Jump to content


The Republican Utopia


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

What you said is "both" are bad.

 

Which implies yes, slavery is bad, but also that it's taught in a way that you think is bad.

 

So, please, clarify what you meant by "both are bad".

Both as in teaching slavery didn’t exist in the form that it actually did exist and teaching CRT.  Both are bad. 

  • Plus1 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment

10 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Both as in teaching slavery didn’t exist in the form that it actually did exist and teaching CRT.  Both are bad. 

Telling students that black people were victims who were oppressed by white people isn't CRT. That's a simple fact of history. Segregation in the south has existed up until recently, heck some older posters on this message board were alive as very young kids/infants in the 1960s when this was occuring.

 

But I understand, being neck deep in the MAGAverse means we craft our own realities.

 

On behalf of everybody who lives in reality, (Climate change is real and caused by people, systemic racism is real and contributes to negative outcomes for minorities, etc.) I want to thank voters like you for making the destruction of this country at least entertaining.

 

It'd be a shame if it were boring, but fortunately we have conservative Republicans steering us into the abyss and at least their insanity is at least funny.

  • Plus1 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:
2 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

 

Telling students that black people were victims who were oppressed by white people isn't CRT. That's a simple fact of history

Ya no kidding.  I never said it was CRT. 
 

What I did say was that teaching a lesson that insinuates slavery didn’t exist or wasn’t as bad as it actually was is bad.  Full stop.  
 

next point of what I said is teaching CRT is bad.  Full stop.   I never once equated the two together other than to say both teachings are bad.  Why are you trying so so hard to say that I think they are related in other ways?   It’s a thing you constantly do and still never makes sense.  
 

 

  • Plus1 3
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
7 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Ya no kidding.  I never said it was CRT. 
 

What I did say was that teaching a lesson that insinuates slavery didn’t exist or wasn’t as bad as it actually was is bad.  Full stop.  
 

next point of what I said is teaching CRT is bad.  Full stop.   I never once equated the two together other than to say both teachings are bad.  Why are you trying so so hard to say that I think they are related in other ways?   It’s a thing you constantly do and still never makes sense.  
 

 

It's funny because you're equating CRT to any teaching regarding race, and you think it's some evil plot. 

 

You tow the Republican party line so hard I sometimes wonder if you're a Russian bot.

  • Plus1 5
Link to comment
24 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

It's funny because you're equating CRT to any teaching regarding race, and you think it's some evil plot. 

 

You tow the Republican party line so hard I sometimes wonder if you're a Russian bot.

I don’t think anyone really understands what you are talking about at this point.

 

Whats actually funny is you trying to tell me what I’m equating CRT to when I’ve actually spelled it out in a past discussing with another poster.  Multiple paragraphs on it actually.  So instead of you telling me what I’m saying, why don’t you  just read what I’m actually putting on the site and go from there.  
 

And how you got to this point from me saying both the teaching of a false slavery narrative and the teaching of CRT is quite amazing 

  • Plus1 2
  • Haha 1
  • Fire 1
Link to comment

8 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Whats actually funny is you trying to tell me what I’m equating CRT to when I’ve actually spelled it out in a past discussing with another poster.  Multiple paragraphs on it actually.  So instead of you telling me what I’m saying, why don’t you  just read what I’m actually putting on the site and go from there.  
 

And how you got to this point from me saying both the teaching of a false slavery narrative and the teaching of CRT is quite amazing

I think the confused one here is you. Firstly, I never said you're in favor of teaching a false narrative of history. What I did accuse you of is equating the proposed Oklahoma law to CRT and being a Russian Bot.

 

Quote

Could be both are bad.  Doesn’t have to be an either or. 

Here you comment on the original post concerning the Oklahoma law, which aims to limit teaching about Oppressive race and victim race in regards to slavery.

 

20 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Both as in teaching slavery didn’t exist in the form that it actually did exist and teaching CRT.  Both are bad. 

In this post, you say that teaching CRT is bad. This is in response to me asking you to clarify what you meant by "both are bad" in the original post concerning the proposed Oklahoma law. This is why I accused you of grouping the proposed Oklahoma law with CRT, because you did it in the post quoted above.

 

17 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Ya no kidding.  I never said it was CRT.

Yes you did, in the previous quote. 

 

This brings me to my larger point, the anti-intellectual wing of modern conservativism is dangerous. In this case, anything inconvenient regarding race can be lumped in with a boogeyman like CRT and be banned. This won't stop, the concern is what the new 'CRT' will be.

 

 

  • Plus1 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
34 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I think the confused one here is you. Firstly, I never said you're in favor of teaching a false narrative of history. What I did accuse you of is equating the proposed Oklahoma law to CRT and being a Russian Bot.

 

Here you comment on the original post concerning the Oklahoma law, which aims to limit teaching about Oppressive race and victim race in regards to slavery.

 

In this post, you say that teaching CRT is bad. This is in response to me asking you to clarify what you meant by "both are bad" in the original post concerning the proposed Oklahoma law. This is why I accused you of grouping the proposed Oklahoma law with CRT, because you did it in the post quoted above.

 

Yes you did, in the previous quote. 

 

This brings me to my larger point, the anti-intellectual wing of modern conservativism is dangerous. In this case, anything inconvenient regarding race can be lumped in with a boogeyman like CRT and be banned. This won't stop, the concern is what the new 'CRT' will be.

 

 

For some reason you forgot to include the original post that I responded to which included mentions of both CRT and the slavery teachings.  That’s a very important starting off point to the entire discussion.  Hence the comment from me that both could be bad.  I DID NOT bring CRT into the discussion.  So I’m Not equating or comparing or whatever you want to believe, instead I’m saying both could be bad.  
 

It’s like saying Nebraska special teams is bad and people being a douche on an airplane is bad.  Both can be bad but I’m not equating the two.  
 

Take it up with @Enhance if you think and want to continue accusing me if being a Russian bot and continue that discussion.  

  • Plus1 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
37 minutes ago, knapplc said:

Don't let CRT distract anyone from the fact that the Republican party has yet to attempt to prosecute those involved in the January 6th insurrection. 

well...considering so many of them were complicit i doubt they will ever attempt to prosecute

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

I think it's a real stretch to suggest teaching CRT and teaching that slavery didn't exist are equally bad. Actually it's not a stretch. The suggestion itself is pretty evil.  Maybe someone could help me find the piece of CRT that is so irksome or factually dishonest. 

Just what is critical race theory anyway?

Critical race theory is an academic concept that is more than 40 years old. The core idea is that race is a social construct, and that racism is not merely the product of individual bias or prejudice, but also something embedded in legal systems and policies.

The basic tenets of critical race theory, or CRT, emerged out of a framework for legal analysis in the late 1970s and early 1980s created by legal scholars Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and Richard Delgado, among others.

 

A good example is when, in the 1930s, government officials literally drew lines around areas deemed poor financial risks, often explicitly due to the racial composition of inhabitants. Banks subsequently refused to offer mortgages to Black people in those areas.

 

Today, those same patterns of discrimination live on through facially race-blind policies, like single-family zoning that prevents the building of affordable housing in advantaged, majority-white neighborhoods and, thus, stymies racial desegregation efforts.

CRT also has ties to other intellectual currents, including the work of sociologists and literary theorists who studied links between political power, social organization, and language. And its ideas have since informed other fields, like the humanities, the social sciences, and teacher education.

 

This academic understanding of critical race theory differs from representation in recent popular books and, especially, from its portrayal by critics—often, though not exclusively, conservative Republicans. Critics charge that the theory leads to negative dynamics, such as a focus on group identity over universal, shared traits; divides people into “oppressed” and “oppressor” groups; and urges intolerance.

 

Thus, there is a good deal of confusion over what CRT means, as well as its relationship to other terms, like “anti-racism” and “social justice,” with which it is often conflated.

 

To an extent, the term “critical race theory” is now cited as the basis of all diversity and inclusion efforts regardless of how much it’s actually informed those programs.

 

One conservative organization, the Heritage Foundation, recently attributed a whole host of issues to CRT, including the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests, LGBTQ clubs in schools, diversity training in federal agencies and organizations, California’s recent ethnic studies model curriculum, the free-speech debate on college campuses, and alternatives to exclusionary discipline—such as the Promise program in Broward County, Fla., that some parents blame for the Parkland school shootings. “When followed to its logical conclusion, CRT is destructive and rejects the fundamental ideas on which our constitutional republic is based,” the organization claimed.

Does critical race theory say all white people are racist? Isn’t that racist, too?

 

The theory says that racism is part of everyday life, so people—white or nonwhite—who don’t intend to be racist can nevertheless make choices that fuel racism.

Some critics claim that the theory advocates discriminating against white people in order to achieve equity. They mainly aim those accusations at theorists who advocate for policies that explicitly take race into account. (The writer Ibram X. Kendi, whose recent popular book How to Be An Antiracist suggests that discrimination that creates equity can be considered anti-racist, is often cited in this context.)

 

Fundamentally, though, the disagreement springs from different conceptions of racism. CRT puts an emphasis on outcomes, not merely on individuals’ own beliefs, and it calls on these outcomes to be examined and rectified. Among lawyers, teachers, policymakers, and the general public, there are many disagreements about how precisely to do those things, and to what extent race should be explicitly appealed to or referred to in the process.

 

Here’s a helpful illustration to keep in mind in understanding this complex idea. In a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court school-assignment case on whether race could be a factor in maintaining diversity in K-12 schools, Chief Justice John Roberts’ opinion famously concluded: “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” But during oral arguments, then-justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said: “It’s very hard for me to see how you can have a racial objective but a nonracial means to get there.”

 
  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

6 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

I think it's a real stretch to suggest teaching CRT and teaching that slavery didn't exist are equally bad. Actually it's not a stretch. The suggestion itself is pretty evil.  Maybe someone could help me find the piece of CRT that is so irksome or factually dishonest. 

Just what is critical race theory anyway?

Critical race theory is an academic concept that is more than 40 years old. The core idea is that race is a social construct, and that racism is not merely the product of individual bias or prejudice, but also something embedded in legal systems and policies.

The basic tenets of critical race theory, or CRT, emerged out of a framework for legal analysis in the late 1970s and early 1980s created by legal scholars Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and Richard Delgado, among others.

 

A good example is when, in the 1930s, government officials literally drew lines around areas deemed poor financial risks, often explicitly due to the racial composition of inhabitants. Banks subsequently refused to offer mortgages to Black people in those areas.

 

Today, those same patterns of discrimination live on through facially race-blind policies, like single-family zoning that prevents the building of affordable housing in advantaged, majority-white neighborhoods and, thus, stymies racial desegregation efforts.

CRT also has ties to other intellectual currents, including the work of sociologists and literary theorists who studied links between political power, social organization, and language. And its ideas have since informed other fields, like the humanities, the social sciences, and teacher education.

 

This academic understanding of critical race theory differs from representation in recent popular books and, especially, from its portrayal by critics—often, though not exclusively, conservative Republicans. Critics charge that the theory leads to negative dynamics, such as a focus on group identity over universal, shared traits; divides people into “oppressed” and “oppressor” groups; and urges intolerance.

 

Thus, there is a good deal of confusion over what CRT means, as well as its relationship to other terms, like “anti-racism” and “social justice,” with which it is often conflated.

 

To an extent, the term “critical race theory” is now cited as the basis of all diversity and inclusion efforts regardless of how much it’s actually informed those programs.

 

One conservative organization, the Heritage Foundation, recently attributed a whole host of issues to CRT, including the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests, LGBTQ clubs in schools, diversity training in federal agencies and organizations, California’s recent ethnic studies model curriculum, the free-speech debate on college campuses, and alternatives to exclusionary discipline—such as the Promise program in Broward County, Fla., that some parents blame for the Parkland school shootings. “When followed to its logical conclusion, CRT is destructive and rejects the fundamental ideas on which our constitutional republic is based,” the organization claimed.

Does critical race theory say all white people are racist? Isn’t that racist, too?

 

The theory says that racism is part of everyday life, so people—white or nonwhite—who don’t intend to be racist can nevertheless make choices that fuel racism.

Some critics claim that the theory advocates discriminating against white people in order to achieve equity. They mainly aim those accusations at theorists who advocate for policies that explicitly take race into account. (The writer Ibram X. Kendi, whose recent popular book How to Be An Antiracist suggests that discrimination that creates equity can be considered anti-racist, is often cited in this context.)

 

Fundamentally, though, the disagreement springs from different conceptions of racism. CRT puts an emphasis on outcomes, not merely on individuals’ own beliefs, and it calls on these outcomes to be examined and rectified. Among lawyers, teachers, policymakers, and the general public, there are many disagreements about how precisely to do those things, and to what extent race should be explicitly appealed to or referred to in the process.

 

Here’s a helpful illustration to keep in mind in understanding this complex idea. In a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court school-assignment case on whether race could be a factor in maintaining diversity in K-12 schools, Chief Justice John Roberts’ opinion famously concluded: “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” But during oral arguments, then-justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said: “It’s very hard for me to see how you can have a racial objective but a nonracial means to get there.”

 

Good thing nobody suggested they are equally bad.  I guess that means no one is evil in that sense.  
 

Neither is good though which you probably agree deep down inside.  

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Good thing nobody suggested they are equally bad.  I guess that means no one is evil in that sense.  
 

Neither is good though which you probably agree deep down inside.  

 

Deep down inside, I know that racism is systemic, and nothing I've read of actual Critical Race Theory strikes me as either factually incorrect or misguided. But for many years I was one of those white people who thought CRT was a little extreme for my taste. Then over the years I realized this wasn't about "my taste" and that deep down, racism in this country was simply more horrific and ongoing than I wanted to believe, and Critical Race Theory wasn't extreme --- just a very uncomfortable truth. 

 

Deep down I also believe that you know what you're doing when you say "teaching that slavery didn't exist" is wrong and that "teaching CRT is wrong."  Once again you lean on semantics to bail you out (you didn't use the word "equal') but your intent is to offer a ludicrous straw man extreme in an attempt to dismiss a far more pertinent example. 

  • Plus1 4
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Deep down inside, I know that racism is systemic, and nothing I've read of actual Critical Race Theory strikes me as either factually incorrect or misguided. But for many years I was one of those white people who thought CRT was a little extreme for my taste. Then over the years I realized this wasn't about "my taste" and that deep down, racism in this country was simply more horrific and ongoing than I wanted to believe, and Critical Race Theory wasn't extreme --- just a very uncomfortable truth. 

 

Deep down I also believe that you know what you're doing when you say "teaching that slavery didn't exist" is wrong and that "teaching CRT is wrong."  Once again you lean on semantics to bail you out (you didn't use the word "equal') but your intent is to offer a ludicrous straw man extreme in an attempt to dismiss a far more pertinent example. 

Ahhh, love how you magically know everyone’s “intent”.  Seems to be whatever you deem it to be no matter how nonsensical your claim is.  
Probably just more trolling from you :dunno  

  • Fire 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

Ahhh, love how you magically know everyone’s “intent”.  Seems to be whatever you deem it to be no matter how nonsensical your claim is.  
Probably just more trolling from you :dunno  

 

The floor is yours. What was your intent when you introduced the idea of people teaching that slavery didn't exist to this particular discussion? 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

The floor is yours. What was your intent when you introduced the idea of people teaching that slavery didn't exist to this particular discussion? 

That question has already been answered on this page.  You may also check out the post I originally replied to.  What was their intent on bringing CRT into that discussion since you magically know everyone’s intent. 

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 3
  • Fire 1
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...