American Federation of Teachers Goes All In On Critical Race Theory
AFT president said elementary schools don’t teach CRT. Yet, she announced a $5 million legal fund to defend any teacher punished for teaching CRT in those schools.
The American Federation of Teachers (AFT), the second-largest union of teachers in America, hosted its TEACH 2021 Virtual Conference July 6-10, 2021.
The virtual conference clarified the union’s intention to defy any Critical Race Theory (CRT) bans in primary education curricula. It featured speeches by Randi Weingarten, Jill Biden, and Ibram X. Kendi. Weingarten, AFT’s president, vowed to use the union’s resources to defend any teacher who defies a state ban on teaching CRT.
In her welcome remarks on July 6, Weingarten said elementary schools in America do not teach CRT. However, she then announced a $5 million legal fund to defend any teacher punished for teaching CRT in the growing number of states passing laws banning it in elementary school classrooms.
AFT President Randi Weingarten:
“Critical Race Theory is not taught in elementary schools or middle schools or high schools.”
“Culture warriors” are “bullying teachers and trying to stop us from teaching accurate history.”
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) July 7, 2021
AFT head Randi Weingarten gives us a pretty clear definition of what critical race theory is, and who learns it: pic.twitter.com/hL4sLXnuN0
— The Recount (@therecount) July 7, 2021
Randi Weingarten, union president of American Federation of Teachers, is investing $5M into future legal fees for when state legislatures try to sue her members for teaching critical race theory. https://t.co/YFA9Ad0X9Q
— MSNBC (@MSNBC) July 8, 2021
Her full speech is here:
AFT had previously announced a campaign called “Stamping Out Racism and Hate,” which purports to create so-called anti-racist spaces in schools and promises resources to teachers:
While the campaign was announced just in time for Juneteenth—the day we celebrate emancipation from enslavement—it will officially launch in July with a special AFT edition of the book Stamped, by Jason Reynolds and Ibram X. Kendi. A relatable remix of Kendi’s Stamped from the Beginning, this version unpacks Kendi’s treatise on how historic racism has shaped our lives with the trademark humor and familiar language that’s made Reynolds an award-winning author of young adult novels. The book is “not a history book,” Reynolds tells readers. It is “a book that contains history.”
“The authors lay out the pervasiveness and insidiousness of racism in our lives, even as the history and legacy of racism often are left out of what we are taught and told,” writes AFT President Randi Weingarten in a note included in the special edition. “Their words have the power to transform the way we look at the world—to deconstruct false narratives, appreciate diversity and differences, and, crucially, recognize and confront our own racist ideas. I wish I had a book like this when I was a young student.”
Jill Biden spoke on July 7, voicing her full support for the agenda of the teacher’s union, saying, “America’s students and families need champions like never before. Last August, we made a promise to you [union members], that if Joe Biden became our president, classrooms would safely reopen, and we would build back our schools better than before.”
.@rweingarten says being invited to the White House to meet with @FLOTUS on Day 1 of the Biden Administration showed their commitment to public education. #TEACH
— AFT (@AFTunion) July 7, 2021
Kendi, of course, was the keynote speaker for the event. He led what the event billed as an unscripted talk with student activists on how to become a so-called anti-racist.
Civic engagement is saying: I have power and I'm going to use it. @DrIbram
— AFT (@AFTunion) July 7, 2021
"Liberation, education justice, housing justice, and economic justice are one in the same in our union struggle. None of us are free until we are all free." @JessJTang #TEACH21
— AFT (@AFTunion) July 7, 2021
Federick Ingram, AFT’s secretary-treasurer, hosted the discussion. Ingram reiterated the union’s intent to get Kendi’s book, Stamped From The Beginning, into the hands of every middle and high schooler in America.
Ingram’s first question for Kendi sets him up as an innocent victim:
There are some folks in the right wing who have made you into a controversial figure, or tried to make you into a controversial figure. Can you tell us what you see your role as in this anti-racist movement, what being anti-racist means to you, and why you continue to be a prominent voice in this movement, despite the vitriol you have had to face?
Well, for me, unfortunately we live in a society of racial disparities and inequities, and certainly those disparities and inequities are harmful for adults, but they’re even doubly devastating for children, and I know, based on all sorts of studies, that those disparities are not the result of what’s wrong with children, or what’s wrong with adults, that are, let’s say, people of color, they’re the result of policies and practices, so for me, to be anti-racist is to really encourage us to see those practices and policies as the problem, rather than people, you know, as we’re taught to believe, and apparently that’s a controversial idea. It’s a controversial idea to say we’re equals. So if we have a disparity, it must be the result of what’s wrong with policy and practices, and we should eliminate those, and create policies and practices that create, you know, equity and justice for all. Apparently it’s a controversial idea to say you’re indoctrinating children when you claim that racism doesn’t exist in a society of widespread racial disparities and inequities. If you’re a child that’s ten years old and you see that certain racial groups have more and certain racial groups have less, you’re going to be asking why is that the case? And to me, it is the prudent thing to do for teachers to say it’s the result of of not … it’s not that certain people have less because they are less, the cause of the disparities that you see are the result of racism, are the result of bad rules, are the result of history, and we’re trying to change this, and there have been people like you, we’re talking about white children, who have been abolitionists, have been civil rights advocates, who fought against racism, just like there’s been other people who haven’t, and to inspire young people to see the problem, not as people, but, again, as systemic racism. I just think our young people, and I know my daughter is asking those questions and trying to figure out why inequality exists. And so it’s our job as teachers and educators to explain why. and to not explain that certain groups are inferior.
The entire talk is available to view on AFT’s YouTube channel.
Last week, the National Education Association (NEA) announced its intention to conduct opposition research on organizations opposed to teaching CRT in primary education. Now, the AFT has upped the game, investing millions into a legal defense of teachers who incorporate CRT into the classroom and distributing controversial materials to every child they can reach.
America’s teachers’ unions have gone all-in on defending and promoting Critical Race Theory to every student in America and teaching the underlying assumption that our nation has the fundamental flaw of systemic racism.
Jeff Reynolds is the author of the book, “Behind the Curtain: Inside the Network of Progressive Billionaires and Their Campaign to Undermine Democracy,” available at www.WhoOwnsTheDems.com. Jeff hosts a podcast at anchor.fm/BehindTheCurtain. You can follow him on Twitter @ChargerJeff, on Parler at @RealJeffReynolds, and on Gab at @RealJeffReynolds.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
We Americans only thought we won the Cold War. Remember, that was a two front war: The USSR over there and Liberals here. We took our eye off the latter.
You’re reading my mail, Whitewall.
I was a Russian linguist in the Navy and pretty much spent the 1980s deployed doing my best to rid the world of communism. It kills me that the second front here in our educational system was corroding the minds of our children. Everything I did was for nothing.
What is to be done?
HEARTS AND MINDS
That is where the war is won or lost.
Marxists know that.
>> They have a 25+ year head start on indoctrinating an anti-American vanguard.
Awareness of a problem is the first step to solving it.
>> US elected leadership failed us all in the last 25+ years – with a few exceptions.
>> Now its up to all who love this country to work actively to save it.
I was one of the indoctrinated.
I know it can be undone.
Because I have woken up.
And I know how they got to me.
I have some ideas but don’t want to put them on paper.
There is no greater existential threat to world Jewry than liberal Jews in America like this malignant swine.
It seems pretty clear to me that Randi Weingarten is making a distinction between CRT and teaching history. It does seem like the right is guilty of conflating a number of different things together under some broader ‘equity’ moniker without understanding that much about CRT or indeed that conflating a number of different disciplines in effect bans history of that period being taught.
Randi is blathering like you are. The basics here are pretty straight forward.
Mark – You’re playing sematic games here – as is Randi and other ideologues.
No one is saying history should not be taught. What most people (across the political spectrum) object to is the neo-racism. And don’t pretend that you don’t know what that means. Why can’t Progressives simply condemn this neo-racism? In fact – I CHALLENGE YOU to condemn it. RIGHT NOW. This is not a left or right issue. This is a matter of humanity.
As you well know – there are people pushing to condemn whites as oppressors and paint blacks as helpless victims who cannot get ahead on their own in the USA. They stoke the flames of racial animosity for their own benefit (financial and/or political). It’s despicable.
You gave some advice cncerning mark311 on another thread, but I think I’ll just follow Fuzzy Slippers advice from earlier today on same thread:
“Best thing to do is ignore him. He’ll either go away on his own or become so outraged that no one cares what he thinks, cross the line, and get himself banned. Win-win. 😛”
Just to be clear, I never gave advice concerning Mark311 – what I did is advocate for civility and specifically again ad homonym attacks including name calling. I did say I that prior thread that I disagree with Mark on many, probably most, things. But I respect his right to have an opinion.
“Let’s keep it civil. I disagree with Mark on many things too. But name-calling accomplishes nothing. America is great because we are free to share our opinion. You learn nothing from people who agree with everything you say and never challenge you. You learn most from those who have a different POV.”
When you mentioned mark’s name I got the impression you were talking about mark. Your adivice was, “Let’s Keep it civil.” And then you said “I disagree with Mark.” Okay, so now you you have made it clear you weren’t talking about mark. Sorry. My mistake. I apologize.
It’s not a semantic game, words have meaning and in this case there is a clear distinction being drawn by Randi between two things whilst the article is attempting to conflate them. They are separate and distinct thing.
Your second para signifies the issue very nicely the claim is NOT that blacks are helpless it’s that the structural disadvantages around them make it much harder for them to have an equivalent opportunity compared to whites. I’ve named a number of examples in a separate comment on this thread. Also for clarity the claim is NOT that whites as individuals are racist bely definition but that the oppressor group has inherent advantages and that those structures giving the advantages are racist.
Mark – the rhetorical device is called parsing. AHA splitting hairs.
For example, someone says the sky is blue and you counter that it is a shade of blue with some white streaks and sometimes even some orange an purple. So you see, calling the sky blue is wrong and misguided.
Earlier, I asked that you condemn neo-racism. And rather than do so you sidestep, divert and parse. If a another commentator did that – you’d call them out. In fact you have done so in comments on other threads.
Now I’m calling you out for doing EXACTLY what you have accused others of doing. It is true intellectual dishonesty to play the games you have accused other of playing.
Last chance – can you say that you oppose neo-racism ? Why is it so hard for Progressives to make that statement ? What if we applied Prof. Kendi’s logic. By his standard – it’s fair to conclude that if you cannot state unequivocally that you’re anti-neo-racism then you must, in fact, be a neo-racist.
Equity;IOW equal outcomes are not compatible with our Constitutional system of individual rights. A sizable percentage, perhaps the majority of people in the US are not going to be convinced otherwise. Nor are they going to allow their children to be indoctrinated.
CRT: a theory which, at simplest, divides everyone into one of two groups. The oppressor or the oppressed. This is likewise not compatible with our Constitutional system of individual rights and will be resisted every step of the way.
If you like CRT and the doctrines of equity well cool man. The rest of us ain’t buying it.
Many of us see the inherent dangers in adopting a worldview in which one group is encouraged to shift responsibility for everything negative in their lives to another group.
Historically this assignment of blame and demonizing another group or ‘other’ leads to very bad outcomes. Why anyone would want to force our successfully integrated multicultural, multiethnic society backwards into a forced return to tribalism and division by ‘race’ is frankly beyond me.
The path you propose leads to a very dangerous place where the tribal factions you want to create are at odds and open conflict inevitable based on history.
“…it’s that the structural disadvantages around them make it much harder for them to have an equivalent opportunity compared to whites.”
It seems the claim is that the structural disadvantage is being black.
What is structural is the 70% out of wedlock babies, the high level of functional illiteracy, the absence of acquiring an 8-5 work ethic, the 1 standard deviation deficit in all standardized tests for entry into academic and technical fields, and the near 100% dependence on the notion that the other is responsible for their absolutely individual choices.
“…it’s that the structural disadvantages around them make it much harder for them to have an equivalent opportunity compared to whites.”
Moreover, if the disadvantages are so onerous, why don’t more black folks move to Mexico or Canada?
No love it or leave it, but if being here, in Mississippi, ie, they just don’t leave.
God, move to California, to New York State?
They stay here, right here in this hellhole.
Quite frankly, they’d rather be with me.
They really would, white and old as I am
They’d rather be with me.
You can trace at least some of those issues to structural disadvantages. For example the school system is funded by property taxes so poorer areas by definition provide fewer taxes and therefore have far less resources for the school. It’s well documented that schools in poorer areas are over crowded and under resourced that’s diametrically opposite to wealthy areas which have much better resources. Since redlining can account for why blacks have been relegated to poor areas you can quite easily link the two issues.
The purpose of CRT is for those with inherent advantages to understand what responsibility they have in relation to those advantages the claim isn’t that oppressor group is ‘bad’ . There is a distinction between taking ownership and understanding of sources of equality compared to being blamed for the events of the past.
You seem to think that having nuance and taking a more balanced view is some kind of word game it’s not. You claim that I’m splitting hairs that’s not the case at all, there is a functional different and lumping together things needs to have a justification which you haven’t provided.
What does neo racism even mean? It’s not a term I’ve heard of? I assume you are trying to make the claim that CRT is racist which is a common right wing trope it’s not, there is nothing racist about pointing out facts with the intent to reduce racism which is the explicit objective.
Have you read kendi? Becuase from his point of view the act of racism is with actions not as a person (unless is continuous obviously)
Sorry Ben going to have to do better than that. I don’t find your argument convincing
Addressing the economic argument. It’s pretty obvious that the US as a whole benefited economically that’s just fact. Feel free to provide a source that provides the alternative view to disprove me
“ For example the school system is funded by property taxes so poorer areas by definition provide fewer taxes and therefore have far less [sic] resources for the school. ”
In the state where I’m reasonably knowledgeable about the government school system, the $12,000/year/student is money out the window, both for the taxpayer and for the dregs.
That $12,000 produces such a spate of serially functionally illiterate h.s. graduates that the jr. colleges admitting them cannot allow them into entry level courses in college algebra and English composition. The students drown.
And in drowning, they don’t even try to resurrect themselves by using the academic lifesavers available to them: bonehead English and bonehead math, remedial courses labeled so by their affectionate instructors.
In spite of the 13+ years @ $12,000 = $180,000, head start through bonehead courses, the darlings can neither read nor figure. 13 years on the other side of the moon is what they’ve gathered for themselves. They just don’t care.
And until, as individuals, each recognizes it is in their own individual interest to master those essential skills, reading, writing, and Jethro’s goesintos , the $180,000 means naught.
My own mastery of goseintos and the spelling of such words is some 65 years old at a cost to the State of Mississippi I reckon @ $750 plus tax.
Mark – You know very well what neo-racism is. Anyone who has spent as much time posting on LI as you have is well aware of the push to use past racism as justification for more racism. You decided to avoid condemning this neo-racism and thereby you subordinate your moral principles to your ideological allegiance.
I feel sorry for you.
FYI I have read Kendi’s “How to Be An Anti-Racist” as well as critiques of his work. You have to be blinded by ideology to not see how that book and others like it are racist. This is not new. Kendi’s work harkens back to Malcolm-X vs Martin Luther King Jr. MLK saw racism as a dead-end where no one wins. Malcom-X wanted race to be the central factor in society – assuring racism guides all decisions. Those advocating neo-racism are destroying MLK’s legacy.
When you assign one group as the oppressed and another as the oppressor based upon race based identity without any analysis of the actions of the individual you are setting in motion very dangerous and uncontrollable forces.
Like a child who wanders into a chemistry lab
and begins mixing components heedless of the danger and unwilling to abide by the historical record, proponents of CRT/Equity are ignoring the historical dangers of tribalism.
Once set in motion the sociological forces just like a volatile chemical combination take on a life and direction of their own. Once mixed and created the witches brew is no longer under your control.
The consequences will not be pleasant.
Define neo racism … You don’t get to say you should know what it is or that I should understand it. That’s not how it works. I could ask you to defend post revisionist conservatism and you’d rightly ask what is that how do you define it. When you have an intelligent conversation it’s essential to know what you mean by certain things. So go ahead and define neo racism
The average cost per student in the US per year is roughly $16k per student so on that basis it sounds like the investment in your locality is on average 25% less than the average. That’s not a great start for a group who have already been disadvantaged. That’s a pretty significant funding issue.
Well I think it would be helpful if CRT was not mischarachterised.
From what I’ve read it’s pretty obvious there is a pretty stark misunderstanding on CRT on the right. There are numerous claims which just don’t make a lot of sense or even reflect accurately how CRT operates.
Any theory which emphasizes ‘race’ is racist. Any theory that divides, sorts and classifies individuals into groups based on ‘race’ is racist. Any policy that rewards or punishes, favors or disfavor, includes or excludes based on ‘race’ is racism.
Racism no matter the purpose no matter the proponent is not only wrong but incompatible with the US Constitution and our social mores.
It’s not racist to make descriptive analysis of groups when that is carried out in good faith and is based on empirical evidence which is present in this case. Nor does it make a whole of of sense to call something racist on the basis that it identifies racist issues. That seems a perverse logic especially in context.
I’m also not clear that CRT seeks to punish or otherwise inhibit anyone what it asks if for those with the benefit of privilige to take responsibility and acknowledge that privilge. I’m also not clear how sorting out structural disadvantages like the huge wealth gap between schools and historic redlining issues is anything other than positive. These are fundamental issues. America won’t be competitive with places like China if it leaves a large section of its population behind.
Parents understand very well teaching CRT has absolutely nothing to do with teaching history, and none of the laws banning CRT have anything in them that prevent schools from teaching history, warts and all. Just as teachers are not banned from teaching the history of the various regimes who have tried communism. That’s very different from recruiting children to become communists. The KKK couldn’t have developed a better lesson plan for stoking racism than CRT if they had set about it. We don’t want schools to encourage either communism or racism. Teachers who can’t see the difference between teaching history and CRT shouldn’t be teaching. But I suspect teachers who want to teach CRT do know the difference.
The only thing pretty clear is you have absolutely no comprehension ability and have no idea what you are talking about….
Far from it, it was plainly stated that CRT is a particular theory that has its own framework and understanding which is different from another discipline like history. The proposition is that CRT is separate and distinct from history in so far as teaching the history of slavery for example. The claim is that the laws as applied are so broad that they function as a catch all that in effect prohibits both. Id also say that from my reading CRT doesn’t claim individuals are inherently racist rather the structures of society as set up are racist in the sense that they benefit one group over another.
It is pretty straightforward in the sense that she has made a clear distinction. All the while you seem to have conflated the two which is entirely her point.
Some of the laws don’t even mention CRT they are framed more broadly than that . In Texas for example it explicitly bans framing teaching in terms of contemporary responsibility for the outcomes of slavery etc. This means that when kids are taught about the history of slavery they aren’t allowed to taught an obvious conclusion which is simply that white people in general have benefited from the slave trade and that benefit has continued to the present day. If I were to write an essay on slavery in Texas I couldn’t teach that : Slavery made whites very wealthy, that blacks were perpetually made poor, that blacks would be consigned to areas of high crime by virtue of being poor, that blacks by virtue of being in high crime areas would more likely end up committing crimes etc etc etc.
What’s Communism got to do with anything? Whilst its true that there used to be critical theory as espoused by certain Marxists, CRT is an examination of structural causes of racism so for example that might be the impact of redlining on poverty in relation to race.
The broader problem is that it appears CRT has been associated with calling an individual racist when my understanding is that actually it focusses on structures.
“Teachers who can’t see the difference between teaching history and CRT shouldn’t be teaching.” This is the whole problem, many of the conclusions from a historical analysis of the slave trade can be the same as CRT,
You have a long row to hoe if you wanna seriously make the claim that slavery was a giant economic boon to the south.
I think there would be a lot better case to be made that investments in infrastructure and practices like red-lining have a much larger impact on the modern day. That and government policies that encourage single parenthood.
Of course, I would invite you to visit areas with around 90% black population and let you determine if there are some cultural influences on disparate outcomes between ethnic groups.
Erm yes it was a massively profitable enterprise for the south and the north. That’s pretty basic history.
With regard to redlining it seems like you acknowledge that it does have a structural impact. I do appreciate that other factors come into play as well.
With regard to cultural influences that’s an interesting point. That’s clearly a factor but if there has been redlining then doesn’t that mean the culture remains undiluted in the sense that you become where you live. If you had lived in a mixed neighbourhood then the chances of having those negative cultural norms might be reduced?
It’s a convoluted tricky subject so appreciate that a pure CRT perspective might fail to adequately incorporate other issues.
The “study” you linked relies on massively flawed analysis to conclude that slavery created significant wealth. Especially the conclusion that the southern states would have been the 4th wealthies economy in the world in 1860. One of the common flaws is assigning a value to the slaves (greatly in excess of any true economic value) then excluding the number of slaves in the denominator.
Secondly, it is a well known understood fact / concept in economics that slave labor impedes overall productivity and wealth creation.
Mark311, that study is narrative-driven nonsense. At best slavery made a very few people wealthy at the expense of the entire rest of the economy.
One of the reasons Trump was awesome is that he promoted a massive investment in predominately poor communities resulting in massive economic gains and a low unemployment for people there.
After a cultural collapse, it must be made functional again before any real improvements can happen for the culture. Endorsing beliefs that denigrate hard work and promote a victim mindset while affirming disadvantageous practices like drug use and abolishing the nuclear family is harmful.
Mark provided a link to a History.com story that is biased.
While its true that some whites in the antebellum south gained a great deal by slavery, most did not. The story focuses on millionaires in the South. But it was the northern industrial states that made the real money by processing cotton into cloth and clothing.
Cotton is a commodity. As every economist knows, commodity producers are price-takers, not price makers. Price takers have thin margins. Add to that the fact that production expanded with the cotton gin and you don’t need a PhD to know what happens to price as unit supply increases (price declines).
Northern manufacturers made the big money in this industry.
Slavery is a terrible thing. There’s no need to try to inflame people with biased history that makes it seem like all whites were becoming millionaires from slavery. The truth is slavery benefited a very small number of elite families in the South and a much larger group of Northerners.
@ Joe Dallas
You are kidding me right. Slavery made a lot of whites very rich. It advanced the US through cheap labour to one of the wealthiest countries in the world. That’s historical fact, no serious historians agree with you at all. I’d suggest you read Edward E. Baptist the half thats never been told.
That assigned value as you put it was the price of the slave at time. So how on earth is that not realistic sine the market sets the price. There is no denominator since that was the price per slave. I’m not clear you really have a basis for saying it’s flawed. The analysis was pretty coherent.
Actually in the last 60 or so years in the slave trade there was a 400% increase in productivity. And even then the owners still had every cheap labour!
Which Trump policies?
If you are refering to the opportunity zones practically all the money went to rich investors in property deals including Trump family and friends.
If you are talking about college funds he also reduced payments into the grant system.
CRT doesn’t talk about individuals so the issues you raise aren’t really relevant to how CRT operates as a theory
Mark, then it sounds like some historians need to increase their understanding of how economic systems function.
“Historians” have to toe the narrative or they can’t be part of the cool kids club. Academics have little to no academic integrity.
mark311 – you obviously did not spend due diligence on the article. I have added the link to the wikipedia page which at least has citations to the source data used to make the claim that the south was the 4th wealthiest country (if treated as a country). It doesnt surprise me since few progressives have a true grasp of most economic concepts. but a few hints that should help you grasp the logic errors.
1) It should strike you as very odd that country which is an agrarian society that relies on low productivity labor would somehow be considered wealthy.
2) they study assigns a a value for each slave – even though the value represents the cost of labor – granted it is effectively amortized over the life of the labor/slave tenure. But it is a cost of labor,
3) not only does the study assign a value for the person , but the denominator excludes the black population which at that time ranged between 1/3 to 1/2 of many of the southern states population.
4) when counting the various countries, the study excluded the austrian/hungarian empire with included present day germany, austria, hungary,
It also exluded denmark, holland
it also exluded China with had approx 25% of the worlds GDP during most of the 1800’s
Is it too much to ask that you perform at least some level of due diligence to see if the study passes the smell test
You do realise the link you provide collaborated the link I provided don’t you?
I’ve already answered the question regarding assigned a slave a value. It’s not an arbitrary assignment it’s what the slave owners paid for slaves. That’s a pretty easy concept to understand.
1) agrarian economy. So what, at that time cotton was a valuable product. The south produced 75% of the world’s cotton. That’s a huge amount.
2) see above
3)already addressed the article states the price per slave. What exactly are you trying to show with a denominator. We aren’t talking about a ratio of anything?
4) firstly I’m not clear where you got the list of countries from as I couldnt see a link on either source.
Secondly you seem a bit confused about Germany and Austria.
Germany at the time was made up of various states, the leading one being Prussia and thus separate from other nations. It was unified by Bismarck circa 1870 if memory serves. The austro Hungarian empire was seperate.
From the lists I’ve seen China is listed as the third largest economy but that list is later in 1890.
I’m not really clear you’ve understood any of the source material at all..you seem to have ignored many aspects of the argument and not really understood the history at all. Either from a historic perspective or an economic one.
Wow…you really really are either ….brainwashed…virtue signaling…or as I stated earlier comprehension compromised. The very basis for CRT is in fact that people…whites only are inherently not just racist but inferior to other races….anyone not getting that is either deliberately obtuse or part of the faction covering for those trying to implement this culture soul destroying evil ideology….which are you?
And where exactly did you get those ideas from because if you actually read any books on CRT none of them say any of that.
Lost me at “It seems pretty clear to me….”
You get lost at 1 so not hard is it
With their argument of “We don’t teach CRT” followed by them creating a fund to help those who violate their local laws and teach it anyway, as well as their statement (now deleted) about how teaching CRT is fundamentally important, one has to wonder about the quality of people being trained as teachers. If these people who are our children’s teachers, hired to teach our children how to think as adults to solve adult problems, and they either cannot or will not see the apparent hypocrisy and outright dishonesty in this, then they should be fired for either being incompetent or morally corrupt/dishonest. Clearly, anyone who spouts this nonsensical garbage and believes in it so strongly is not qualified to teach our children.
Cameras and mics in the classroom will help parents and teachers. Cops use them so why not schools?
There is no faster way to eliminate the non-woke teachers than this proposal.
That would be awful.
If you really believe that that’s a positive move, then you are kidding yourself.
Clearly, being quarantined at home for a year, just made the AFT Administrators crazy. They had now outlet for their stupidity. So, they saved it up, compressed it, polished it up. And, now they are presenting us with a giant turd as if it were a gift.
I think that they were already crazy, we just didn’t know it.
The government is supposed to be constrained by the Constitution but not private groups…so gov uses friends in private industry to do the damage. She says unions don’t promote CRT and its not history but their individual members can. CRT is promoted as a theory but taught as fact. If CRT was solely discussed within a poli-sci class that would be fine but interspersed with all age groups is indoctrination. As with all such ideologies, there are enough smatterings of fact to give it sense of legitmacy. The failure of certain groups is blamed others yet their foundation is built on flawed constructs. Look at “whiteness” ….. Hate to tell them that most of those traits led to success throughout recorded history.
Fight “racism” with “good racism”…the kind that discriminates against evil Whitey…harbinger of doom and the source of all evil.
It’s not going to turn out well.
These people are formenting a civil war.
“These people are formenting a civil war…”
But at least you said it.
Juneteenth did not signify emancipation for slavery. On that date, the few remaining slaves in the Confederacy learned that they were subject to the Emancipation Proclamation. The date that signified the date when all slaves were freed is the date that the 14th Amendment was ratified.
These idiots cannot get their history straight.
A little more history on juneteenth –
Lincoln signed the emancipation proclamation Jan 1, 1863, partly to bolster Union moral on what was becoming a somewhat unpopular war in the North. The emancipation proclamation actually freed zero slaves since it only covered territories in the south that were not under union control.
The Union army general granger announced the freeing of Texas slaves in galveston on June 19, 1865.
Should be teaching why Western civilization & White culture began its rapid achievements and corresponding advancements in wealth circa 1400’s / 1500’s where as most of the rest of the world remained stagnant .
There is something about the white culture that facilitated the rapid advancement.
Why did I get a down vote?
There is something about western civilization and the white culture that facilitated the rapid advancement and achievements starting from the middle ages forward while other cultures remain stagnant.
1) rule of law
2) hard work,
3) christanity / Judism.
4) technology improvements
to name just a few.
the achievements were not at the expense of other races and cultures.
I agree with you and your well expressed view and just accidently down voted you on my tiny fonted phone…sorry…
One important point is to understand why Western civilization thrived while other cultures stayed behind so that others can learn and emulate the good lessons to be learned instead of trying to destroy what accomplished so much good.
In fact, those achievements made slavery obsolete, machines really improved life for everyone.
Mark no doubt, he’s insane
His pronouns are Shi-it
Joe, like a cockroach at a restaurant, we de get trolls here now and then. Though we do spray.
That should be a part of the “difficult conversation” Obama wanted us to have.
That sentiment you express isn’t “racist”. It’s true.
I always thought the difficult conversaton Obama wanted us to have is how the hell does he get away from Michelle.
Or maybe why the Indo-European groups were able to spread out and rule every area they saw.
Many of those values date back to the beginning of recorded history.. There were brief bursts of advanced societies in Africa. I doubt they were the reverse of “whiteness” values. Cohesive societies have similar structures. Reading 5000 year old clay tablets proved the point. Modern “blackness” as opposed to “whiteness” isn’t a historical success story.
CRT is pure racism pulled from the same well that has allowed slavery to exist around the world for 1000s of years. So how do these CRT racists explain the hellscape of poverty, crime, violence and injustice for blacks and browns in countries run only by blacks and browns and with 99.05 of the population being made up also of those same skin tones in those countries….according to CRT the ONLY reason people of color aren’t successful or why they commit crimes is because white people exist around them.
The CRT hustlers may have to explain why black Africans sold other Africans across the Indian Ocean long before any white Europeans showed up or even knew of continents across the Atlantic.
Easy. Whiteness. The slavers were clearly infected by internalized racism. Basically it is the same thing that makes blacks assault asians
They also should explain Muslims’ substantial involvement in the African slave trade. Another inconvenient bit of history that makes American black Muslim converts look even more gullible and stupid, for converting under the belief that this act is one of self-perceived “liberation.”
The KKK changed their initials to CRT
Bravo. You summed it up in one sentence.
With middle class parents now wise to the teacher unions and their plan to force CRT into the class by any means necessary, this ideological issue has gone from just a harmless “teaching method” to a culture war litmus test. Now that normal parents say no way, the leftist unions now have to make CRT a do or die simply because conservatives don’t want it. Any discernable good in CRT would have been obvious at the outset. But there is none.
The NEA and AFT are, IMO, going to lose this fight. They are foolishly doubling down and compounding on the resentment they built up with their intransigent refusal to return to the classroom.
They don’t have a choice but to do so. They have crossed the Rubicon and having done so can only surrender unconditionally or fight in the faint hope of victory by relying upon a ‘puncher’s chance’.
Never pick a fight with a parent if you’re goal is to fuck with their kids.
No matter what the parent’s politics – they will fight you to the death.
>> SFT and NEA and teachers are now in a death match vs parents.
They refuse to condemn neo-racist school curricula. In fact, allow Teachers Unions to double down on it. Whether you call it CRT or something else – it’s neo-racism and its wrong.
Terry McAuliffe is running for Governor of VA and is saying that CRT is just a “right wing talking point.” Every parent in VA knows that not true. McAuliffe is either liying or living in a bubble. Below is a link to a story with a vide of him actually calling it a “right wing talking point” LOL
Well, that’s a bid better than CNN which pretends CRT does not exist or is just restricted to legal academia. See link below if you enjoy ppl telling you not to believe your lying eves and ears – aka “gaslighting”.
As any historian worth his salt understands, those two words do not go together.
Somebody might want to inform PMSDNC Hack Joyless Ried of these facts.
Facts, logic, reason – they mean nothing to hardcore ideologues.
You really think an overpaid useful idiot like Reid has her ears open? Even if she did, do you think her pea-brain could understand facts without a tutor explaining them in simple enough English?
Stupid move. Just find an AFT teacher who doesn’t like the BS. Sue the school board/district rather than the teacher, and if AFT tries to misappropriate its fund for legal defense of the school the teacher can sue AFT for misappropriation of their dues.
Problem is – like most unions – the union leaders have wide latitude in how they use funds. The will say it was within their authority because it was defending a teacher against an arbitrary action.
I love how progressives use the word “divisiveness” to mean “you have an obligation to obey us”.
Racist! Lesbian! Haliburton!