I've seen used in some of the laws is "no one should be made to feel bad because of their race", which in my opinion is dangerous because it's so subjective.   That's why I'm still searching for a definition of what people want banned.  Certain terms?  Any discussion of who benefits or is harmed by certain events or policies?

[Sneezyone]

14 minutes ago, goldberry said:

That student was a senior as well as being in an AP Class.   I found that surprising as well.

Any student that fragile has no place in an AP Lit class and, dare I say it, is hardly college ready.

Edited November 3, 2021 by Sneezyone

[SanDiegoMom]

2 minutes ago, goldberry said:

That student was a senior as well as being in an AP Class.   I found that surprising as well.

We studied Toni Morrison in AP English when I was a senior, way back in 1994 (in Florida).  I thought everyone read a Morrison novel for AP Lit. How is this suddenly so traumatizing?

 

[Sneezyone]

6 minutes ago, SanDiegoMom said:

We studied Toni Morrison in AP English when I was a senior, way back in 1994 (in Florida).  I thought everyone read a Morrison novel for AP Lit. How is this suddenly so traumatizing?

 

A live enslaved baby is less traumatizing than a dead one? I dunno. It’s clearly more traumatizing than Grisly Grendel’s exploits. Do they still read Beowulf these days?

[goldberry]

This is a good article about how broad the bans are and why it's concerning.  I'm wondering if those in favor of the bans have an opinion on this?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2021/09/29/critical-race-theory-bans-are-expanding-to-cover-broad-collection-of-issues/?sh=5785b6705e5d

"Tennessee is one of several states that has laws banning CRT from schools, and a chapter of Moms for Liberty, led by Robin Steenman (whose child attends private school) has been reporting the schools of Williamson County for violating the gag rule. But the spreadsheet of objections seems to fall far outside the issues of historic and systemic racism in the US. Objections include books about poisonous lizards, Johnny Appleseed, Greek and Roman mythology, and owls. One respondent objects to a book about Galileo because there is no “HERO of the church” to contrast with their persecution of the astronomer. This group has also objected to a book about Ruby Bridges because it offered no “redemption” for the protestors who screamed at a child trying to go to school."

[goldberry]

A comment about the Ruby Bridges book reveals the potential problems with the subjective aspect of these laws:

claiming its mention of a "large crowd of angry white people who didn't want Black children in a white school" was too harsh 

The statement is accurate.  These people were white.  They are not bad because they are white, they are bad because of their behavior.  But could someone say that might make white children feel guilty or bad?  Sure they could.  But that's not the point of the story.  

[Dmmetler]

18 minutes ago, goldberry said:

This is a good article about how broad the bans are and why it's concerning.  I'm wondering if those in favor of the bans have an opinion on this?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2021/09/29/critical-race-theory-bans-are-expanding-to-cover-broad-collection-of-issues/?sh=5785b6705e5d

"Tennessee is one of several states that has laws banning CRT from schools, and a chapter of Moms for Liberty, led by Robin Steenman (whose child attends private school) has been reporting the schools of Williamson County for violating the gag rule. But the spreadsheet of objections seems to fall far outside the issues of historic and systemic racism in the US. Objections include books about poisonous lizards, Johnny Appleseed, Greek and Roman mythology, and owls. One respondent objects to a book about Galileo because there is no “HERO of the church” to contrast with their persecution of the astronomer. This group has also objected to a book about Ruby Bridges because it offered no “redemption” for the protestors who screamed at a child trying to go to school."

Willing to bet the poisonous lizards one has to do with evolutionary arms races in herpetology, where two species co-evolve, one developing poisons well beyond what the animal has any good reason to have, and one becoming more and more immune to said poisons. It's a really interesting topic, one kids really enjoy learning about, one where there is a lot of accessible research, making it a good one to look at-but it requires accepting evolution as something that has happened and is happening now. 

 

And heaven help any book that gets into reproductive strategies in lizards (or fish, for that matter-and, more and more, birds). Biology is weird. 

Edited November 3, 2021 by Dmmetler

[Matryoshka]

32 minutes ago, goldberry said:

All I have seen is discussions about racism, some of which admittedly could have been handled better.  That doesn't make the discussion itself wrong or unnecessary.  The only firm definition I've seen used in some of the laws is "no one should be made to feel bad because of their race", which in my opinion is dangerous because it's so subjective.   That's why I'm still searching for a definition of what people want banned.  Certain terms?  Any discussion of who benefits or is harmed by certain events or policies?

Well, no, their definition appears to be 'no WHITE person should be made to feel bad about their race".  Because if it applied equally to those of all races, pratically the whole western Canon would have to be tossed out as well.

[goldberry]

4 minutes ago, Dmmetler said:

Willing to bet the poisonous lizards one has to do with evolutionary arms races in herpetology, where two species co-evolve, 

Apparently it was simpler than that 😁  But hey, parents should absolutely control what is taught in public schools, right??

“text speaks of horned lizard squirting blood out of its eyes”

[Matryoshka]

1 hour ago, BusyMom5 said:

One thing I did not see mentioned at all on the left-wing news I was watching last night,  as they talked about school boards and CRT- not one single person mentioned the biological male who was gender fluid and allowed into the girls restrooms- where he raped a 14 year old.  As they were talking about how the women's vote swung so far from last November, not one single person mentioned how it may be that women are feeling vulnerable by the growing push for biological males in women's safe spaces.   CRT is getting the spotlight,  but I think we fool ourselves if we think that the father complaining, and getting arrested in this case was not a big factor.

So... why do you think that Critical RACE Theory would have anything to do in a discussion about GENDER?  One has exactly nothing to do with the other.  Bathrooms are not assigned by Race, at least not anymore, thank goodness.  But apparently we're not even supposed to mention that they used to be.  Because apparently people think even bringing up things like the existence of Jim Crow would be CRT.

[Dmmetler]

1 minute ago, goldberry said:

Apparently it was simpler than that 😁  But hey, parents should absolutely control what is taught in public schools, right??

“text speaks of horned lizard squirting blood out of its eyes”

Which they absolutely do. And is a kind of neat defense mechanism which is completely harmless both to the lizard and the predator, but usually allows the lizard time to escape.  

 

Having said that, horned lizards aren't poisonous or venomous. Their whole modus operandi is to discourage predators from trying to eat them. So I might object to the book on the grounds of inaccuracy....

[Sneezyone]

6 minutes ago, Dmmetler said:

Which they absolutely do. And is a kind of neat defense mechanism which is completely harmless both to the lizard and the predator, but usually allows the lizard time to escape.  

 

Having said that, horned lizards aren't poisonous or venomous. Their whole modus operandi is to discourage predators from trying to eat them. So I might object to the book on the grounds of inaccuracy....

On a side note, I really do enjoy reading these herpetology snippets. 🤣

[Idalou]

1 hour ago, SanDiegoMom said:

We studied Toni Morrison in AP English when I was a senior, way back in 1994 (in Florida).  I thought everyone read a Morrison novel for AP Lit. How is this suddenly so traumatizing?

 

He was a senior in 2012, I'm hoping he's gotten over the trauma 9 years later. They just pulled another fear mongering retread out to rile up their base. 

[Sneezyone]

1 hour ago, goldberry said:

A comment about the Ruby Bridges book reveals the potential problems with the subjective aspect of these laws:

claiming its mention of a "large crowd of angry white people who didn't want Black children in a white school" was too harsh 

The statement is accurate.  These people were white.  They are not bad because they are white, they are bad because of their behavior.  But could someone say that might make white children feel guilty or bad?  Sure they could.  But that's not the point of the story.  

Meh, despite the best efforts of Fritz et al., I’ve no doubt that the unpleasant parallels between the grandparents spitting on high schoolers, demanding to control who can enter the schoolhouse and parents shouting at administrators, demanding to omit evidence of the former will gel eventually. Apple-tree. Super close.

Edited November 3, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Melissa Louise]

2 hours ago, SanDiegoMom said:

The whole story has a lot of nuance that is left out of both left leaning and right leaning news.  The implication that I have gleaned is that the rape happened but the school did not want the news of it to get out because they wanted to get the bathroom bill passed.  Now I'm hoping it was more that it was more student confidentiality that was involved in the lack of news when the rape happened, however the fact remains that it happened and it plays in very nicely to the conservative view points of ideology overrunning the schools.  I am sure it played a part in the election.

 

 

The whole treatment of this as 'relationship violence' is sickening. 

This was a story because a. the school denied a rape had taken place b. the proven rapist was moved quietly to another school where he sexually assaulted another student and c. the girls father, responding to being told that his daughter was a liar at the school meeting fairly angrily, was removed from the meeting and made the face of 'domestic terrorism'. 

The rapist's skirt wearing was irrelevant, except in so far as he used it to try and excuse his second sexual assault on the first victim as happening 'accidentally, as his skirt was caught on a door handle'. 

It is point c that drove widespread anger. 

Sadly, the rape and sexual assault of a girl - yeah, no, it makes no difference they were in a prior relationship - followed by the sexual assault of another girl, in school, by a violent and disturbed male - the actual story - was of zero interest to left or right. The right was more concerned with parent rights, the left with defending unisex bathrooms. 

And lost in the middle, two girls, violently brutalized and used, by the perp and by the media. And zero attention paid to the very real problem of sexual assault in schools. 

The entire thing makes me ill.

 

 

[Sneezyone]

There isn’t a widespread problem of rape in schools. There’s a widespread problem of sexual assault in society, period. It’s neither a left or right issue, shouldn’t have been made one, and doesn’t have a darn thing to do with CRT, yet it continues to be trotted out in threads on the topic. Why is that?  As someone who walks the streets and listens to people and watches people and has kids in public schools in this state, the idea that the flattened story of a single rapist is what drove anger here is absurd on its face. The exit polling numbers on voters who wanted to see post-reconstruction monuments paid for by the DoC and KKK remain on public display was OVER 50%. Let that sink in.

Edited November 3, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Melissa Louise]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/620595/

You Can't Win Elections by Telling Voters Their Concerns Are Imaginary. 

I wish I could find a recent psych article I read that talked about the role of splitting in the CRT brouhaha.

It's the splitting aspect of curriculum  (where all bad qualities are projected onto whiteness ) that most people are reacting to. It's really just a reversal of the splitting that impacts on Black people, where all bad qualities are projected onto them. 

I'd love to see some psychologically sound curriculum in this area, that still teaches all the content, but avoids splitting in either direction. Chloe Valdary's program is the closest I've seen. 

 

[Sneezyone]

Their concerns aren’t imaginary they’re just masked by the CRT label. They’re really, really concerned about not being able to impose their faith and version of history on everyone else and need a nice, smiley guy to make it look good for the cameras. CRT is a proxy for white identity politics.

Edited November 3, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Tanaqui]

Exactly what curriculum do you imagine exists where all bad things are projected onto all white people, past present and future?

[Sneezyone]

10 minutes ago, Tanaqui said:

Exactly what curriculum do you imagine exists where all bad things are projected onto all white people, past present and future?

Let’s get something straight…

- Jim Crow was the fault of white people.

- Chattel slavery in the US was the fault of white people.

- The Trail of Tears was the fault of white people.

- Restrictive covenants were the fault of white people.

- Redlining was the fault of white people.

Fact is fact. 

I really don’t care whose feelings are hurt by those factual statements. Toughen up. Cancel yourself. Whatever you need to do to get right with truth. If those statements of fact make you feel some kinda way about our collective obligation to right those wrongs…IT SHOULD. That feeling isn’t supposed to be suppressed or avoided but harnessed. We should always be striving to do and be better. The big fear fear is that our children might actually try that, for a change.

 

Edited November 3, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Sneezyone]

And, I’ll add…

Those simple statements of fact, said in that simple way, are EXACTLY what sends anti “CRT” people into orbit. It’s exactly what they don’t want kids to know. Those past white people represent parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents, aunts and uncles. It’s personal and visceral; protecting the old narratives feels just. What they seemingly fail to realize or just don’t care to acknowledge is that it has been every bit as personal and visceral for kids who read about themselves and their ancestors on the receiving end of past abuses. It’s their history too. In censoring books about them and banning discussion of their histories, folks are asserting/confirming their powerlessness and marginalization yet again. What is the impact of THAT?

Edited November 3, 2021 by Sneezyone

[goldberry]

3 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/620595/

You Can't Win Elections by Telling Voters Their Concerns Are Imaginary. 

I wish I could find a recent psych article I read that talked about the role of splitting in the CRT brouhaha.

It's the splitting aspect of curriculum  (where all bad qualities are projected onto whiteness ) that most people are reacting to. It's really just a reversal of the splitting that impacts on Black people, where all bad qualities are projected onto them. 

I'd love to see some psychologically sound curriculum in this area, that still teaches all the content, but avoids splitting in either direction. Chloe Valdary's program is the closest I've seen. 

 

There are times in history that was the case though. So how do you avoid victim blaming without putting the bad qualities onto white people? In every conflict, there are some from the oppressors "side" who do the right thing and some from the oppressed "side" who do the wrong thing. It doesn't change the reality of the bigger picture.

It's like trying to lessen responsibility for the Holocaust by saying some Jews turned in their friends and neighbors for their own benefit. Or that some Jews were very prejudiced themselves.Sure they did and were, but that's not the primary story is it?

[Melissa Louise]

59 minutes ago, goldberry said:

There are times in history that was the case though. So how do you avoid victim blaming without putting the bad qualities onto white people? In every conflict, there are some from the oppressors "side" who do the right thing and some from the oppressed "side" who do the wrong thing. It doesn't change the reality of the bigger picture.

It's like trying to lessen responsibility for the Holocaust by saying some Jews turned in their friends and neighbors for their own benefit. Or that some Jews were very prejudiced themselves.Sure they did and were, but that's not the primary story is it?

Yeah, I don't think it's content, really, that's a problem. Clearly many white people did really bad things. I've taught my kids that and more ( though more intersectionally than that, and acknowledging that violence and power have a long and diverse history of ruining the lives of ordinary people). 

It's more of a psychological attitude, and you see it in things like that book for kids whose title keeps slipping from mind. The whiteness is a pact with the devil one. 

Idk. I'm studying a degree that explicitly foregrounds the not white perspective. It does it so well! And the only way I can describe the healthiness of it is in the lack of splitting.

It's represented in language like 'coming alongside'. There's no lack of acknowledgement that we are (largely) white settlers on unceded land, but the 'coming alongside' framework also lets us meet and learn from each other as individuals, not just as avatars for whiteness. 

I can confidently say that it is more explicitly radical in intent than anything in American classrooms - we are literally being trained to resist neoliberalism  in early childhood - but it doesn't rely on reductive racial  frameworks. And yet it's explicitly unapologetic about the violent and genocidal facts of settlement. 

Idk. I think really good pedagogy is needed in this space. 

 

 

Edited November 4, 2021 by Melissa Louise

[Pam in CT]

Good news folks!  Tonight Tucker himself conceded that even HE has never did figure out what Critical Race Theory is, really, after a full year of drumbeating about it.

So we're in good company, with all our drifting.

 

 

[Fritz]

6 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/620595/

You Can't Win Elections by Telling Voters Their Concerns Are Imaginary. 

I wish I could find a recent psych article I read that talked about the role of splitting in the CRT brouhaha.

It's the splitting aspect of curriculum  (where all bad qualities are projected onto whiteness ) that most people are reacting to. It's really just a reversal of the splitting that impacts on Black people, where all bad qualities are projected onto them. 

I'd love to see some psychologically sound curriculum in this area, that still teaches all the content, but avoids splitting in either direction. Chloe Valdary's program is the closest I've seen. 

 

Mounk nailed it! They will continue to double down on this as you have seen over and over in these CRT threads. 

But the one option that is both intellectually dishonest and electorally disastrous is to insist on a verbal trick unworthy of a middle-school debate team: to keep claiming that widespread concern over these ideas is misguided because the term by which they have publicly come to be known technically applies to an academic research program rather than the lessons that real children are being taught in real schools. 

[KSera]

7 minutes ago, Fritz said:

Mounk nailed it! They will continue to double down on this as you have seen over and over in these CRT threads. 

But the one option that is both intellectually dishonest and electorally disastrous is to insist on a verbal trick unworthy of a middle-school debate team: to keep claiming that widespread concern over these ideas is misguided because the term by which they have publicly come to be known technically applies to an academic research program rather than the lessons that real children are being taught in real schools. 

The previous paragraph is key as well:

”Regardless of the choice Democrats make, they should, at the same time, denounce Republican plans to prohibit teachers from discussing ideas that might make their students uncomfortable as illiberal assaults on free speech that will lead to unacceptable forms of overreach. In the coming years, the introduction of such laws—which Youngkin favors—is likely to lead to a significant number of teachers who are unfairly punished for doing their job. If Democrats manage to decry such injustices while simultaneously distancing themselves from the most unpopular content now being taught at schools, public opinion will probably be on their side.”

[Melissa Louise]

Mount is pretty centrist in that article  (not used as a pejorative). 

I think his argument is 'you can be right, or you can win, and I'd really rather the non-T side won next time, thanks'.

I mean, politics is the art of pragmatism. 

[Fritz]

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/what-happened-last-night-in-virginia

Another accurate take on what happened in the Virginia election.

 

In an ideal world, Democrats would take a hard look in the mirror and ask themselves whether maybe they should have rethought their approach to Critical Race Theory. Or the constant belittling of parents who want their children to take off their masks and get back to class. Or the embrace of a radical agenda that imagines the whole of America in the grip of white supremacy. Or the nomination of a professional politician whose name is closely linked with Clinton-era globalization, the displacement of the working class, and the corruption of the American meritocracy. But why do that when—in the same vein as Thomas Frank’s “What’s The Matter With Kansas?”—you can just write off millions of voters as rubes? 

 

It’s true that these parents often struggle to define Critical Race Theory. They’re not in a law-school seminar; they’re not fluent in academic jargon. But they’re not imagining things. They have noticed something very real: a new ideological orthodoxy pervading public schools, including an obsession with race, and the disparagement of anyone who questions the new dogma. 

And here’s the crucial point: The “Critical Race Theory isn’t real” meme is not about race. It’s not about politics. It’s not even a culture war, really. It’s about class. It’s about one class—a highly-educated chattering class—using highly specialized language to tell normal parents that they lack sufficient intellectual capacity and are imagining things because they’ve been brainwashed. A highly-educated progressive media has used its educational advantage—92 percent of American journalists have a college degree—to gaslight working-class parents of all races. Under the guise of fighting racism.

The Democrats’ abandonment of the working class didn’t begin in the early aughts, of course; by then, the mainstream liberal media had already abandoned the cause of labor for a higher-class reader, an erasure that was mirrored in the disastrous Clinton-era policies that decimated manufacturing and created a downward spiral for working-class families.

The irony is that the class warfare being perpetrated by the Democrats and their allies in the media in the name of racial justice not only paved the way for Youngkin’s victory, but the economic populism he was offering: Youngkin’s “day one game plan” includes a mix of spending and tax cuts, just as his school proposal combines banning Critical Race Theory along with expanding Advanced Placement classes statewide and pay hikes for public school teachers.

It was just the latest example of how the sneering of elite media, masquerading as a social justice fight against racism, is actually class consolidation in political, even race-baiting, garb. And voters have long since learned to tune it out.

[Pam in CT]

8 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

...I mean, politics is the art of pragmatism. 

How I wish.  Are you seeing that in American politics today?

 

I mean, it's BEEN true, at certain junctures of American history, including the junctures where we've lurched however inelegantly toward a More Perfect Union -- the establishment of a safety net for our seniors, the establishment of public policies that tilted toward home ownership, the redistributive tax structures of the 1940s-50s., the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

But apropos of this thread, the capacity in this nation to act "pragmatically" when it comes to extending public policy or even basic protections to minorities generally, and particularly black Americans specifically, dissolves into precisely what we've seen in this thread. 

(Perhaps Australia has been better able to navigate pragmatically through its own racial landmines and legacies. Count your blessings.) 

Here, every halting stumble forward toward racial justice that the nation has made since the Civil War that nearly killed us has erupted in furious (white) backlash, quickly followed by the emergence of both codified law (poll tax fused to grandfather clause, convict leasing, Jim Crow, redlining, real estate covenants, differential sentencing for crack v cocaine) and de facto enforcement mechanisms (KKK, lynching, late night burning of black owned houses and stores, gerrymandering, uneven allocation of electoral resources resulting in vastly different wait times, realtor "steering," emergence of charter schools that enable de facto re-segregation of schools after after de jure segreation was struck down... and et cetera). 

Not pragmatism: Defensive fury, quickly followed by legislative action to sustain the threatened status quo.  As we're witnessing, in real time, here.

 

Which is why this picture book, written by a real life former 6 year old, describing her real historical experience of when she really did need federal agents to walk her to a newly integrated school because there really were redfaced screaming (white) parents blocking the way and hurling tomatoes and racial epithets at her, is listed, in 2021, among the books banned from elementary classrooms. 

 

Not because it isn't true.  Because it IS true. 

And not, certainly, because this developmentally appropriate picture book is "Critical Race Theory." Rather: because it is true.

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Fun fact re art & politics: Ruby Bridges selected the cover for her 2020 book, which slightly crops a painting Norman Rockwell did in 1964, which became the cover of Look magazine in the midst of the Brown v Ed implementation struggles.  In all his years of doing covers for Saturday Evening Post, Rockwell had been sharply limited by the Post's editorial guidelines on how often and in what roles he could depict blacks; and this painting was, and was received by the public as, a jolting departure from the rather sentimental rosy-eyed depictions of America to which his (white) audience had become accustomed.  He was at the time reviled.  When his foundation established the Norman Rockwell museum, this was the first painting the museum purchased. Ruby Bridges later became a board member.

The painting is titled "The Problem We All Live With."   As we still do.

 

Note the epithet on the wall behind her.  The painting, itself, has also made its way onto the newly legislated content bans.)

 

 

[Fritz]

Also elected by the "white supremacists" of Virginia were Winsome Sears for Lt. Governor and Jason Miyares for AG. Sears is a black woman and Miyares is a Cuban man.

Also 14% of black women in Virignia voted for Youngkin. 

https://apnews.com/article/election-day-2021-virginia-2bbad4e99c1a9bd4b5b943551b0ba303

 

[ktgrok]

3 hours ago, Fritz said:

A highly-educated progressive media has used its educational advantage—92 percent of American journalists have a college degree—to gaslight working-class parents of all races. Under the guise of fighting racism.

 

What a bunch of hogwash. Right wing journalists also have degrees, does that mean they also are gaslighting working class parents?

 

[Melissa Louise]

7 hours ago, Pam in CT said:

How I wish.  Are you seeing that in American politics today?

 

I mean, it's BEEN true, at certain junctures of American history, including the junctures where we've lurched however inelegantly toward a More Perfect Union -- the establishment of a safety net for our seniors, the establishment of public policies that tilted toward home ownership, the redistributive tax structures of the 1940s-50s., the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

But apropos of this thread, the capacity in this nation to act "pragmatically" when it comes to extending public policy or even basic protections to minorities generally, and particularly black Americans specifically, dissolves into precisely what we've seen in this thread. 

(Perhaps Australia has been better able to navigate pragmatically through its own racial landmines and legacies. Count your blessings.) 

Here, every halting stumble forward toward racial justice that the nation has made since the Civil War that nearly killed us has erupted in furious (white) backlash, quickly followed by the emergence of both codified law (poll tax fused to grandfather clause, convict leasing, Jim Crow, redlining, real estate covenants, differential sentencing for crack v cocaine) and de facto enforcement mechanisms (KKK, lynching, late night burning of black owned houses and stores, gerrymandering, uneven allocation of electoral resources resulting in vastly different wait times, realtor "steering," emergence of charter school ups that enable de facto re-segregation of schools after after de jure segreation was struck down... and et cetera). 

Not pragmatism: Defensive fury, quickly followed by legislative action to sustain the threatened status quo.  As we're witnessing, in real time, here.

 

Which is why this picture book, written by a real life former 6 year old, describing her real historical experience of when she really did need federal agents to walk her to a newly integrated school because there really were redfaced screaming (white) parents blocking the way and hurling tomatoes and racial epithets at her, is listed, in 2021, among the books banned from elementary classrooms. 

 

Not because it isn't true.  Because it IS true. 

And not, certainly, because this developmentally appropriate picture book is "Critical Race Theory." Rather: because it is true.

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Fun fact re art & politics: Ruby Bridges selected the cover for her 2020 book, which slightly crops a painting Norman Rockwell did in 1964, which became the cover of Look magazine in the midst of the Brown v Ed implementation struggles.  In all his years of doing covers for Saturday Evening Post, Rockwell had been sharply limited by the Post's editorial guidelines on how often and in what roles he could depict blacks; and this painting was, and was received by the public as, a jolting departure from the rather sentimental rosy-eyed depictions of America to which his (white) audience had become accustomed.  He was at the time reviled.  When his foundation established the Norman Rockwell museum, this was the first painting the museum purchased. Ruby Bridges later became a board member.

The painting is titled "The Problem We All Live With."   As we still do.

 

Note the epithet on the wall behind her.  The painting, itself, has also made its way onto the newly legislated content bans.)

 

 

You can't win if you can't win. 

That's all pragmatism means.

Look at how you can win. School issues lost you this one - how do you ensure school issues don't lose you the next? 

Railing against the racist voters won't do it. Insisting that people should know better won't do it. 

So, what will? 

Or, perhaps more importantly, if youre not willing to listen to voters and go out there to win their vote, what alternatives are you suggesting? 

Seems to me you've got three options. 

Keep berating the electorate for being wrong and hope to G_d things swing your way. 

Anti-democratic revolution.

Listen to moderates in your own party and make some pretty minor adjustments in conversation with the electorate. See Mounk. 

We've got enough on our hands here with out own fool of a PM. We don't want another Trump presidency. Be tactical! Close those goals conservatives keep finding wide open. 

Justice of the cause means nothing if you're not in power. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Melissa Louise]

7 hours ago, Fritz said:

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/what-happened-last-night-in-virginia

Another accurate take on what happened in the Virginia election.

 

In an ideal world, Democrats would take a hard look in the mirror and ask themselves whether maybe they should have rethought their approach to Critical Race Theory. Or the constant belittling of parents who want their children to take off their masks and get back to class. Or the embrace of a radical agenda that imagines the whole of America in the grip of white supremacy. Or the nomination of a professional politician whose name is closely linked with Clinton-era globalization, the displacement of the working class, and the corruption of the American meritocracy. But why do that when—in the same vein as Thomas Frank’s “What’s The Matter With Kansas?”—you can just write off millions of voters as rubes? 

 

It’s true that these parents often struggle to define Critical Race Theory. They’re not in a law-school seminar; they’re not fluent in academic jargon. But they’re not imagining things. They have noticed something very real: a new ideological orthodoxy pervading public schools, including an obsession with race, and the disparagement of anyone who questions the new dogma. 

And here’s the crucial point: The “Critical Race Theory isn’t real” meme is not about race. It’s not about politics. It’s not even a culture war, really. It’s about class. It’s about one class—a highly-educated chattering class—using highly specialized language to tell normal parents that they lack sufficient intellectual capacity and are imagining things because they’ve been brainwashed. A highly-educated progressive media has used its educational advantage—92 percent of American journalists have a college degree—to gaslight working-class parents of all races. Under the guise of fighting racism.

The Democrats’ abandonment of the working class didn’t begin in the early aughts, of course; by then, the mainstream liberal media had already abandoned the cause of labor for a higher-class reader, an erasure that was mirrored in the disastrous Clinton-era policies that decimated manufacturing and created a downward spiral for working-class families.

The irony is that the class warfare being perpetrated by the Democrats and their allies in the media in the name of racial justice not only paved the way for Youngkin’s victory, but the economic populism he was offering: Youngkin’s “day one game plan” includes a mix of spending and tax cuts, just as his school proposal combines banning Critical Race Theory along with expanding Advanced Placement classes statewide and pay hikes for public school teachers.

It was just the latest example of how the sneering of elite media, masquerading as a social justice fight against racism, is actually class consolidation in political, even race-baiting, garb. And voters have long since learned to tune it out.

I know some people won't read Bari Weiss. Just pointing out this article is on her Substack but it isn't her article. 

 

[Faith-manor]

4 hours ago, ktgrok said:

What a bunch of hogwash. Right wing journalists also have degrees, does that mean they also are gaslighting working class parents?

 

This!