The Trials Of Critical Race Theory
excellent new documentary on this controversial topic. i highly recommend it
you can watch it here
CBSN Originals | The Trials of Critical Race Theory (msn.com)
You could also watch this on CBSN or on Paramount+ streaming service
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A new episode of CBSN Originals' Reverb series examines the backlash to so-called critical race theory in schools and the impact on students and teachers.
Tags
Who is online
77 visitors
Just before the 12:00 mark, they begin to interview a teacher who was fired for "inappropriately" bringing up racial issues in his high school classroom. He teaches a "contemporary issues" class to teenagers and was fired for discussing "white privilege" with high school students.
In another segment , starting at the 17:30 mark, they interview a woman from "Moms For Liberty" who is anti-"crt" leader in her Tennesee town. She also doesnt think "social justice" should be taught in school.
They look at a book related to MLK's march on Washington in 1963. The mother objects to a photo in the book where it shows white police mistreating black civil rights protesters because she doesnt think young children should be taught that police can do anything racist.
She doesnt really think that "racism" should be taught to children . She objects to language in the 1963 book that says "blacks and whites are not treated equally" because she doesnt want "racism" depicted to children.
-
This is the crux of the issue. White parents , the ones complaining, dont want anything taught to their kids that shows that white people did anything racist.
You should travel around the country to every school board and voice your displeasure at what they are teaching.
You should stop trolling my articles.
If you have something to say about the topic, say it.
Well, I did, and you responded to my post, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you actually read it.
I heard a black woman say this on a news show the other day
"How come no one asks black parents what they want taught in school about race? "
Last time I checked John there is a Black History Month. Does that need to be longer?
Was that a joke?
Please, name 10 districts in your state that teaches CRT in grade or high school.
You won't find any because its not a class.
I know. This is, to me, a non problem/fear mongering ploy.
Class or not, it is being taught in schools. Here is another article showing it is.
... fox news... bwah ha ha ha... try to find a credible source, please.
So they don't have any CRT curriculum. Thanks for at least admitting that.
What? How dare they tell their teachers to be empathetic to marginalized students and offer to help them! /s
Basically, these conservative States and dipshit bigots are angry that any school would acknowledge a possible need for a student and take the initiative to help that student. Many schools have programs to help identify and aid students who have depression, thoughts of suicide, dyslexia, disabilities, autism and other roadblocks some students face when trying to obtain a standard education. Why shouldn't teachers be given the tools to help those who have been historically and systemically oppressed for centuries?
There is no CRT curriculum being taught, as is essentially admitted to. What conservative shit for brains want is for teachers to pretend race doesn't exist anymore. White conservative Christians spent the last 250+ years of American history making sure no one forgot they were the white Christians in charge, but now they want to wash their hands of it by pretending race doesn't exist because that's their way to proclaim they're not being racist while also not supporting any hand up to those who have been discriminated against for hundreds of years.
“There is no CRT curriculum being taught,”
that’s what morons on certain networks tell morons watching certain networks. Why is crt promoted on the virginia dept. of education website.
Then prove it’s wrong, put up or shut up. Bwah ha ha ha
All of them in them State of Washington...
It's state law.... ( SB 5044 , SB 5227 , and SB 5228 ) Covers the entirety of education in the state, K-12, Higher education and workplace education..
They took effect July 21st this year....
Highline School District for one... (and if you don't like it from a talk radio reporter)
How about their own training symposium ....
Three State laws passed by the liberal controlled legislature mandate that it be the framework of education in all state schools...
You can bet your bippy if they are doing it here they are doing it everywhere else they have complete control...
It's so open and brazen here cause they do not believe they can be overthrown....
Should schools teach anti-racism, or racism?
If they teach racism has existed in America, who should they say were the perpetrators?
No one?
The idea that schools can address racism without blaming "whites" is ludicrous.
The Story of William Ellison
What if they are the same thing?
Neither...
They should teach history...the good and the bad
Nothing more.
Are you serious? What exactly do you think that proves?
What if up and down are the same thing?
All this deflection......
A short history of Slavery
Racism is racism whether you call it racism or anti-racism. It's the oldest and most transparent trick in the book. You hide an unpopular or nefarious action behind an innocuous or even positive name. It's like a calling a bill to dump mercury in the water, the "Refreshing Water Act" Who could possibly oppose refreshing water?
There is no history of black people being racist in America other than as a reaction to white racism. Two different animals.
Candace Owens Prager U video on slavery is ridiculous. Go on You Tube and see all the amateur historians lining up to debunk her.
I did like the 'artistic' touch of her wearing all white in the video though.
What deflection, John?
You asked a question.
I correctly answered it.
Maybe you can follow suit.
Anti-racism, of course. They should definitely be teaching that
What do you think? Is that a good start?
You showed us this in the other article and I pointed out that there is no context to who these people are or who they are addressing. That makes a big difference.
I looked into the laws that were passed and it is hard to determine if this makes law from what was already being taught or not. Here are the links I found that others can make up their minds:
Come on. Leave it to Prager U to use the two wrongs make a right and argument. It isn't.
Our slavery is not OK because of other slavery. No slavery should be OK, especially in an enlightened society.
Absolutely agree, but American Slavery is a lot more than whites enslaving blacks based upon hatred... the hundreds of thousands of white slaves the British brought into the colonies before the revolution for example.... The whole premise of CRT is wrong...
And you should know that being an unbiased educator...
That sort of thing is usually sourced from white nationalist websites. You should step back off that plank.
The Forgotten History of Britain’s White Slaves in America ...
Slavery in America, typically associated with blacks from Africa, was an enterprise that began with the shipping of more than 300,000 white Britons to the colonies. This little known history is fascinatingly recounted in White Cargo (New York University Press, 2007).
=================
------------------------------
Fact check: First slaves in North American colonies were not “100 white children from Ireland” | Reuters
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a civil rights organization that tracks hate and extremist groups ( www.splcenter.org/hate-map ), the myth of the “Irish slaves” has been a favorite meme of the far-right for the past few years ( here ). Described by the SPLC as historical “revisionism,” the narrative “has attracted Neo-Nazis, White Nationalists, Neo-Confederates, and even Holocaust deniers, while racist trolls have deployed the myth to attack the Black Lives Matter movement.”
Interviewed by the SPLC, Liam Hogan, an Irish librarian and independent scholar, has written extensively on these memes since he first saw one in 2013 ( here , tinyurl.com/y9yho7mg ).
The British brought indentured servants. They were treated like slaves but they knew they were going to be freed after 7 years of servitude. Of course in the antebellum south, mixed-raced blacks that could have "passed" as white were also kept as slaves if they were not passing.
The premise of CRT, is that the construct of "racism" can only be against other races since it comes from who has the power and of course collective guilt...
You seem to think that I support CRT, but I don't. It is just a school of thought that I don't particularly subscribe to. I just know from fellow educators that CRT is not being used. That being said, I think that we should be able to discuss current events, even when race is an issue (age appropriately) and it should be done in a manner that doesn't make other students feel uncomfortable or bad.
And I have always been an unbiased educator or I should say as unbiased as humanly possible.
Really? White nationalist websites? {chuckle}
Maybe someone aught to inform SPLC that Oxford , Nat Geo and Wiki are White nationalist websites
Slavery in British America - Atlantic History - Oxford Bibliographies
point out the part of that page that mentions white slaves
New England Colonies' Use of Slavery | National Geographic Society
That page doesnt mention white slaves either although it does briefly mention indentured servants
the wikipedia article you link is ONLY about slavery in Britain, not america
Slavery in Britain - Wikipedia
What the heck is your point anyway?
You know me better than that girl, I don't presuppose anything coming from you... And no it's not being taught directly, it's being used as a framework for education in general... So yeah when it is brought up and pointed out, there is plausible deniability in saying it isn't being taught anywhere K-12 as an actual part of any curriculum... It is being politically implemented as a structure for education in general... In the case of Washington State, across the entire breadth of state education...
You go to a public school in the state of Washington, it is mandated that you be taught under a CRT framework....
It may not be happening in your area yet, or your compatriots are not willing to admit it, but it is happening here and they really don't care if anyone knows about it.....
Whether or not anyone wants to accept that or not is of no consequence to me... I'm just the reporter...
I made a point of calling my cousin who is a teacher in Washington State and she says she is so sick of hearing that they are teaching CRT that it is maddening. I made a point of reading the laws you posted and I posted links directly to the new laws for people to judge for themselves.
In NY, they are NOT teaching CRT. NYS is very strict about educational goals and is the only state in the union that has another battery of tests called the "Regents" and almost all our requirements are geared for that battery of tests in all major subject levels.
CRT has become a rallying call. The buggy man of white parents and a political device and that is sad when it comes to education, as it becomes a huge distraction.
I know we are going to disagree, so maybe this should be where we leave this discussion?
It's definitely a political hot button, and Democrats on the national level plainly stating that parents shouldn't have a say in what their kids are taught stomps all over that button.... And there is a long and nasty history of various governmental boards and councils that have cut off public comment, preventing public comment on their actions and actually have brought the police down on the citizenry to stop the public from voicing their positions on anything the government is doing... At least here in the state of Washington... We get bills passed in the night and signed by the governor before there is even a public notice...
We are definitely going to disagree on this one, the retired educators in our family are split about it, makes for interesting conversations sometimes...
Isn't much more to be said girl the information is out there, i tend not to use the news media around here cause of it's plain bias, and everything you need to know is on the LEG WA site from the links we both posted...
The framework being implemented I posted... it's up to the people to make their own decision if they want to.... Not going to change anyone's mind here on this site, everyone has a bias here... But it is interesting to see how far they lean....
I think we have the basis covered, agreed...
This is nothing more than your political POV. It's fine to say it is an op/ed but to state it as a fact, as a democrat cabal is ridiculous. I would say the same thing to any Dem who say something similar.
Sure... And so is yours....
Totally agree, Perrie. There seems to be a lot of people who present their idea of what is fact, when in fact it is merely their own POV regarding the circumstances at hand.
This is detrimental to those who choose not to look into the situation and decide for themselves what is fact, or simply someone spreading misinformation.
This in turn creates confusion and distrust among those on both political sides.
To avoid this kind of situation, it is always best to present one's own ideas regarding a political circumstance as what it really is, just one person's opinion, POV, idea, thought, etc.
JMOO
I think that was very well said, Raven and you have expressed all of my concerns.
Thank you, Perrie.
One could argue that Christopher Rufo singlehandedly began the current "culture war" over critical race theory. He is a conservative activist who wanted to find a way to make a name for himself and make money. He heard from a friend in Seattle that the city government out there was doing racial sensitivity training with their employees and he expanded that out to represent race based instruction in the nations schools.
He is what we call a WHISTLE-BLOWER.
opportunistic grifter would be more like it
Yes. People think because CRT is not listed on a syllabus, it's not taught. Or if they aren't reading excerpts of Kimberlee Crenshaw to fouirth graders, the concepts aren't taught. It's a very simple minded way to avoid dealing with reality.
I think Andrew Sullivan put the issue in the most accessible terms:
The goal of education of children this young is to cement the notion at the most formative age that America is at its core an oppressive racist system uniquely designed to exploit, harm, abuse, and even kill the non-white. This can be conveyed in easy terms, by training kids to see themselves first and foremost as racial avatars, and by inculcating in them a sense of their destiny as members of the oppressed or oppressor classes in the zero-sum struggle for power that is American society in 2021.
Let me draw an analogy to another kind of education. In Catholic kindergarten, kids are not taught Aquinas, the debates about the Trinity in the early church, or the intricacies of transubstantiation. But they are taught that they were created by God, in his image, and that they should love one another. All of this is part of Catholicism. But the former is abstract and esoteric; the latter is the practical, downstream application of these truths — accessible to children, to direct their morality. As they grow up, they will learn more. But it is all part of the same system of faith and thought. Its words and values resonate throughout it all: love, compassion, sin, forgiveness, dignity, God, heaven.
Similarly with CRT, impenetrable academic discourse at the elite level is translated to child-friendly truisms, with the same aim — to change behavior. And so the notion that the most important thing about a child is that she is white, and this makes her part of an oppressive system purposely designed to hurt her new friend, who is black, is how this comes out in an actual real-life scenario. And she has to account for her indelible “whiteness”, just as Catholic kids have to account for their sins. CRT has its own words and values, and they are instilled from the beginning: racism, systems, intersectionality, hegemony, oppression, whiteness, privilege, cisgender, and “doing the work,” as CRT convert Dr. Jill Biden would say."
Nothing political about that rant, lol.
The "white parents" in question say they want racism taught as a topic , but they dont want it said who the racists were.
I'm expected to listen to a 47 minute presentation of B.S.?
Will this new anti-racism curricula teach about antisemitism and anti-Asian bigotry within the Black community? Will the topics of Black Nationalism, the Black Panther movement, Nation of Islam, and the Republic of New Afrika be taught?
Isn't there a need to teach Black kids to be anti-racist, too?
the other point of view is given as well
Every one of those groups was born as a reaction to white racism.
Blaming the white population won't end racism within the Black population. If anti-racism is going to be taught then all the kids, regardless of race, need to be taught the same lessons.
Black people are not anti-Semitic and anti-Asian because white people forced them to be racist.
That unfortunately may be true, but they teach the same sort of racially motivated hatred, segregation, and domination based on the color of one's skin or underlying religious belief. None of that has any place in today's civilized society. If we are to teach children about the horrors of racism in our past, then we must also teach them about how we must strive to eliminate it in our present and future, in all of its many forms. And we can only do that by not teaching our children that one or another race or religion is superior, or inferior, to any other, or that one or the other is inherently evil in some way.
In another discussion you had commented on my adoption of MLK's dream about judging people by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. Your response to that was that he became more militant as he grew older and spoke of his dream becoming a nightmare. In reviewing the history and his speeches it is clear that he was talking about the war in Vietnam, and the hatred and violence he had seen from some of the groups mentioned in Nerm's comment above. He always, to his death, preached about loving thy neighbor and treating each other the way we want to be treated. He abhorred violence and revenge and said many times that it was not the answer and just made things worse. While he acknowledged that riots are sometimes the result of people not listening, he never condoned the hatred or violence. He was always a proponent of peaceful protest. Certainly, IMHO, his philosophy or vision is vastly superior to that of any group teaching violence against, or hatred toward, others based on the color of their skin.
We can only be responsible for those things that we have reasonable control over. In the case of human beings that means we cannot change the past, but we can most certainly change ourselves in the present and make a better future for all to come.
I agree. But tell me this. How are we supposed to do that when states are actually removing the topic from the curriculum?
I agree, we must learn from the past so that we don't repeat it, but we can't change it nor hold those who weren't even born yet responsible for it. This lumping of every discussion about race into the anti-CRT bucket has got to stop, but so does any "anti-white" sentiment that might creep into it from time to time. Although I think that much of the perceived "anti-white" sentiment is not what many make it out to be, it is overblown.
I think this whole CRT or anti-CRT issue has been blown out of proportion on both sides. Some on the far right tend to lump any teaching of true historical racial injustice into their anti-CRT rhetoric. Even though CRT was never really taught in elementary or even high school, that has been the target of their anti-CRT legislation. While there are some activists on the far left that take it as far as to label all white people even today as evil or fully responsible for the horrors of the past, or responsible now for reparations no matter how vehemently they reject the racism of their ancestors and are on board to mitigate any systemic issues that remain. Neither represent the true roots of CRT that was taught primarily in graduate level universities and law schools investigating legitimate structural or systemic racism in our legal and educational systems, and figuring out ways to weed it out.
As with most issues in the highly partisan political sphere, both sides seem to enjoy straw-manning and/or grossly exaggerating the position of their opponents to the point where no meaningful discussion can be had. My point is that we reject that bullshit and all of us, of all races creeds and colors, work together in a way that MLK had proposed. Quit putting skin color in the middle of the discussion and work together to make things better.
Are they?
I realize that's the current liberal assertion, but as far as I can see it's as erroneous as the conservative claim that CRT is being taught everywhere.
Absolutely. There should be no room for bigotry.
I dont think there is actually a reasonable national fear that blacks will become the new racists. Its kind of absurd .
There are MILLIONS of white people in this country who believe that they are the real victims of racism. It is mass delusion.
I don't think there is much chance of our society being controlled by black people who believe white people are inferior, heck most are just trying to get the point across that black lives matter. I do think that many black Americans have what we would consider 'racist' thoughts towards white people and do judge white people as a stereotype, but that's mostly because white Americans have rarely proven their stereotypes wrong. Is it wrong to judge others based on the color of their skin? Yes, but that isn't really the kind of racism that enslaves other races, grinds them under their heels as inferior, takes advantage of them and treats them as less than human because of their skin color which was basically what conservative white Christians have been doing to blacks for hundreds of years.
For a black person to say in their heads "I don't trust this white person because they're white", while that may be racist, it's not the same as those whites who saw blacks as livestock to be worked, beaten, bred, raped or killed if they didn't perform well for their white masters.
Exactly.
Well of course it's not, but is it your contention that most white people (or even most "conservative white Christians") nowadays still have those kinds of thoughts about black people? C'mon man are we going to work together to put racism and distrust behind us, or are we going to continue to fan the flames with ridiculous comparisons and stereotypes?
"Conservative" whites do not want the nation's racist past to be taught in school. They want to pretend it never happened. Pretending it never happened is a sweeping under the rug, and it will not sell. It will sell to some whites, but the problems from minimizing the nations racist history will never go away until they are worked out in the nations classrooms.
Nah, I doubt it. Do you actually have figures to support that particular theory? Many just don't want their kids to be berated or maligned in school just because of the color of their skin, just like any parent of children of any race/color. To the extent that some grossly misinterpret the teaching of historical fact and today's theories about racism in school as a berating of their race, that is unfortunate, and something that we need to talk about rationally. But I'm relatively certain that your sweeping generalization about them doesn't help, but rather just invites an equally unreasonable knee jerk reaction that we see reflected in some recent legislation. It is unfortunate that we can't have a rational discussion about this without the ultra partisan BS clouding the issue.
As I said in the article, one of the women leading the push against "CRT" in a section of Tennessee told the CBS interviewer that she doesnt agree with children being shown pictures of police officers being racist. She thinks that would upset the children.
I dont think she has much of a point, but I bet you a lot of the white parents do.
Well, perhaps that can happen when white conservatives actually accept what their ancestors did, stop flying confederate flags and stop trying to protect confederate monuments, recognize that both their lives and those of black Americans are still effected by those actions and announce that they are more than happy to support pro-black American businesses and support programs that attempt to create some equity and not just equality.
You mean what their mostly southern Democrat ancestors did right?
How about we dispense with the political labels, learn and understand the history, vow never to repeat the racial hatred that caused it, and then we can recognize that all our lives and those of black Americans are still effected by those actions and show by OUR actions (not just "announcing" it to show we are "woke") that we are more than happy to support pro-black American businesses and support programs that allow for equity and not just equality. I'm fairly certain that will be better than just talking about it and constantly offering sweeping generalizations blaming others for any change that is not happening, particularly in our major cities.
Like I said, white conservatives. No one with more than half a brain believes the religious conservatives of the South who used to register Democrat now consider themselves part of the modern liberal secular progressive Democratic party. Southern conservatives have never stopped flying confederate flags, protecting confederate monuments, attempting to disenfranchise minority voters or controlling Southern State governments, they just do it under a different party affiliation now. Those who keep pretending that the white conservative Southern Dixiecrats of old somehow left the South and some other white conservative Southerners that look like them, speak like them and act like them moved in are either woefully ignorant and gullible or they're intentionally being obtuse in an effort to hide the truth so they can shirk any culpability.
In a NC appeals court ruling they found the Republican voter ID laws were intentionally designed to discriminate against black people. Republican legislators had requested data on voting patterns by race and, with that data in hand, drafted a law that would "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision," according to the court. This is just more proof that the white Southern conservatives haven't really changed at all, they're just trying to hide behind their new party affiliation while still doing all the same underhanded racist shit they've always done. They clearly show by their "actions" who they still are. Black Americans overwhelmingly vote Democratic because the Democratic party hasn't been "all talk and no walk", they've supported far more minority candidates for office, they support programs to help overcome the roadblocks set in place by conservative bigots of the past, they've torn down confederate flags and confederate monuments off government buildings and public spaces, they've not just spoken out against racism but actually work on laws that help level the playing field and give historically disenfranchised black Americans opportunities and access to better education and job programs.
Many conservatives, on the other hand, have done just about everything they can to wash their hands of any responsibility and ignorantly claim they're being less racist by simply ignoring systemic inequality and pretending there isn't a problem anymore after the civil rights act was passed and are now trying desperately trying to whitewash American history so that white conservatives of the past are only seen in a positive light which is why they are so concerned with anything they label CRT which is really just code for any history or facts that expose they or their ancestors prejudice which might make some of their white conservative children feel a hint of guilt.
were the "Democrats" that you believe were all the cause of racism (which is nonsense, the entirety of the United States was racist in the mid 19th century (and on)) liberal, or were they conservative? Were they "progressive" in outlook , or were they "traditional" ?
You are I think too intelligent to use the silly argument that "Democrats" were the racists of American history.
This seed contains a CBS news documentary about Critical Race Theory. I think that if everyone watched that video some people might have a different opinion on the controversy. Of course everyone didnt watch it, I wouldnt be surprised at all if almost no one who saw this seed watched it. It is 47 minutes long, ok.
Many white conservatives do not want race issues taught in school in a way that claims that white people are responsible for the historic and extremely widespread racism that has always existed in America. They will accept race being mentioned in American history, but only if it minimizes the responsibility of whites.
There are TODAY many many millions of white people who grew up being indoctrinated with racist ideas. I was watching a video recently called "The Negro In The South" . It was a documentary made in 1965. In this film there is a point where we see schoolchildren, black and white, being taught, I believe in Mississippi from a textbook that states that Negro slaves had to be helped (by their owners) to overcome their natural laziness and become civilized. Someone who was 10 years old , let say, in the early 1960's is in their late 60's today, still within the prime of life in most cases. Not to mention their children, who in many cases were also indoctrinated (by their parents) with racist ideas. And those students in 1960 who were being taught that Negro slaves were lazy are now the grandparents in many cases of young children themselves. These ideas are not "ancient history", they are contemporary.
I saw a black parent ask on tv a couple weeks ago
"why doesnt anyone ask black parents what they want their children taught about race in school?" Why do we only care about what the white parents want?
... dream on.
They are almost all dead. While alive they were happily Democrats.
o keep pretending that the white conservative Southern Dixiecrats of old somehow left the South a
They left the earth.
are either woefully ignorant and gullible or they'
The actually woefully ignorant and gullible, or those who need to scare the woefully ignorant and gullible, claim the South is just as racist now as it was in 1960.