Poll: The real reason Republicans are so riled up about 'critical race theory'
Category: News & Politics
Via: tessylo • 3 years ago • 164 commentsBy: Andrew Romano, West Coast Correspondent, Yahoo News
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Poll: The real reason Republicans are so riled up about 'critical race theory'
But a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll suggests that the roiling culture war over so-called CRT isn’t about whether today’s schoolchildren are suddenly probing the complexities of an academic approach to race that originated among legal scholars in the mid-1970s.
Rather, the clash over CRT — aside from whatever the term now connotes in the public imagination — appears to be a supercharged spinoff of a deeper dispute between conservatives and pretty much every other group in the United States.
A protest against critical race theory outside Loudoun County School Board headquarters in Ashburn, Va., on June 22. (Evelyn Hockstein/Reuters)
According to the poll, the right largely believes that racism is personal — the product of one individual discriminating against another. The rest of the country mostly agrees that racism is systemic — a force that continues to harm people of color, regardless of how isolated individuals treat them.
And therein lies the disagreement over what kids should learn in school.
The survey of 1,592 U.S. adults, which was conducted from June 22 to 24, set out to determine how closely the public’s opinion of the term “critical race theory” aligns with a central idea behind it. To do that, Yahoo News and YouGov asked respondents whether they’d “heard of critical race theory” — and followed up with the ones who had heard of it by asking if “critical race theory is something students should be exposed to in school.”
It turns out only about half of Americans (52 percent) are even familiar with the term "critical race theory," according to the poll, and political engagement is likely to account for that exposure. As Time magazine reported in a recent cover story , “conservative advocacy groups, legal organizations and state legislatures” have “mounted a campaign to weaponize” the term because they believe that “fighting it will be a winning electoral message.”
As a result, awareness is much higher among white Americans who identify as conservative (71 percent) or liberal (70 percent) than it is among white moderates (48 percent), African Americans (42 percent) or Latino Americans (39 percent).
A protester in Leesburg, Va., on June 12. (Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images)
Given the sharply polarized, cable-news-driven nature of the current feud, it’s little surprise, then, that the people who say they’re familiar with the term also tend to say they don’t want it in schools. Overall, 49 percent of those who have heard of CRT are against “exposing” students to it; 37 percent favor exposure.
Some groups disagree, of course, including Democrats (by a 76 percent to 9 percent margin), Black Americans (62 percent to 23 percent) and 18- to 29-year-olds (53 percent to 23 percent). But within most demographics, those who’ve heard of CRT — including people 45 or older as well as independents (who oppose exposing students to it by a 55 percent to 29 percent margin) — do not.
The interesting thing is what happens — and, more to the point, what doesn’t happen — when you dissociate one of CRT’s main tenets from the hot-button term.
To do that, Yahoo News and YouGov also asked — before ever mentioning “critical race theory,” so as not to influence the answers — whether respondents agreed or disagreed with the concept that “racism is not merely the product of individual bias or prejudice, but also something embedded in legal systems and policies.” We then asked if that concept is “something students should be exposed to in schools.”
That particular wording, it’s worth noting, wasn’t chosen at random. Here’s how the Florida Department of Education’s new policy prohibiting “the teaching of Critical Race Theory” in public schools — one of dozens of similar measures introduced in Republican-controlled states this spring, and one of at least six that have been enacted — defines the term : “the theory that racism is not merely the product of prejudice, but that racism is embedded in American society and its legal systems.”
Protesters at a packed school board meeting in Ashburn, Va., on June 22, at which two people were detained. (Evelyn Hockstein/Reuters)
So what do Americans think of the idea that Florida just banned, absent the CRT label? A full 54 percent agree with it; just 27 percent disagree. And similar (or larger) margins of agreement show up pretty much across the board, including among 45- to 64-year-olds (53 percent to 31 percent), white Americans (49 percent to 34 percent), Americans making less than $50,000 a year (52 percent to 31 percent) and independents (50 percent to 28 percent).
In fact, a majority or plurality of every single group surveyed by Yahoo News and YouGov agrees that “racism is not merely the product of individual bias or prejudice, but also something embedded in legal systems and policies.”
Except one: Republicans. By a more than 2-to-1 margin — 57 percent to 27 percent — they disagree that racism is systemic and embedded in the United States. And those who voted for Donald Trump in 2020 are even more likely to disagree (65 percent to 20 percent).
The dynamics around exposing students to the idea of systemic racism are the same. A plurality of Americans — 47 percent yes, 31 percent no, 22 percent unsure — say students should be exposed. Independents — who opposed teaching “critical race theory” by 26 points — favor teaching the existence of systemic racism by 12 points. Nearly every other group agrees by similar or larger margins.
But there remains one clear outlier: Republicans, who oppose student exposure by a three-to-one margin (60 percent to 19 percent). Again, Trump voters are even more vehemently opposed (67 percent to 14 percent).
Protesters against the teaching of critical race theory in schools confront a counterprotester at the Leesburg rally. (Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images)
The gap between Republicans and everyone else on this issue appears to be widening. Last June, in the wake of George Floyd’s murder, Yahoo News and YouGov asked Americans if there was “a problem with systemic racism in America.” Nearly two-thirds (63 percent) said yes; just a quarter said no. Strikingly, the share of Republicans who considered systemic racism a problem at the time (39 percent) wasn’t much smaller than the share who didn’t (45 percent).
One year later, however, that’s no longer the case. Today, just 27 percent of Republicans say there’s a problem with systemic racism in the United States, while a full 59 percent say there isn’t — a net shift of 26 points.
The upshot is clear. Teaching about the United States’ “history of racism” is fine with 53 percent of Republicans, according to the poll; teaching about its “history of slavery” is OK with even more of them (84 percent).
But teaching that racism is still embedded in U.S. legal systems and policies even today — and that all Americans are part of that system, regardless of how they treat others — is not.
This represents a more fundamental divide than what critical race theory is or isn’t, and who is or isn’t teaching it — and one less likely to fade after a few overheated news cycles.
___________
The Yahoo News survey was conducted by YouGov using a nationally representative sample of 1,592 U.S. adults interviewed online from June 22 to 24, 2021. This sample was weighted according to gender, age, race and education based on the American Community Survey, conducted by the U.S. Bureau of the Census, as well as 2020 presidential vote (or non-vote), and voter registration status. Respondents were selected from YouGov’s opt-in panel to be representative of all U.S. adults. The margin of error is 2.7 percent.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
102 visitors
But a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll suggests that the roiling culture war over so-called CRT isn’t about whether today’s schoolchildren are suddenly probing the complexities of an academic approach to race that originated among legal scholars in the mid-1970s.
Rather, the clash over CRT — aside from whatever the term now connotes in the public imagination — appears to be a supercharged spinoff of a deeper dispute between conservatives and pretty much every other group in the United States.
it's their new theme for synchronized goose-stepping...
According to the poll, the right largely believes that racism is personal — the product of one individual discriminating against another. The rest of the country mostly agrees that racism is systemic — a force that continues to harm people of color, regardless of how isolated individuals treat them.
This sounds quite familiar. Someone posted this comment - practically word for word - in a seed the other day. Hmmmmmm
Somebody knows how to copy and paste their daily talking points that come down from the top
“the theory that racism is not merely the product of prejudice, but that racism is embedded in American society and its legal systems.”
That's total fiction, a pack of lies, unsupported by any evidence.
Teach STEM, not CRT. Teach CRITICAL THINKING, not RACIST PROPAGANDA
Lol and then you demand that critical thinking be prioritized after a fantastic display of how to not think critically.
So the 3/5s compromise wasn’t a thing? Slavery never existed? Jim Crow is all made up? Segregation was just bullshit propaganda? Arrest and sentencing data are totally fabricated numbers? See Greg, ALL of that is systemic racism because it is racism that was baked into the system and in all but one of the examples I listed (the outlier is a direct product of the others) were actual laws based upon race and enforced by governing authorities in many areas of the US for a loooong time. That is the very definition of systemic racism.
And that shit, and the consequences, don’t just disappear over night. And especially not by pretending they never happened.
It’s actually easy to see if you’re willing to look. E.g. We have a relatively small number of police events that look like, and are, murder of minorities. Now they may be caught on video, and that makes them more difficult to cover up. Police are not soldiers, they are not the adversaries of the people they protect. In fact, they need the trust and cooperation of the community to be really effective. Racist police destroy that trust. I would bet that the overwhelming majority of police are not racists and would love to see the small number who are eliminated; it would be better for the community, and make their jobs much easier. But, the system is set up such that any attempt to remove one of these racists is fraught with peril for any who would attempt that. That protection for those who should lose their jobs is systemic racism. The system is facilitating racism.
Supposedly racism ended in 1964 when the Civil Rights Act was signed into law.
Or this is the conservatives story and they are sticking to it.
We are supposed to believe that 300+ years (more if you go back to Columbus) of constant and extremely widespread racism ended in one day, or even in one decade.
Imagine a man who in 1964 owns a small store or restaurant in a southern city, he is a stone racist who uses the n word frequently and does not serve blacks in his business. Maybe he attends local concerned citizens meetings where the attendees plot how to keep the local Negroes from getting too uppity.
Imagine he has a ten year old son and an eight year old daughter, and a wife who completely shares his view on race and they pass their bigotry on to their children, with ease.
Someone who was 8 years old in 1964 is 65 years old today, most likely with their own children and grandchildren.
Some want us to believe that racism has been removed from our society and institutions over the time period of just two or three generations. It is absurd.
Your thinking is absurd. Your sweeping generalizations and vague opinions are not supported by hard and credible facts.
I personally know a couple dozen racists. Some of them use the word nigger and ridicule blacks on a fairly regular basis. Worse, some of them are cops and firemen.
If I, a regular person living in an average American city know that many, they are widespread. Any denial of this fact is ridiculous.
It isn’t absurd at all, children often adopt a lot of positions and lines of thinking of their parents. It stands to reason that the children of an avid racist will likely harbor some racist or prejudicial views.
Of course those can be broken with a little education and basic critical thinking skills, but it is moronic to think that children develop in a vacuum and are not influenced by their parents.
Greg, You Tube has numerous videos of white people calling the police because they saw a 'suspicious' looking black person walking down the street or standing in front of their apartment building. Often the police come and the innocent black person is hassled.
I call that a product of systemic racism. Do you?
Some of us have worked very hard to remove that from our lives and grow our own children to be accepting of people as people. I will admit it was difficult to overcome those views (more so for my hubby), but it is something we work on even today.
A perfect example. Awesome of you and your husband to actively work to be better. As I said, that shit can be broken, but it takes an open mind and willingness to admit you are wrong. 2 things many seem to be unable or willing to do.
But yeah, where did you/your husband learn whatever views it was that you held? I doubt you developed them on your own.
We grew up in a very small farming community in the Southern Tier of NY. Potato & dairy farm country. Both of our parents were very racist (my mother still is - my father & both of hubby's parents have passed - all racist until the end). Every fall the migrant workers would arrive for the potato harvest. Their children would ride our bus. Every morning my mother would tell me "don't sit with them - who knows what bugs & stuff they have". I always felt it was awful. Especially as a born & raised (no longer) Catholic. I always felt it went against everything Jesus taught us.
When I went away for college I was exposed to so many different types of people. POC, gays (at that time that was the only word), different religious beliefs. It opened my eyes dramatically. I found that I was comfortable with more than "just my kind". Hubby & I got together in high school & when I started to grow as a person - he came along for the ride. We became happier without all the hate.
I told him when I was pregnant with our daughter I did not want to raise her in a bigoted home & he agreed. So we tried to limit the exposure of both our children to that side of our families. When they did hear something racist we talked it over with them. I was never one to gloss over the truth with my kids - be it about sex, birth control, racism, homophobia, or the true history of our country. I think they turned out rather well.
~steps off my soapbox~
It can be broken but it takes a lot of work. It takes actually moving into a society that is diverse and culturally rich. I broke the chain of Yankee racism when I joined the Air Force. My first superintendent was a black man. This was the man who would shape my career over the next couple of years. Then there were all the other people in the clinic that I came into contact daily. We bonded over cigarettes and beers.
My husband is still working thru his own issues but together we didn't pass that shit on to our kids.
Same here. I was raised to believe in the Golden Rule. I raised my children and grandchildren to believe the same. I spent 20 years in the military, many of them overseas. I was fortunate to have my family with me. My wife and I raised out children to be respectful of other people and other cultures and made sure it carried over when we returned stateside.
That is what it takes to create a community where everyone can live. There will always be the ones that shit all over it, but I believe we have to commit to those teachings. The Golden Rule is an awesome feature to teach children values and shape morals.
Agreed.
Sadly, the Golden Rule in generally forgotten and/or considered a outdated and archaic concept. The idea of do unto others as you would have them do unto you has been replaced for many by do unto others before they do unto you. Very sad I think.
It is very sad indeed.
Who ever claimed that? Can you point me to the person who claimed that America, a country of 330 plus million individuals, became the first society in the history of the world to not have a single racist person?
IS that the new standard? Until the impossible is achieved and not a single racist person exists, progressives are justified in discriminating against white people? Past discrimination justifies future discrimination, right?
who discriminates against white people?
White grievance is nothing short of astonishing. I know someone , a white person, who is a multimillionaire. He is approaching 70 and has enough money to do just about anything he and his wife want for the rest of their lives. I have heard him complain about blacks for YEARS and it continues to this day. Blacks take advantage, they are dumb, they are lazy. And of course they are habitual criminals.
These are common sentiments among the white grievers , not outliers.
Some of us are tired of hearing this shit all our lives.
Universities, state and local governments etc...There's literally a whole system designed to do it.
e is approaching 70 and has enough money to do just about anything he and his wife wa
No one I know denies that some people are racist. There always will be racist people. And as long the government engages in racial discrimination, it will piss people off and divide the country more than need be.
But race relations were steadily improving up until about 10 years ago, when the left went full bore into racial identity politics. They've weaponized and deluded half the country into believing utter nonsense, like that cops shoot thousands of innocent black people every year. You need go no further than this website but to see people argue that cops kills innocent black people every day. It's utterly batshit crazy, but that's the sort of nonsense that's been drilled into progressive's heads.
We have to have a racial "reckoning" where the society admits that non whites have been discriminated against for hundreds of years, and yes, America has been a racist nation. This is not even disputable but so many to this day want to dispute it. How can we "overcome" this national attitude?
It would have been nice if that was accomplished at emancipation in 1865, but in many ways things only got worse and continued for another 100 years. That is astonishing in itself.
Now we have whites who have the gall to claim that they are the real victims.
They should just stop.
[Deleted]
Queen? C'mon you can do better than that..
Tell us again how cops kill innocent black people every day though.
It's true despite your projection, deflection(s), and denial(s).
Kind like my dad when he starts whining about illegals. I just flat out told him to stop his bitching, he has done very well for himself and has nothing to complain about. Illegals haven’t had any negative effect on his life whatsoever, he is just whining just to whine. I swear he would complain about the rope used to ha g him.
So if a University that has 1000 spots for the next school year sets aside 100 for non-white students, that is somehow "discriminating against white people"? 90% of the admissions are still going to white kids, how is it discriminatory to make sure there is diversity in the school? Should we listen to the bigots who claim there should be no affirmative action and the spots should be given based on 'face value'? Of course they believe their 'faces' are more valuable because they're white. What we've had since before our founding is white affirmative action, now we still have the vestiges of that system, it's just unspoken white affirmative action.
You say that after admitting that we're always going to have racist people, so what you're really saying is you don't want to piss off the racists because if we do that will divide our nation. What a crock of shit. I don't give a flying fuck about bigots and white supremacists feelings and they need to feel uncomfortable because this nation is not "theirs" to manipulate the way they want any longer. They can go fuck themselves, they should get in the nearest boat and fuck off. We cannot continue to tolerate and placate intolerance.
I have no problems with white people, I'm white and have no feeling of guilt for being white, it just happens to be my skin color, it is not a heritage I am desperate to preserve. America is diverse and that means white people are just as welcome as anyone else, and going out of our way to make a place in society for non-white citizens to feel included is not at all infringing on my space or my rights or discriminating against me or my children. But there should be no space for white supremacists or any other kind of supremacist who is working to exclude and diminish others they feel are somehow inferior, either based on the color of their skin, their gender identity, sexual orientation, different faith or possible lack of faith.
Those who continue to desire some white theocratic utopia with white Christian males controlling everything and weeding out the supposed "undesirables" should get the fuck out of our country, this is not a place for them. The same is for those who wish to enforce some form of white fascism, or even some Russian or Chinese communism, pure capitalism or total Marxist socialism. None of those forms of government are desired here in America even though we are a melting pot of people from all over the world and our constitutional Republic is a melting pot of the best parts of democracy and capitalism tempered with the best parts of socialism.
There had been some improvements over the last few decades, really up until President Obama was elected, then we saw the ugly head of white supremacist rise up with an 800% increase in white supremacist militia groups, the overtly white Christian led tea party movement, all the white supremacist bigots who had just been getting comfortable not talking about black people and not having to hear about any racial tension, who thought black people had finally just sat down and shut up, were awoken to a black President and they gnashed their teeth and bared their teeth at the audacity of a liberal progressive America that would dare elect a black man as President.
Since then the mostly silent hidden white supremacy has come back to the surface with a vengeance and we've seen them coalesce and grow within the conservative movement, support Republicans and support Donald Trump who empowered them with constant messages of racial hate, speaking in the language they agreed with most, calling Mexicans rapists, calling African countries 'shitholes', calling majority black cities 'rat infested', calling the Nazi's and white supremacists who marched in defense of a confederate statue 'fine people' while also defending the statue himself. THAT is what has caused the racial divisions to erupt in this country, not the black Americans standing up for their rights, not black Americans being outraged at the continual killing of unarmed black men by police, not the progressives and liberals supporting those civil rights movements and calling for an end to systemic inequality in our justice system and in society.
What is utterly batshit crazy is the warped right wing conservative nonsense drilled into often already bigoted white conservative minds through right wing media like Fox News or even the Russian propaganda outlets like RT. That shit is fucking insane and doesn't represent reality, it lives in it's own alternative punch bowl, and that punchbowl is full of floating shitbergs of disinformation, misinformation or outright lies. It's why virtually every Qanon theorist sides with conservative ideology, support Republicans and believe the lies that progressives, liberals and Democrats are somehow eating babies or might be alien lizard people controlling the fantasy 'deep state' while poisoning our water with mind controlling fluoride. They are batshit crazy and fit right in with their fellow right wing conservatives.
Totally awesome!!!!!
I wish I could vote this up 100 times
As always DP HITS IT OUT OF THE PARK!
I admire and respect your ability to say what I cannot seem to formulate so often and you do it so well!
AWESOME!
THE PROJECTION, DEFLECTION, AND DENIAL SQUAD HAS HAD THEIR ASSES HANDED TO THEM ONCE AGAIN.
BRAVO!
Yes of course. This is basic stuff. There aren't infinite seats and when seats are reserved for particular races, it's textbook racism.
This isn't even debatable. When these cases get argued at the Supreme court, it's a given the programs discriminate on the basis of race, the only issue is whether the discrimination is justified.
I can't believe someone in 2021 makes an argument that informed liberals stopped making in the 70s...
at you're really saying is you don't want to piss off the racists because if we do that will divide our natio
LOL. What an imagination you have. I'm saying racial discrimination is always wrong and continuing to discriminate on the basis of race causes problems.
The rest of your screed is liberal fan fiction where you just project all sorts of nonsense onto a strawman of your creation because you can't past your simplistic stereotypes of those who disagree with you.
til President Obama was elected, then we saw the
Barack Obama started with more support and a more unified country than any President since Kennedy. Those are facts. Then the Democratic party took up racial identify politics and Obama refused to speak up when fake narratives like Ferguson took over the left's fevered mindset.
rt Republicans and believe the lies t
Yow spew all that hate and you couldn't even address why more than half the Democrats falsely believe thousands of innocent blacks are killed by police every year. YOu believe so much fake shit, and you can't even stop and wonder why. Just continue with hate hate and more hate. Sad to see.
ll again just how law enforcement officers are continually exempt from being held accountable for their actionsus
Okay, show me the thousands of cops who murder black people each year and aren't held accountable for it.
Id' love to see you try.
It's true Sean. Your projection, deflection, and denial notwithstanding.
The alleged concerned parents regarding teaching CRT are nothing but a [deleted]
I fall in with the independent group. Definitely teach about the history of racism in America and it’s economic and social impacts, but leave CRT for the university level.
CRT itself is definitely not something that k-12 students are equipped to discuss and really understand what it is that they are talking about.
And goddamnit everyone, stop taking this thing so personally.
I agree. I believe we should start teaching our children the truth and stop teaching them fairy tales about Columbus, slavery, Native Americans. It saddens me that so many children still believe Columbus discovered America & was a good guy, that slaves were "given" homes & food for their labors, and that Native Americans were grateful for the reservation lands they were "given".
But it is personal if you are a racist.
I'm not aware of any public school system where CRT is taught. Is that even a thing? I'd thought it was taught in law school.
It's not taught in schools. It's not a thing. It's an astroturf (teabagging) movement from the gqp.
And if one cares to read, looks like the whole of CMS
All that article shows, in terms of Critical Race Theory, is that the high school in the story doesnt teach it.
If you want to complain about Social Justice lessons in schools, then do that. Don't misuse terms.
[deleted]
So you see, I didn't misuse any terms. [deleted]
Just because someone says this falls under CRT, doesn't make it so!
What I saw in his link was a local AM talk show radio website that has posted the school's newsletter in an attempt to rile up the locals.
Ah...I would question the veracity of that radio station. We have one here in Little Rock that disseminates false information and stretches the truth like a Gumby doll. These local AM talk radio stations are about riling up the locals and getting them to swallow the bait...and to sell insurance
Notice the word phrase...hot button. Designed to anger the peasants
, in terms of Critical Race Theory, is that the high school in the story doesnt teach it
So the concept of white privilege is, in your world, completely divorced from CRT?
The "founder" of CRT claims it "cannot be confined to a static and narrow definition but is considered to be an evolving and malleable practice" yet it's new found defenders seem to think it's still "Critical legal theory" and only "Critical legal theory" and hasn't changed or spread to other fields since it emerged as critical legal theory in the 70s.
It's amazing the lengths it's supposed defenders will go to deny it's existence. Anything to deflect from the actual substance that's it's critics object to I suppose.
Just because you say it doesn't fall under CRT doesn't make THAT so either.
many of which fall under the hot-button issue known as Critical Race Theory (CRT),
that is an opinion from the article writer, not a fact.
I posted a seed yesterday where a conservative activist group in Texas describes any mention of social justice as "critical race theory" . That is not accurate. "Critical Race Theory" is now a boogie man for conservatives to try and use as a catch-all.
Sean, you are smart enough to know that the right is using CRT as a catch all boogie man and whipping boy for their grievances, so why not just admit it?
Indeed.
Even the headline of the story says "CMS TEACHERS are concerned......"
If the teachers are concerned you can bet your bottom dollar that the parents would be.
This is text from a North Carolina anti-CRT in schools law. You didn't answer this yesterday, but which provision do you object to?
Students can't be taught:
(1) One race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex.
(2) An individual, solely by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously.
(3) An individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex.
(4) An individual’s moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex.
(5) An individual, solely by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex.
(6) Any individual, solely by virtue of his or her race or sex, should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress. […]
Put aside the label dodge and explain why kids should be taught any of this stuff.
How do you know they are? Like I said, it's a local radio talk show. They are known for being one-sided. What was it you said about trust then verify in another comment?
"What I saw in his link was a local AM talk show radio website that has posted the school's newsletter in an attempt to rile up the locals."
"Ah...I would question the veracity of that radio station. We have one here in Little Rock that disseminates false information and stretches the truth like a Gumby doll. These local AM talk radio stations are about riling up the locals and getting them to swallow the bait...and to sell insurance
Notice the word phrase...hot button. Designed to anger the peasants"
Exactly right TG. We see it for what it is.
The article gives very good examples of why many teachers are concerned about the material being taught.
It is always good to read beyond a headline.
My wife teaches in the CMS system.....................therefore......I have my own sources
"Even the headline of the story says "CMS TEACHERS are concerned......"
If the teachers are concerned you can bet your bottom dollar that the parents would be."
All made up by this hack a.m. radio station.
Who listens to a.m. radio anymore?
I doubt you do, you had to search far and wide to find your biased hit piece about CRT which IS NOT BEING TAUGHT ANYWHERE
So the definition from the Britannica explains it all!!!!!!!!!!
well well..... thanks for the heads up TG
WBT Charlotte's News Talk
WBT Charlotte's News Talk . On Air. Mark Levin 7:00pm - 10:00pm. Ben Shaprio 10:00pm - 12:00am. michaelknowless how12:00am - 1:00am. View Full Schedule. The Return of WBT 's Skyshow Charlotte 2021. The Bo Thompson Morning Show.
This is a right wing talk radio station. The linked article from Just Jim article is an editorial, not a factual report.
They're not being taught 'any of this stuff'
Is it because they are not equipped to handle "hot-button" issues such as LGBTQ, racism, sexism, etc,? They want math, science, and English teachers to engage the classroom once a week. They are not social studies teachers or counselors. I can seen them being concerned because it's not their area of expertise
That very one sided article is not the topic of this seed.
No more comments on JJ's article.
I know what goes on in local talk radio these days. There are no liberals out there doing talk radio any more
Because no one would listen to a left wing radio station. And therefore they couldn't get any sponsors. Closest thing is NPR.
Always shooting the messenger FFS.
GOOD POINT!!!!
and I apologize for doing going down the rabbit hole with Jim
John is right about it being an editorial not an actual news piece
Not anything I read in the article. Did you read it? Where did you get this idea?
You want me to condemn teachings that I dont even know exist.
The fact that Republicans passed a law preventing something is not remotely proof that it exists.
You already set the precedent on that one by commenting on it and cannot order anyone to not comment on it nor have the comment marked as a violation. CRT is the topic of your seeded article.
Of this editorial/opinion 'piece' which is all LIES.
I have complaints about this being off topic, so I need to know what is CMS, before I make a decision.
Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools
And if I am correct, anyone who responded cannot flag it as off topic.
Yes, I did read it. I speculated (maybe I was wrong?) but have you ever had a substitute teacher in school who studied basketball but is now put in charge of your trigonometry class? Awkward for them and you, isn't it.
That's where I get the idea. Take a math teacher who teaches algebra, geometry, trig, and calculus nearly every day but that one day a week he/she is required to engage the class in a social issues discussion. Where do they start? How do they keep the students engaged? They know how to do that with their algebra lesson but this is something entirely different? Where would you start, if you're a home ec teacher by trade?
So you tell others that they can't comment on the article but you keep doing it.
Too funny.
That is the thing, it isn’t and it shouldn’t be. As I have said many times, you will not encounter it in anything short of a 300 or 400 level college course and that’s the way it should be.
I read the entire article you linked to. There is nothing in there that would amount to proof or even reasonable evidence that the school is teaching critical race theory.
The truth is the article is a hit piece /editorial that comes from a right wing talk radio site.
Too true!
(1) Not CRT
(2) Not CRT
CRT does not teach either. However, when you look at various per capita outcomes by race, it is obvious that this is happening. CRT posits that systemic racism is a [non-exclusive] cause.
(4) Not CRT.
(5) Not CRT
(6) Not CRT.
So, most of the 'anti-CRT law' is concerned with stuff that's not CRT, and not being taught. (3) is not taught by CRT, but outcomes by race are unequal. Is this truth too much to hear? Seems like this 'law' is just to keep the ignorant riled.
Irrelevant. CRT simply says that the playing field is not equal -- this does not preclude success, just makes it harder for some.
Once again you're using a meme that doesn't allow any of these men to speak for themselves as to the systemic racism they've had to deal with to get where they are. You're putting words in their mouths as dishonest bigots often do. Just because one can suffer through discrimination and become a police officer or an attorney doesn't mean the discrimination doesn't exist and we can all just ignore the millions of black Americans that attest to the fact that they do live under the knee of oppression daily and experience the systemic racism regularly. Color may not define your future, but it certainly has a lot to do with the available opportunities, the blatant prejudices and assumptions some make of you and the scrutiny you'll have to deal with as you're trying to make good choices.
If you've ever tried to shoot a basketball to win a prize at a carnival, it's not impossible to make it, but the odds are stacked against you. The rim is often tilted slightly and smaller than a regulation rim and farther up and back than a normal free throw. You've made free throws all day on a regular court and a regular rim, but for some frustrating reason you just can't seem to win the prize at the carnival, but that's because it is designed to make it as hard as possible for you to win the prize.
In America the system is set up with a standard rim for white Americans but it's the carnival rim for black Americans, and while some can overcome the obstacles and still hit a shot, the number who can make it are far more limited in our society because of the challenges and obstacles that have been put in place in our laws and society that make it exponentially more difficult for black Americans to succeed at the same rates as the white Americans the system was built for.
Now, you can't blame the white Americans who make their free throw and succeed, they're playing the game as it was designed for them. But for those Americans to point and laugh at the black Americans who are struggling to make the shot while blindly ignoring the the systemic differences and just saying that the outcomes must be black Americans fault for not being able to succeed at the same rates is beyond ignorant. To try and claim everything is already equal and it's just the choices made that are the difference is to stupidly ignore the facts and is often rooted in the prejudices that were passed on to them from their parents and peers who were often the ones who set up the carnival hoop for black Americans in the first place.
Another one of your meaningless memes.
Ho hum
Once again DP, Bravo
Anymore comments on JJ's very one sided and biased reference are OFF TOPIC.
Can't do it. You already commented on it and therefore it cannot be labeled as off topic. sandy-lotsanumbers clarified that for me the other day.
I'm tired of you and the others derailing it with your the opinion piece you posted which is essentially nothing but lies.
Critical Race Theory, in its academic form, involves analysis of racial biases in laws, regulations, and legal interpretations of those laws and regulations by the courts. What everyone overlooks is that affirmative action deliberately incorporated racial biases into codified law. The courts are required to apply those racial biases when interpreting laws and regulations concerning affirmative action and, to some extent, civil rights. Hate crime laws deliberately incorporate racial biases into codified law.
What has not been clearly addressed in discussion of CRT is the purpose of the academic theory. Is the purpose of CRT to remove racial biases from codified laws and regulations - or - is the purpose of CRT to protect racial biases deliberately incorporated into codified laws and regulations? Is CRT attempting to end affirmative action or protect affirmative action?
CRT, as a pop-culture phenomena, has extended the narrow academic scope to a broader, more amorphous critique well beyond institutional laws and regulations. The pop-culture form of CRT promotes political theories and has been appropriated by social activists for political purposes. The academic scrutiny of institutional biases has become a political theory of systemic racism in pop-culture. The purely academic form of CRT doesn't address systemic racism and it's unclear if the purpose of academic CRT is to remove or protect racial biases incorporated into institutions.
As the polling indicates, teaching raw history isn't controversial. The controversy is over using history to teach moral dictums and shape moral attitudes. Using history in that manner is the same as religious training. Teaching the morality of history requires an established body of moral dictums and doctrine that is understood by teachers. Using history to make moral judgements and shape moral attitudes requires teachers to be versed in the body of moral dictums and doctrine. Teachers can't subjectively create the moral lessons they are teaching; that would be nothing more than cult indoctrination.
Another point being overlooked is that the conflict over CRT is not between the Black population and the white population. The white population isn't fighting the Black population; the white population is fighting with itself over the Black population. The controversy over CRT is strictly within the white population; the Black population is an objectified part of the controversy. The teaching of raw history is not controversial, as the polling indicates. Both sides of the controversy within the white population accepts that racism exists, as the polling indicates. The controversy within the white population is over teaching moral dictums and moral attitudes which is very much like religious training. This type of conflict within the white population is not new. The same conflict flares repeatedly between protestant beliefs and Catholic beliefs. The controversy over CRT within the white population is very similar to the recurring conflict between protestant religious training and Catholic religious training.
Repeating your nonsense over and over again, is still nonsense.
Some are claiming that CRT is not being taught in schools. That is flatly false.
CRT is being taught as a college-level academic subject. But we've seen how college-level subjects migrate down to primary levels of public education. Colleges train teachers and teachers train primary students.
A primary teacher that has been taught critical race theory will bring CRT into the primary classroom and CRT will influence how they teach primary students. That was the purpose for teaching the primary teacher critical race theory.
"Some are claiming that CRT is not being taught in schools. That is flatly false."
That's flatly TRUE
It's not being taught in K-12.
Portions of critical race theory are being incorporated into primary history education the same way that portions of the theory of evolution have been incorporated into primary science education. That only illustrates how college level academics migrates down to primary education; the merits of the academic theories are not relevant to the example of college-level academics migrating down to primary education.
But primary and high school teachers must produce a lesson plan that is in accordance with the school board's decisions. If CRT is not part of the decisions then it won't be in the lesson plans and teachers get censored when they introduce things in the classroom that are not part of their plans.
links? sources? proof?
Haven't you been following the news?
No, there isn't a primary course entitled 'critical race theory'. But there isn't a primary course entitled 'theory of evolution', either.
If primary history education includes scrutiny of institutional racial biases incorporated into the laws and legal rulings then portions of Critical Race Theory are being taught. If the Dred Scott decision is being taught as an example of institutional racial bias or as an example of systemic racism then portions of Critical Race Theory have been included into primary history education.
Well, then it sounds like a good thing if students are being taught about the Dred Scott decision and about systemic racism
Have you - I mean other than [deleted]
But there is a danger in teaching that history based on the thesis of critical race theory. If that history is taught within the context of pop-culture critical race theory then the lesson learned may be that civil rights requires civil war and violent conflict.
The Civil War was not a war of the white population fighting the Black population. The white population was fighting itself over the Black population but was not fighting against the Black population. The Black population was not an enemy to be defeated. And the Black population was not an ally to be befriended, either. There wasn't an expectation that the Black population would fight on either side of the conflict.
The white population has not fought a war with the Black population throughout colonial and US history. If antebellum history is taught within the context of institutional or systemic racism, there is a danger that the Black population could become an enemy to be defeated.
No it isn’t. Teaching about racism in America is not CRT.
What a stupid thing to say. The ToE is included in all biological science education because it is central to every biological science making sense. Kinda like how addition is included in math, can’t really have math that makes any sense without it.
CRT is not even remotely comparable to the ToE for a couple reasons, what I stated above and of course it exists within the hard sciences, not the soft sciences. It is not taught in k-12, hell parts of it aren’t even really taught unless you consider covering basic material to be CRT influence.
CRT is based on White Supremacy and White Privilege which is being taught in K-12 education. Maybe a version of CRT but it's roots come from that theory.
Elementary School Kids Taught That “Objectivity” and “Perfectionism” Are Racist Traits of “White Supremacy” – Summit News
Elite K-8 school teaches white students they’re born racist (nypost.com)
But it's not being taught in schools anywhere............../s
The author of the first article you posted is someone named Paul Joseph Watson, a notorious conspiracy nut and a longtime sidekick to Alex Jones of Infowars. Watson has hosted Infowars numerous times in Jones' absence.
You people are giving me a headache.
Feel free to prove it wrong.
It isn't!
It's bullshit. So need to prove anything.
I'm not touching it, the sewage might rub off on me.
Just say you can't.
You should not be posting something by Paul Joseph Watson , who has no credibility at all, but thats your choice.
Again, feel free to write something substantial to prove it wrong.
Paul Joseph Watson (born 24 May 1982) [1] is a British right-wing YouTuber , radio host, writer and conspiracy theorist whose views have often been qualified as anti-feminist and politically extremist . [4] [5] [6] [7] Up until July 2016, Watson concurred with his alt-right label, but has since dropped the label and now self-identifies as being part of the new right . [8] Despite the change, he is still understood to be a far-right individual by multiple sources. [7] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] In May 2019, Facebook and Instagram permanently banned Watson for violation of hate speech policies. [14] [15]
Watson's career emerged through his work for conspiracy theorist and radio host Alex Jones . As editor-at-large of Jones' website InfoWars , he helped promote fake news [16] and advocated for 9/11 , chemtrail and New World Order conspiracy theories.
And THAT is your opinion.....................
Not gonna waste my breath, particularly since there is nothing in there related to CRT. You do know the material referenced in that article is 20 years old dont you?
So what do you feel is misinformation, lie, or bias in the article?
Prove him wrong. If he is a nut, it should be easy for you.
Actually, I know a conspiracy nut when I see one. If you support Paul Joseph Watson you are supporting disinformation.
He's already proven him and you wrong. You repeating that nonsense over and over again, is tiresome.
The New York Post?
I can see why Sunshine likes him
Where?
Again, your opinion.
[deleted]
Oh my goodness, Sunshine. Didn't John already do that? I see no point in covering ground that's been covered.
So...what do you say about continuing our discussion here
Geez Trout, it is a very simple and an easy question. No reason to deflect to something else.
Where did he prove the article in my link is wrong?
You believe numerous conspiracies yourself, so obviously you dont think Watson being a conspiracy nut disqualifies his credibility. I disagree.
As I said, in the article it is revealed that the material being discussed by Watson is 20 years old. So what does that have to do with CRT in 2021?
That is a discussion you had with John. I made one little comment that you apparently took exception to. So you don't like Paul Joseph Watson? Then why post a link to something that belongs to him?
As it is...you ran away from the discussion we were having earlier. I was trying to re-direct your attention back to it. But if you don't want to discuss that, let's not discuss anything else in this seed. Agreed?
Pretty big assumption on your part Mr. Russell. I don't do conspiracy theories unless there is possible reason to do so. You know like spreading the "theory" that 1-6 was partially an inside job. And I never heard of this guy till today and I don't partake in conspiracy theories as a general rule. I have much better things to do than listen to a bunch of BS from some pundit.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
What disinformation are you referring to?
This is the entirety of Watson's "argument".
What on that list represents critical race theory? Be as specific as you can. Honestly, I have never seen a single one of those items mentioned as part of CRT.
You know CRT is based in White Supremacy. Quite being obtuse.
Versions of CRT is being taught in K-12 education regardless of your opinion that it isn't.
So your argument is that if a classroom mentions white supremacy they are engaging in critical race theory?
What do you think has been going on in this country for 500 years if not white supremacy? You actually think that no class room should use discussion of white supremacy in their social studies reading material?
That is ridiculous.
White supremacy is also democratic majority rule. The white population has been and continues to be the democratic majority. The Black population isn't even the majority of Democratic Party voters; the majority of Democratic voters are still white.
The Black population has been and will continue to be in the democratic minority. That's the way democracy works. As long as the white population remains the majority overall and the majority of each party's voters then the white population will retain democratic supremacy.
[removed]
Once again, I'll remind you that I'm not the topic of discussion.
Sorry, when people say nice things about white supremacy I tend to get that way.
No, it isn't
That one page is your entire argument Sunshine? What's to dispute?
How utterly ridiculous!
Nothing in the article actually proved that "K-8 teaches white kids are born racist". I read the whole article, nothing in it even comes close to making that case other than an anonymous parents opinion that said “One hundred percent of the curriculum is what whites have done to other races,”.
Most of the complaints seem to be that non-white children are getting "special" treatment, places they can go to “share experiences about being a kid of color,”, while white kids "are herded into separate classrooms and taught to raise their “awareness of the prevalence of Whiteness and privilege,”. Of course, the non-white kids are just being allowed to use a "separate classroom" just like the white kids, but the authors negative inference is obvious as he claims the white kids are "herded" like animals which of course is pure dumb fuck bigot projection as is their opinion that what they're learning is somehow negative instead of simply to be "aware" of what white privilege is and its effects on society.
They further create a sense of victimhood when they claim " the “kids of color” come back to the main classroom munching on cupcakes they were given in their “affinity group.”
Oh, now its time to get upset about the unfairness of segregation when it's the non-white kids getting cupcakes sometimes but the four hundred years of whites eating the cupcakes and rubbing poverty stricken black communities noses in it should be glossed over so that the white ancestors and heritage can be celebrated and the ugly side of slavery, segregation, Jim crow laws and the continued legacy of racism should be covered up and ignored. Now we need to focus on the unfairness of non-white kids getting cupcakes! Oh the fucking humanity!...
Then the author says the teacher " cited the GI Bill as proof of “white privilege,” claiming the popular post-World War II legislation only benefited white soldiers and their heirs, when in fact, black enrollment in colleges exploded under the GI Bill."
The facts of course, are that the GI bill did exclude black Americans greatly. Just because there was a jump in college enrollments does not mean that it wasn't. Only a dumb fuck bigot trying to obfuscate the truth would focus on that single metric.
" While the GI Bill’s language did not specifically exclude African-American veterans from its benefits, it was structured in a way that ultimately shut doors for the 1.2 million Black veterans who had bravely served their country during World War II, in segregated ranks"
From the start, Black veterans had trouble securing the GI Bill’s benefits. Some could not access benefits because they had not been given an honorable discharge—and a much larger number of Black veterans were discharged dishonorably than their white counterparts .
Veterans who did qualify could not find facilities that delivered on the bill’s promise. Black veterans in a vocational training program at a segregated high school in Indianapolis were unable to participate in activities related to plumbing, electricity and printing because adequate equipment was only available to white students.
Simple intimidation kept others from enjoying GI Bill benefits. In 1947, for example, a crowd hurled rocks at Black veterans as they moved into a Chicago housing development. Thousands of Black veterans were attacked in the years following World War II and some were singled out and lynched.
Southern postmasters were even accused of refusing to deliver the forms Black veterans needed to fill out to receive their unemployment benefits.
As the years went on, white veterans flowed into newly created suburbs, where they began amassing wealth in skilled positions. But Black veterans lacked those options. The majority of skilled jobs were given to white workers.
Though the GI Bill guaranteed low-interest mortgages and other loans, they were not administered by the VA itself. Thus, the VA could cosign, but not actually guarantee the loans. This gave white-run financial institutions free reign to refuse mortgages and loans to Black people.
Redlining —a decades-old practice of marking maps by race to characterize the risks of lending money and providing insurance—made purchasing a home even more difficult for Black veterans. Lenders froze out poorer neighborhoods, ensuring that loan assistance and insurance would be denied. And new white suburbs often came with overtly racist covenants that denied entry to Black people. "
From start to finish this was a thinly veiled whiny victimhood article on a known right wing conservative rag. Nothing surprising here, but truth is not something you'll find among this ridiculous attempt to stir up white outrage and contempt, the fucking morons who believe this shit should be ashamed of themselves.
Your idiotic comments are beyond utterly ridiculous.
I didn't mark you off topic TG
You have a very warped view of the article but not surprised you want children to be treated and taught that they are inhumane oppressors based solely on their skin color they where born with.
The fact that you don’t see the difference and oppression forced on children by a public or private institution is really not surprising with liberal logic.
Who the fucking morons are is obvious.
Nope.
The fact that you see some is more surprising and obvious right wing media propaganda.
Yes, yes it is.
Indeed DP, QUITE OBVIOUS
No, it isn't. And it's not an opinion, it's a fact, THAT IT'S NOT BEING 'TAUGHT' IN K-12.
"Where?"
EVERYWHERE AND YOU NEED TO STOP SPAMMING NOW.
It's all good. No points were assigned. It's only the second day of the month...I have to pace myself.
You. Are. Awesome.
What is your point? That no aspects of CRT should ever be taught to anyone by anyone at any level of our education system?
Elements of CRT should not be incorporated into primary education until there is clarification of the purpose of CRT. Complaints about institutional biases and systemic racism can't be allowed to ignore that the remedies of civil rights and affirmative action intentionally and deliberately established institutional racial biases and stereotypes. 'Disadvantaged Black' is a racial stereotype that justifies specific institutional privileges and benefits according to civil rights laws.
Is the purpose of CRT to protect and expand institutional privileges and benefits according to intentional racial biases incorporated into civil rights and affirmative action laws? If that is the case, then CRT is nothing more than political activity to benefit special interests and should not be incorporated into primary education.
That is some seriously messed up thinking...
Complete rubbish. As usual
CRT is not being taught in K to 12
Repeating your garbage over and over again, is still garbage
First you say itit's being taught then you say it shouldn't be incorporated into the curriculum
You're arguing against yourself.
It's nuts
Give it up Nerm.
It's not being taught in schools.