Jump to content

How To Disrupt Critical Race Theory Training


Monte1076

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

I wish people would called this something else. This is not CRT. Amazes me how conservatives have made up a new topic to champion, by taking one thing and making people believe in another.

Maybe not, but the ideas and tenets areĀ basedĀ in CRT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, KirtFalcon said:

Good read ... the CRT pushers and deniers, yes they exist on SDC, have no rational response other than avoidance and deflection ... absolutely no logical rebutal .....

The questions asked in the article were indeed good ones, at least in my opinion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ctown81 said:

I wish people would called this something else. This is not CRT. Amazes me how conservatives have made up a new topic to champion, by taking one thing and making people believe in another.

The article isn't about CRT.Ā  It lists ways to respond to what CRT teaches.Ā  Have you read CRT, and do you accept it as 100% truth or as I do just the opinion of the author that wrote the synopsis of their beliefs of why things in History happened ?Ā  Almost every single aspect that CRT presents on any given historical event since 1649 they say were based on racist thinking, at that oppressing people of color was the intended result of historical event.Ā  It is the goal to center it specifically on blacks and in some instances Native Americans.Ā 

Why they failed to bring up the building of railroads across this nation is beyond me.Ā  Maybe the have Sinophobia.Ā  For example one could make a case in regards to that.Ā  However what they would fail to understand is that people from Asia were not recruited initially to build the railroads.Ā  They came to California in search of gold, and then applied for jobs to build the railroads if they did not find gold.Ā  CRT would say that the railroads actively recruited them in Asia and brought them to America simply to gain profit by subjecting Asians only to build the railroads in terrible conditions.Ā  They would completely leave out the true historical context, and say this is why it happened.Ā  That is the problem with CRT.Ā 

Ā 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, DaveTV1 said:

The article isn't about CRT.Ā  It lists ways to respond to what CRT teaches.Ā  Have you read CRT, and do you accept it as 100% truth or as I do just the opinion of the author that wrote the synopsis of their beliefs of why things in History happened ?Ā  Almost every single aspect that CRT presents on any given historical event since 1649 they say were based on racist thinking, at that oppressing people of color was the intended result of historical event.Ā  It is the goal to center it specifically on blacks and in some instances Native Americans.Ā 

Why they failed to bring up the building of railroads across this nation is beyond me.Ā  Maybe the have Sinophobia.Ā  For example one could make a case in regards to that.Ā  However what they would fail to understand is that people from Asia were not recruited initially to build the railroads.Ā  They came to California in search of gold, and then applied for jobs to build the railroads if they did not find gold.Ā  CRT would say that the railroads actively recruited them in Asia and brought them to America simply to gain profit by subjecting Asians only to build the railroads in terrible conditions.Ā  They would completely leave out the true historical context, and say this is why it happened.Ā  That is the problem with CRT.Ā 

Ā 

Maybe we should post the questions from the article...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, DaveTV1 said:

The article isn't about CRT.Ā  It lists ways to respond to what CRT teaches.Ā  Have you read CRT, and do you accept it as 100% truth or as I do just the opinion of the author that wrote the synopsis of their beliefs of why things in History happened ?Ā  Almost every single aspect that CRT presents on any given historical event since 1649 they say were based on racist thinking, at that oppressing people of color was the intended result of historical event.Ā  It is the goal to center it specifically on blacks and in some instances Native Americans.Ā 

Why they failed to bring up the building of railroads across this nation is beyond me.Ā  Maybe the have Sinophobia.Ā  For example one could make a case in regards to that.Ā  However what they would fail to understand is that people from Asia were not recruited initially to build the railroads.Ā  They came to California in search of gold, and then applied for jobs to build the railroads if they did not find gold.Ā  CRT would say that the railroads actively recruited them in Asia and brought them to America simply to gain profit by subjecting Asians only to build the railroads in terrible conditions.Ā  They would completely leave out the true historical context, and say this is why it happened.Ā  That is the problem with CRT.Ā 

Ā 

CRT studies the impact of laws on POC. That statement is not CRT. Did you see this taught somewhere?Ā 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Monte1076 said:

Maybe we should post the questions from the article...

The thing is how many lecturers allow for questioning their opinion at the end of their opinionated thoughts on historical events ?Ā  I would doubt that few do, because they want their perception of the facts to be held as truth.Ā  I believe the same would be done by school teachers if it was allowed in public schools.Ā  Many professors and teachers already take this stance when it comes to the curriculum that they are teaching.Ā  If a student fails to parrot how they perceive the truth, and state otherwise they will fail them.Ā  I believe that many teachers will do the same with CRT, because whether they accept the students version they will fail them for not grasping the opinion of the lesson that they were taught.Ā  I excelled at History when I was in school.Ā  I still read World and American History books that are used in Universities and Colleges.Ā  There is no way that I could answer a question outside of it's true historical context.Ā  That is what I think we are truly dealing with when it comes to CRT.Ā  It is to erase History, and teach it in a manner that is half true.Ā Ā 

Since we live in Texas, I haven't read the book "Forget the Alamo"Ā  by Bryan Burrough, Chris Tomlinson, and Jason Stanford.Ā  However I have read the excerpts in the Houston Chronicle, and it is filled with lies.Ā  Many may not remember the battles that were happening against Spain with the Republican Army of the North.Ā  The Battle of Medina was the deadliest battle ever fought in Texas and it was in 1813 with 1400 soldiers that were mostly Tejano fighters.Ā  Yet, CRT only wants to say it was whites that fought for slavery in Texas, now.Ā  Come on.Ā  Texas Independence was to be free from Mexican rule, and the seeds had been planted long before the Texas Revolution.Ā  The battle cry wasn't "For Slavery", and no one could show me where it was entirely based on slavery there were far greater issues involved.Ā Ā 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

CRT studies the impact of laws on POC. That statement is not CRT. Did you see this taught somewhere?Ā 

I have read their topics.Ā  Have you been to their main website ?Ā  I have and spent several hours reading what they want to teach.Ā Ā The 1619 Project ā€¢ Critical Race Training in EducationĀ .Ā  I don't blindly follow along with a crowd.Ā  I have to educate myself on a topic so that I can either accept it or reject it.Ā  They tackle many subjects and not just laws that have impacted the lives of people of color in the past.Ā  Since you were unable to show a current law that affects people of color today, unless you want to say our immigration laws, those have already been corrected.Ā  The thing about our immigration laws is they are applied to all people of all colors.Ā  There are many white people that want to immigrate to the United States, but they can't due to our quota's.Ā  Our immigration laws are to protect American Citizens jobs and our economy.Ā Ā 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ctown81 said:

CRT studies the impact of laws on POC. That statement is not CRT. Did you see this taught somewhere?Ā 

So then what are they being taught, where a six year old white girl comes home and asks her mother if she's racist and a bad person because she's white?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Monte1076 said:

So then what are they being taught, where a six year old white girl comes home and asks her mother if she's racist and a bad person because she's white?

Have a question for you. Is it outside the realm of possibility that a kid may ask that question when you look at American history? Not trying to be funny, but whites were doing racist stuff in this country during the most historical moments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

Have a question for you. Is it outside the realm of possibility that a kid may ask that question when you look at American history? Not trying to be funny, but whites were doing racist stuff in this country during the most historical moments.

Ask that question of themselves? Clarify, please. The problem is, my understanding is that in some cases the general "teaching" is thatĀ allĀ whites are intrinsically racist, and in some other cases people are taught thatĀ only white people can be racist.

But here's the thing. I'm a white guy. I don't know what ethnicity you are, and it doesn't matter to me. Does that make me racist? I'm going to treat you civilly until you give me a reason to do otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Monte1076 said:

Ask that question of themselves? Clarify, please. The problem is, my understanding is that the general "teaching" is thatĀ allĀ whites are intrinsically racist, and in some cases people are taught thatĀ only white people can be racist.

Here you go, this will give you the full scope of it. It's a college elective course. I've yet to see or hear about a school district in this country rolling out a CRT course or a course that teaches what you typed above. Could I see an individual doing this, yes and it would be wrong but that type of teaching happens both ways.

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/civil-rights-reimagining-policing/a-lesson-on-critical-race-theory/

As for the story. It was extremely vague. I believe her child asked that but I can honestly see many situations where she would feel compelled to ask since 1492.Ā 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

Here you go, this will give you the full scope of it. It's a college elective course. I've yet to see or hear about a school district in this country rolling out a CRT course or a course that teaches what you typed above. Could I see an individual doing this, yes and it would be wrong but that type of teaching happens both ways.

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/civil-rights-reimagining-policing/a-lesson-on-critical-race-theory/

As for the story. It was extremely vague. I believe her child asked that but I can honestly see many situations where she would feel compelled to ask since 1492.Ā 

As I've said before, the full CRT I don't think is being taught. But tenets of it most definitely are. When the basic premise of something is "white people bad", don't you see a problem there? I'm certain you'd have a problem with the premise of something being "black people bad", right? And you'd be right to have a huge problem with that. So why does it only work one way?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

Have a question for you. Is it outside the realm of possibility that a kid may ask that question when you look at American history? Not trying to be funny, but whites were doing racist stuff in this country during the most historical moments.

On 11/26/2021 at 2:17 PM, ctown81 said:

more like WHAT power was behind slavery? $$$$$$

Was it about money or race?Ā Ā 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Monte1076 said:

As I've said before, the full CRT I don't think is being taught. But tenets of it most definitely are. When the basic premise of something is "white people bad", don't you see a problem there? I'm certain you'd have a problem with the premise of something being "black people bad", right? And you'd be right to have a huge problem with that. So why does it only work one way?

I have still failed to see it in anyone's curriculum. I have a HUGE issue with teaching "white people bad" but I have zero problem with there being "bad white people" as in the ones who purposely embedded it into systems and institutions being said. Which I'm assuming white people don't like bad white people either and it works for blacks with bad blacksĀ  too. I'll say it again, I'm FULLY against "all white people bad".

Here are the 4 tenants of CRT from the article. Which one do you feel is being taught in schools and by that, I mean in the actual curriculum? If you can't tell, I'm off today and got the time lol.

  • Recognition that race is not biologically real but is socially constructed and socially significant. It recognizes that science (as demonstrated in the Human Genome Project) refutes the idea of biological racial differences. According to scholars Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic, race is the product of social thought and is not connected to biological reality.
  • Acknowledgement that racism is a normal feature of society and is embedded within systems and institutions, like the legal system, that replicate racial inequality. This dismisses the idea that racist incidents are aberrations but instead are manifestations of structural and systemic racism.
  • Rejection of popular understandings about racism, such as arguments that confine racism to a few ā€œbad apples.ā€ CRT recognizes that racism is codified in law, embedded in structures, and woven into public policy. CRT rejects claims of meritocracy or ā€œcolorblindness.ā€ CRT recognizes that it is the systemic nature of racism that bears primary responsibility for reproducing racial inequality.
  • Recognition of the relevance of peopleā€™s everyday lives to scholarship. This includes embracing the lived experiences of people of color, including those preserved through storytelling, and rejecting deficit-informed research that excludes the epistemologies of people of color.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

Both.Ā 

I agree both were factors.Ā  But I think it was more about power and money than race.Ā  It is human nature for those with power to not want to give it up, no matter their color.Ā  Did white men not give white women the right to vote because they were "racist" against women?Ā  Did the Vikings raid and kill the English because of their race?Ā  Did native Americans wipe out neighboring tribes because of their race?Ā Ā 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are the questions from the article:

Ā ā€œCode Switchingā€
1. What is ā€œcode switching?ā€ I have heard that black people respond to racism by ā€œcode switchingā€ Ā ā€” what is it?

2. Is code switching acceptable?

3. Words have meaning and generally if you use different words you change the meaning. Ā Why isnā€™t code switching lying? Ā So it is okay to speak different truths to different audiences?

4. Is it okay if white people code switch?

5. Unless you are calling white people dumb, donā€™t you expect that the response to your training will just be for white people to code switch (like black people do)? Ā How will that help?

Moral Relativism
1. What are the values or principles behind what you are teaching us?

2. Are those moral assumptions ā€œmoral absolutesā€ or are they just social constructions like all the stuff you are teaching us about race?

3. So you agree there are moral absolutes? Iā€™m still allowed to adhere to my moral absolutes, like putting my family first? Ā Putting God first? Putting my faith first? Ā Iā€™m allowed to expect that other people will always tell me the truth (see code switching above)? Iā€™m allowed to expect that other people will respect my property?

4. So morality is a social construction? So you are attacking my religious faith? Ā You say itā€™s a problem if itā€™s a moral absolute? Ā What exactly is wrong with my religion? Ā If there is nothing wrong with my religion, why do you want me to change what I do? Ā Iā€™m just following my faith. Iā€™m Christian ā€” do you have the same problem with Judaism?

How Do You Know?
1. If I follow what you are saying, how we approach the world is shaped by cultural forces beyond us?

2. How did you escape these cultural forces? Ā Arenā€™t you in fact part of the cultural forces? Ā Arenā€™t you intellectually a prisoner to the same forces you are telling us about?

3. So you are saying you are smarter than me ā€” that you escaped, but I didnā€™t?

4. Without knowing me personally, how can you teach that I am subject to these cultural forces and have not ā€œescapedā€ them through my own critical thinking?

5. Why would you assume all escape from these social forces looks the same? Ā Arenā€™t there different paths that work?

6. Doesnā€™t Christian faith lead one to escape these cultural forces? [This depends on oneā€™s willingness to argue doctrine]

7. Of course you have read [fill in your favorite text, and argue from it] Martin Lutherā€™s ā€œFreedom of the Christian.ā€ Ā Do you have a problem with Lutherā€™s teaching that one has liberty or freedom only when he lives in bondage to Christ? Ā Indeed, freedom has nothing to do with the secular or political world, but is purely a matter of our relationship with Christ?

Teleology
1. Letā€™s take a step back for a moment. You are teaching us a process of critical analysis. Ā You are asking us to examine how culture shapes thinking. Ā What is the end point of your process? Ā Does this process have an end point? Ā Why is that end point correct? Ā So you are saying that end point is a moral absolute? Ā So you believe in moral absolutes? So that end point is not a moral absolute, itā€™s just a different cultural constructionā€”one among perhaps an infinite number of possible such cultural constructions? Really?

2. Why isnā€™t your end point merely an alternative cultural construction? Ā Can you show me the difference? How one is an absolute and the other a construction?

3. Why donā€™t you try this to explain this more clearly. Letā€™s invert the problem and use your end point as the point of critical departure. Ā What happens if we apply your methods to your end point? Ā Doesnā€™t that mean we will end up somewhere else? Ā Where? That place might not be good? Wonā€™t people just apply your methods to your ends?

This last one probably goes beyond the easy.

4. Can you restate what you are telling us in terms of Popperian falsification? Can you give me a testable hypothesis that we could prove false? Ā Can you present us your theory in something testable that can be falsified?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, ObiOne said:

I agree both were factors.Ā  But I think it was more about power and money than race.Ā  It is human nature for those with power to not want to give it up, no matter their color.Ā  Did white men not give white women the right to vote because they were "racist" against women?Ā  Did the Vikings raid and kill the English because of their race?Ā  Did native Americans wipe out neighboring tribes because of their race?Ā Ā 

This is apples to oranges. If slavery wasn't race based, why didn't they enslave more whites? At that time, it was the rich white males who had the power. Most of the examples you gave prove my point. Europeans sought out Africans for slaves. Vikings and Native Americans did what they did out of "nationalism".Ā  No way around it, American slavery was very race based. Find me one non european civilization that enslaved people based solely on race.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

This is apples to oranges. If slavery wasn't race based, why didn't they enslave more whites? At that time, it was the rich white males who had the power. Most of the examples you gave prove my point. Europeans sought out Africans for slaves. Vikings and Native Americans did what they did out of "nationalism".Ā  No way around it, American slavery was very race based. Find me one non european civilization that enslaved people based solely on race.

If it was mainly race based, then why not just enslave native Americans?Ā  Why go to the trouble to enslave mainly African slaves?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...