Why is anyone trying to keep public schools from teaching Critical Race Theory?

[UltraChad]

And that never happened.

I quoted it multiple times.....it happened, you can't undo it.

You having a meltdown after you realize you said something ignorant is happening.

I didn't say anything ignorant. You just fucked up and are too much of a child to admit it.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I quoted it multiple times.....it happened, you can't undo it.




I didn't say anything ignorant. You just fucked up and are too much of a child to admit it.

You quoted me asking how your claim is happening. You literally
Roved yourself wrong.
This is what you do, say incredibly ignorant things, get called out for it, and have a meltdown, stomp your feet and say “nuh huh”. It was a simple question that you still won’t answer.

 

[Politruk]

No schoolkids are being taught this:

"In summary, although the principles of critical race theory are somewhat nebulous, the basic overall arc is to examine how seemingly neutral laws might have a disparate impact on minorities.[5] (The extent to which some CRT proponents have done so, however, has troubled some critics.) Law professor Douglas E. Litowitz paraphrased some of the key tenants of critical race theory, as advanced in an introductory essay to a book written by Delgado called Critical Race Theory: An Introduction, as follows:[8]

1. Racism is "normal" in our society. Racist assumptions about minorities pervade our mind-set and are reinforced in the media and popular culture. Race is encoded not merely in our laws, but in our cultural symbols such as movies, clothes, language, and music. Our commonsense assumptions about people of color are biased - "we are all racists."
2. Liberalism has failed to bring about parity between the races, for the simple reason that formal equality cannot eliminate deeply entrenched types of racism (sometimes called "microaggressions") which are encountered by minorities on a daily basis. Liberal solutions to affirmative action and free speech are white compromises which fail to significantly advance minority interests. Although liberalism professes to value equality, it actually prevents the radical reforms necessary to achieve true equality between the races.
3. CRT posits an "interest-convergence theory" which holds that the dominant white culture can tolerate minority successes only when these successes also serve the larger interests of whites. Major civil rights advances occur rarely, and only in situations where whites stand to benefit as well. Every movement toward change is a struggle against the dominant white culture. People of color can only achieve limited success under the current system.[note 4]
4. CRT issues a "call to context" which rejects the formal perspective taken by white male scholars who subscribe to the "dominant narrative" of the law, whereby the law is seen as clear and neutral. CRT advocates a situated perspective which brings out the nuances of life as experienced by historically oppressed minorities. The dominant type of legal scholarship should be countered with techniques such as storytelling,
   https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Wikipedia%27s_W.svg/12px-Wikipedia%27s_W.svg.png
   science fiction, sarcasm, and parody.

Click to expand...

And -- apart from it all being too challenging for their age -- there is no good reason why they should not be taught it. All of the above is true.

And is not anti-white, either.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

No schoolkids are being taught this:

"In summary, although the principles of critical race theory are somewhat nebulous, the basic overall arc is to examine how seemingly neutral laws might have a disparate impact on minorities.[5] (The extent to which some CRT proponents have done so, however, has troubled some critics.) Law professor Douglas E. Litowitz paraphrased some of the key tenants of critical race theory, as advanced in an introductory essay to a book written by Delgado called Critical Race Theory: An Introduction, as follows:[8]



And -- apart from it all being too challenging for their age -- there is no good reason why they should not be taught it. All of the above is true.

And is not anti-white, either.

Someone told Comrade BotanyBoy it’s happening and as fantastical as it seems he swallowed the propaganda whole.

 

[UltraChad]

You quoted me asking how your claim is happening.

You I quoted you trying to ascribe me YOUR claims.

I never made any such claim as

"teachers bending the laws of time and money to create another course (pick whatever level you want) AND cover all the material they still have to cover"

That was 100% your ascription.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

You I quoted you trying to ascribe me YOUR claims.

I never made any such claim as

"teachers bending the laws of time and money to create another course (pick whatever level you want) AND cover all the material they still have to cover"

That was 100% your ascription.

You didn’t. You quoted me asking you a question, asking you a question about what you were quoted saying isn’t ascription. Maybe you’ll have better luck next time.

 

[UltraChad]

You didn’t.

I did.

You quoted me asking you a question,

That you tried to ascribe to me.

asking you a question about what you were quoted saying isn’t ascription.

You didn't quote me though. You made shit up and decided that it was a quote when it wasn't.

Which is ascription.

. Maybe you’ll have better luck next time.

With what? I've been fucking you with this mistake since you dropped it son.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I did.



That you tried to ascribe to me.




You didn't quote me though. You made shit up and decided that it was a quote when it wasn't.

Which is ascription.



With what? I've been fucking you with this mistake since you dropped it son.

A question isn’t ascription. You were directly quoted, but now you’re running away from what you said hard. I’ll chalk this one up to another BotanyBoy meltdown and wish you better luck next time.

 

[Politruk]

No schoolkids are being taught this:

"In summary, although the principles of critical race theory are somewhat nebulous, the basic overall arc is to examine how seemingly neutral laws might have a disparate impact on minorities.[5] (The extent to which some CRT proponents have done so, however, has troubled some critics.) Law professor Douglas E. Litowitz paraphrased some of the key tenants of critical race theory, as advanced in an introductory essay to a book written by Delgado called Critical Race Theory: An Introduction, as follows:[8]

1. Racism is "normal" in our society. Racist assumptions about minorities pervade our mind-set and are reinforced in the media and popular culture. Race is encoded not merely in our laws, but in our cultural symbols such as movies, clothes, language, and music. Our commonsense assumptions about people of color are biased - "we are all racists."
2. Liberalism has failed to bring about parity between the races, for the simple reason that formal equality cannot eliminate deeply entrenched types of racism (sometimes called "microaggressions") which are encountered by minorities on a daily basis. Liberal solutions to affirmative action and free speech are white compromises which fail to significantly advance minority interests. Although liberalism professes to value equality, it actually prevents the radical reforms necessary to achieve true equality between the races.
3. CRT posits an "interest-convergence theory" which holds that the dominant white culture can tolerate minority successes only when these successes also serve the larger interests of whites. Major civil rights advances occur rarely, and only in situations where whites stand to benefit as well. Every movement toward change is a struggle against the dominant white culture. People of color can only achieve limited success under the current system.[note 4]
4. CRT issues a "call to context" which rejects the formal perspective taken by white male scholars who subscribe to the "dominant narrative" of the law, whereby the law is seen as clear and neutral. CRT advocates a situated perspective which brings out the nuances of life as experienced by historically oppressed minorities. The dominant type of legal scholarship should be countered with techniques such as storytelling,
   https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Wikipedia%27s_W.svg/12px-Wikipedia%27s_W.svg.png
   science fiction, sarcasm, and parody.

Click to expand...
Click to expand...

And -- apart from it all being too challenging for their age -- there is no good reason why they should not be taught it. All of the above is true.

And is not anti-white, either.

 

[HumpDayHoratio]

 

[SkyBubble]

Because it's a racist, Marxist lie.

 

[lovecraft68]

Because its a lie.

 

[latecomer91364]

I kinda can't believe we're still arguing this issue. Just goes to show you that Leftists cling to every lie and every damaging bullshit theory, but ultimately their very serious attempt is to turn today's schoolchildren into tomorrow's Marxist activists and they will never stop.

We need these fucks out of our schools forever.

 

[OralAllOver]

Nobody in the public schools was ever teaching it. CRT is a graduate-school subject. This is pure manufactroversy.

Glad you figured that out

What's next? Christian Nationalists hold Jesus in contempt? That they hate most people in their nation?

You might be ON TO SOMETHING

 

[ll74]

People are seeing ghosts again.

 

[SkyBubble]

https://www.newsweek.com/critical-race-theory-repackaged-marxism-opinion-1599557

When a Rhode Island local school district allegedly considered suing one woman for the high crime of asking for information about school curricula, many were shocked, and rightfully so. To be sued for making a request for school records, in accordance with records laws, would have been a violation of her basic First Amendment rights. Skepticism and dissent are bedrock American values. But shocking as it may be, I wasn't surprised this happened. See, the woman wanted to know about critical race theory being taught in American schools.

In fact, critical race theory isn't a theory at all. Nor is it a "perspective" of teaching history. It is racism and bigotry, and not only that—it's an attempt to revive a failed Marxist agenda.

Critical race theory is an offshoot of critical theory, the brainchild of the Frankfurt School, a group of 20th-century Marxists associated with the Institute for Social Research. (Fun fact: the founder of the Institute for Social Research wanted it to be named the Institut fur Marxismus, which translates to the "Institute for Marxism." That name was scrapped for fear it would alienate the public.)

 

[SkyBubble]

https://thedailyeconomy.org/article...ankfurt-school-the-neo-marxist-roots-of-woke/

critical theory, which is a neo-Marxist school of thought born in the Frankfurt School in 1923.