MSNBC Contributor Rolls Eyes as Christopher Rufo Describes Anti-White Racist Content in Assigned Book
“…they are telling kids that they are fundamentally racist because of the color of their skin. They’re telling people that they should feel shame, guilt and anguish because of their inborn characteristics and traits.”
MSNBC contributor and Princeton professor rolled his eyes at Christopher Rufo when he expressed concern over a book mentioned in a critical race theory lawsuit.
From Fox News:
In response to Glaude’s claim that he was narrowly focused on bashing critical race theory as part of a broader effort to make it and other left-wing ideas unpopular, Rufo told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” he cared “deeply” about the substance of what’s being taught in the nation’s schools.
“I’ve written policy papers, white papers, I’m deeply concerned about the substance,” Rufo said. “What I’m concerned about and what millions of parents are really concerned about is things that are happening in hundreds of public schools in Illinois and Chicago, where they’re teaching children as young as kindergarten that whiteness is the devil and attempts to lure people into it with the promise of stolen land and stolen riches. That’s a book being used in hundreds of schools, and people don’t think that’s right.”
MSNBC’s @esglaude rolls his eyes when @realchrisrufo describes one of the far-left books being used in Chicago kindergarten classes pic.twitter.com/7d71etYAcC
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) July 6, 2021
Rufo explains the book to Scarborough. I’ll add in the entire exchange and highlight the important parts. From Grabien:
SCARBOROUGH: “What’s the name of that book, just for the record? What’s the name of that book?”
RUFO: “Sure, the book is called ‘Not My Idea.’ It’s being taught in hundreds of schools in Illinois and Chicago. It’s actually the subject of a federal lawsuit by a teacher named Stacy Deemar, who protested this and was forced to teach it. And these are the kind of things — you can retreat to the defensible territory of saying it’s just looking at the history of racism and society, but when you actually look at the specifics, they are telling kids that they are fundamentally racist because of the color of their skin. They’re telling people that they should feel shame, guilt and anguish because of their inborn characteristics and traits. These are the kinds of lessons that I’ve uncovered in dozens of schools. It’s now being endorsed by the NEA in 14,000 public school districts across the country. And you can’t retreat because parents know what they’re seeing every day, parents know what they’re seeing when children come home with workbooks like ‘Not My Idea,’ and they’re right and they’re rightly and very strongly pushing back.”
SCARBOROUGH: “Okay. So, Eddie, let me tell you, this is interesting and it’s something that people won’t say when they’re on the television set, they won’t say at polite dinner parties. I’m not sure why they whisper it or text it or e-mail it to me, but liberal members of the mainstream media, Democrats that are huge contributors to the Democratic Party and even people that work for Democrats, I’ve heard over the past three or four years, ‘I’ve got to get my kid out of this private school. They’re teaching my 7-year-old boy that because he’s white he’s, you know, a racist, he’s part of the problem, et cetera, et cetera.’ I don’t know if you’ve heard the same thing. I’ve heard the same thing. And, again, it’s anecdotal, but it sure does seem to match with more and more stories that are going out there. How do we sort through all of this and make sure that we don’t throw out teaching about slavery and teaching about racism over the past 400 years, that we don’t throw that out with a war against critical race theory and its extremes?”
GLAUDE JR.: “Right. We’re going to make mistakes. There are going to be extremes, there are going to be moments of overreach, I grant that. But part of what we have to do in this moment, Joe, and we’ve talked about this, is to confront the ugliness of who we are. And part of what I hear in these sorts of arguments is this sense in which that confrontation must be won where we’re comfortable, where we feel good about who we are after we confront it. So in some ways — I’m scooting up in my chair, Joe, because I’m getting upset. Because we’re seeing right now, in real time, a reassertion of the lie. The very thing that keeps us from becoming a different America because we don’t want to accept who we are, what we’ve done.”
SCARBOROUGH: “Wait, wait, wait. But reassertion, though, of what lie? I — I can believe in two Americas. I can believe that 1776 and 1619 can be merged together, that you can believe two things at once. I could disagree with critical race theory, but still believe what you and I have talked about, that we have a long way to go to being a just country the way that the Founding Documents said we were going to be. Do I have to choose one or the other?”
GLAUDE JR.: “No, no, no, no. Part of what I’m thinking is that once you concede the initial claim that America in some ways comes into being in light of this extraordinarily painful reality, the contradiction that is at the heart of our beginnings, once you concede that, the way in which you begin to think about American exceptionalism shifts, right? Because it’s not this idea that we are wholly innocent, that we are absolved of our sins, that recognizing who we are somehow condemns us to hell as it were, that we are being bludgeoned by our sins and made to feel guilty. That’s not what we’re saying at all. But we’re saying that you have to confront it in order to release us into a different future. I want to say this really quickly. This sort of argument is happening right now, and I want us to link it to January 6th. I want us to link it to the attack on voting rights. This is, in effect, in my view, Joe, an attempt to arrest substantive change in the country, and we give these folk the credit that they’re making the arguments in good faith, and I don’t think they are. And I’ll say it to Christopher right to his face. I don’t think this is a good faith argument, period.”
Here is the book. Click through for the references to where it’s taught.https://t.co/yUENEcc9I1
— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) July 6, 2021
It’s pretty gross seeing a professor roll his eyes as Rufi describes the disgusting content taught to small children in Chicago.
I’d get outraged if I found out a school taught kids that slavery was a good thing and separate but equal is the way to go.
I wrote about the lawsuit Rufo mentioned. Deemr claimed her school district forced teachers and students to participate in CRT training courses with “highly racial content that stereotypes White people.”
Superintendent Devon Horton already told teachers, “If you’re not antiracist, we can’t have you in front of our students.”
A large section concentrated on the importance of dismantling the nuclear family. It’s all about the collective. You know, true Marxism. Communism.
The training forces teachers to admit “White identity is inherently racist[.],” participate in “affinity groups” and “privilege walks,” accept the fact that white people are “loud, authoritative…[and] controlling.”
The district requires students to participate in those groups and walks as well.
The lawsuit accuses the district of indoctrinating K-8th grade students by telling them that treating everyone equally “is a colorblind message” and “color blindness helps racism.”
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Why is it that the whole truth about slavery is not told. Black tribes practiced slavery for hundreds of years prior to 1619 and were the source of African people sold into slavery in the Americas. Kunta Kinte (Roots 1976) did not magically appear on a slave ship headed for the Americas. He was captured and sold by his fellow countrymen.
Because that undercuts the victim status of today’s POC whiners.
Slavery probably goes back thousands of years, as that is what tended to happen to losers of wars between tribes or regions, regardless of color (if they were not killed outright).
And still does, there are over 40 million slaves today in the ME, Africa, China and other Eastern nations
“thousands of years”
That’s a profound understatement, depending on how long you think humans have been around.
5K years of (recorded) human history.
The Bible contains some rules on how to treat your slaves.
Slavery is in the Old Testament. In fact, God told the Israelites to enslave bunches of the people he had them go to war with, after winning.
No, actually God told the Israelites to drive the Canaanites out of the land. God was angry when the Israelites allowed some of them to stay. The Gibeonites tricked the Israelites into believing the were from a far away land, not the promised land, and entered into a peace pact with the Israelites. When Joshua found out that they had lied to him, that they were practically neighbors, he condemned them to be “hewers of wood and drawers of water” but spared their lives. They should have done their due diligence and consulted God but they felt that since it was their own carelessness that they were tricked into a peace pact that they had to keep it.
But God had commanded the Israelites not to spare the lives of the Canaanites. Which meant they weren’t supposed to even enslave them. But it also doesn’t mean God ordered them to commit genocide, which is what many ignorant atheists believe. They were ordered to drive them out of the land. But if you read the Bible these people they were supposed to “wipe out” and destroy keep showing up.
Frankly, the language used in the Bible seems to be stock Middle Eastern terminology. Like all Egyptian Pharaohs Ramses II built memorial temples praising him and his great accomplishments. The inscription on his temple praising his great generalship at the Battle of Kadesh would lead you to believe he had not only won a complete and total victory over the Hittite army but also utterly destroyed the Hittite army and didn’t leave a soul alive.
In fact it was really a draw. Both sides claimed victory, but the inconclusive outcome led both kingdoms to agree to a peace treaty. It’s the first peace treaty in recorded history.
Three Hittite versions on baked clay tablets were discovered at archaeological digs at Hattusa, the ancient Hittite capital. Two are now at the Istanbul Archaeology Museum in Istanbul, the third at the Berlin State Museums in Germany. Two versions of the Egyptian version are preserved on two temples belonging to Ramses II in Thebes. I always thought it must have been awkward to have scribes describe Ramses II’s version of his great, total victory over the Hittites on some temples in which he just wiped them out on the one hand, then have the peace treaty he entered into with the Hittites when they both realized they couldn’t defeat the other inscribed on two other temples.
Mentioned rarely = the Muslim Slave Trade
It spanned a considerably longer time frame, involved more enslaved people, and was cruel as only the Muslims can do it. The percentage of the enslaved who died en route to their destinations was incredibly high.
https://www.fairplanet.org/dossier/beyond-slavery/forgotten-slavery-the-arab-muslim-slave-trade/
Which inconvenient history reveals the total gullibility, stupidity and ignorance of black converts to the ideology of “Submission.” Converting to the ideology which enslaved them, and, believing that this conversion allegedly represents some form of liberation. It’s farcical.
I can think of no greater example of this gullibility and ignorance than the late boxer Muhammad Ali. He converted to Islam because the charlatans who do dawa (proselytize to potential converts) will say anything to gain converts. Although to be fair back in the 1960s there was very little information about Islam in English; the hadith collections didn’t start to get transliterated in English until the 1990s. But then it’s stupid to convert to a religion you can’t learn anything about on your own, so he hit your trifecta with that one.
He claimed to have rejected his “slave name” and to a name his indoctrinators told him was a name that represented liberation from the white man. Yet Cassius Clay was in fact a fearless abolitionist. Meanwhile both Muhammad the supposed prophet and his son in law Ali the 4th “rightly guided” Caliph owned slaves, traded in slaves, and had sex slaves. And the Islamic sources insist Muhammad was white (Arabs are indeed caucasians; a Syrian classmate in one of my college Islamic studies courses was blond and blue eyed and that isn’t especially unusual) and contain sahih ahadith (authentic reports that must be accepted without question by all Sunnis) that his companions insisted that anyone who said he was black must be killed for insulting the prophet.
According to reliable Muslim sources blacks are sub-human and are born to be slaves and thus it is a capital offense to insult the prophet by saying he was black. The word for slave in Arabic is abd (abeed is plural). It’s incorporated into popular Muslim names. Abdullah or Abdallah? That means slave of Allah. It’s a sign of devotion to Allah. Or it might be used in conjunction with another of Allah’s 99 names, such as Abd al Rahim. But it’s still an insult if it’s construed as saying someone is black. I took a lot of Islamic studies courses in college and generally the other students were mostly Muslim immigrants who took those courses for the same reason Latino students took Spanish as their language elective when I was in high school; they figured it was an easy A (in both cases they were wrong). I recall class one day when we were learning a few Arabic words and the professor asked, “What does abd mean?” One student shouted out, “Slave.” Another, the Syrian immigrant I mentioned earlier blurted out, “Black man.” The instructor looked at him for a few seconds and said, “Yes, but we don’t say that here.” It isn’t like this is a big secret. American black converts to Islam often learn that Islam is steeped in Arab supremacism (that’s why non-Arab Muslims take Arabic names), that blacks are naturally inferior, and that abd is the Arabic version of the N word. And they use it freely to express their sense of superiority.
There has never been an abolitionist movement in Islam. Yes, you can find examples of Muhammad emancipating slaves. But that was considered a form of penance; it was considered a good deed to emancipate Muslim slaves under certain circumstances to atone for sins. But you’ll also find examples in the canonical Islamic texts of Muhammad re-enslaving slaves he believed were wrongly emancipated. And there was never a movement to abolish slavery altogether as it , especially sex slavery, is according to the Quran one of the “good things” Allah has permitted the Muslims. Muhammad isn’t a higher authority than Allah as a source of Sharia but considering how Muslims for all intents and purposes worship him. But the word of Allah as written in the Quran is still the highest source of authority for Sharia and no Muslim, not even Muhammad, could ever contradict Allah.
Which is why with Barack Obama’s help the Muslim Brotherhood seized power in Egypt they set out to write a new constitution among other atrocities they wanted to make slavery legal again. No Muslim country had ever abolished slavery willingly but always had to be pressured by outside forces. Saudi Arabia resisted the pressure until 1960, and slavery was legal in Mauritania until 1980 and there’s a great deal of evidence that just because there are laws on the books doesn’t mean slavery still isn’t widely practiced. When wealthy saudis hire non-Muslim women such as Filipinas as domestics they treat them as slaves. Being a servant was always synonymous with being a slave, so saudi men will confiscate their passports, keep them locked up, don’t pay them as promised since you don’t pay slaves, and rape them of course because that’s their legal right. And Islam doesn’t require consent; if a man has a right to have sex with a woman either through through marriage or slavery then a woman has no more right to say no than a field has a right to say no to a farmer about how and when he plows it (that’s the exact analogy used in the Quran; the Quran compares women to a farmer’s fields in Surah 2 Ayah 223). In Mauritania nobody was ever prosecuted for keeping slaves until just a couple of years ago even after supposedly being outlawed 30 years ago now. Almost no one has any fear of prosecution, and even if a slave owner meets the legal requirements under Mauritanian law, the slaves still belong to the owner after emancipation. So the technically ex-owner will go around and collect money from his technically former slaves. So the slaves are free in name only; they’re still working for their former owners and apparently that’s perfectly legal.
And so when Obama, Clinton, Rice et al stupidly deposed the Desert Duck, Gaddafi, the Muslims wasted no time in enslaving the sub-Saharan Africans crossing Libya in their attempt to get to Europe.
https://lasentinel.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/12/INT-Libyan-Slave-Trade1-700×470.png
Gaddafi may have been a dictator but he never would have allowed this. But his major sin in the eyes of the American left was that he was cooperating with the U.S. That made him traitor to his “race” in the eyes of those in thrall to CRT.
I’ve met a Christian missionary who worked for years in The Gambia. It’s the only nation on earth named after a river. When the British decided to stop the slave trade they needed their own territory to use as a base for the Royal Navy’s anti-slavery patrols. So they sent a gunboat up the river Gambia and fired canons to both sides. Wherever the shot fell that marked the boundary of their new colony.
The Gambians made their living selling slaves to any willing buyers. There’s an island just off the coast called James Island. It’s also known as Kunta Kinte island thanks to Alex Haley. He supposedly traced his ancestry back to slaves sold on that island. He was conned; there are Gambians who aren’t above taking money from the ignorant and gullible if they want to throw their money away.
I’ve never read the book, but in the made-for-TV movie Roots whites are shown raiding into African villages and taking slaves. That never happened in recorded history. The reason why the slave trading posts were on islands is that whites didn’t have any resistance to African diseases. They almost neve went to the interior of Africa (and then they were almost always missionaries, not slavers) and staying offshore on islands was healthier. It was healthier as there were fewer vectors of disease but it was no guarantee you would stay disease free; a lot of Royal Navy officers and men who stuck to their ships off the African coast still died of disease, but going to the interior for more than for a brief time was a guarantee of a different. It was a guarantee that you would die of disease in at most a matter of months.
So the slavers stayed on the islands and the native Africans and Arabs would bring the slaves to them. And not even the Arabs generally went on slave raids; they’d arm allied tribes and the tribes would raid into their enemies’ villages and enslave any survivors.
The Gambians don’t quite know what to make of American blacks. Apparently they don’t think to highly of them according to the missionary of my acquaintance. They know their history. They know their ancestors made their living by selling slaves and ivory (the slaves were known as black ivory; they’d be forced to carry ivory to market, then they were sold too). So they see rich American blacks coming to their country where they stay in air-conditioned hotels and are driven around in air conditioned buses. They know what air conditioning is of course, but it’s a luxury item 99% can’t afford. So they’re amazed when rich American blacks come back to the place where the ancestors of today’s Gambians killed the elderly, pregnant women, and most of the men in their raids, enslaved the survivors, and then sold them. Yet the Americans somehow think they have some sort of bond with the descendants of their enslavers, and hate the country that made them rich. And they are rich compared to how most of the rest of the world lives, and not just third world countries like the Gambia.
I’ve spent quite a bit of time in Africa and Africans see American blacks as just as much outsiders as American whites. Their primary affiliation is to their tribe. Other tribes were their traditional enemies. That’s why when Robert Mugabe seized power and sent his North Korean-trained 5th Brigade into Matabeleland in 1983 they committed mass murder. Mugabe and his supporters were mostly Shona. The people of Matabeleland (and were supporters of Mugabe’s most formidable political opponent) were Ndebele, a norther branch of the Zulu. It had all the hallmarks of the kind of atrocity you’d expect a communist-trained army (or a fascist one; there’s no real difference between the two totalitarian systems although western communists want you to think there is since your average communist is just as evil as your average Nazi) including forcing the victims to dig their own graves before the were executed.
You’d think by now after all the atrocities one black tribe has committed against other black tribes such as the Rwanda genocide that American blacks would have figured out the various tribes and ethnic groups have no affinity for each other just because they have similar features and complexions. Any more than Europeans ever had even though they have similar features and complexions. Or for that matter Asians. Historically one’s most hated enemies are one’s own neighbors. Since American blacks don’t have a tribal affiliation and therefore don’t fit into the familiar pattern of enemy or ally Africans just consider them outsiders; they are for all intents and purposes differently colored white people. But, hey, if black Americans want to go to Africa and give money to people who don’t really respect them, they’ll take it with a smile.
‘He was captured and sold by his fellow countrymen.’
They gave Obama away for free.
If you do not watch MSNBC you will not have to see or hear this vileness.
I don’t know how our LI friends can stomach it. No way I could.
If for some reason I decide to watch MSDNC I will take an extra HTZ pill to keep my blood pressure in check.
They must suck on each others bung holes prior to the telecast so they can speak the same crap.
These Affirmative Action fools/tools need some excuse to justify their preferences. If this “Professor” is so qualified, why can’t he exist without holding back white folks.
Actually, a lot of black people are figuring out that through critical race theory the left is saying that minorities really are inferior to white.
What are the hallmarks of white supremacy according to the critical race theorists?
Hard work
politeness
being on time
focusing on getting the right answer
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2021/02/why-math-is-racist.php
Using proper English grammar and spelling
I don’t think I need to explain to any of you (OK, I’m sure I’ll find out I will have to explain) that there is a lot of peer pressure among black students to not do well in school. Doing well in school is considered acting white.
But more importantly this is the perfect self-fulfilling prophecy. If you don’t expect black students to work hard, if you don’t expect them to show up on time (some critical race theorists think it’s racist to expect black students to show up at all or take and pass tests, and “grade equity” demands that black students get their share of A’s, B’s, etc. regardless), if they have to be rude and obnoxious to be authentically black, and if they shouldn’t be required to do math or speak, read, or write proper English, then they won’t have the job skills to get hired. But then the CRT mongers will tell them that the ONLY reason no one will hire them is that the world is racist and white supremacist.
But then it’s insulting that the CRT mongers are saying it’s racist and only a white supremacist would expect black (or other minority students) to actually meet any sort of standards. In other word, the racists 0f 2021 speak like your typical KKK member of 1921. Blacks are too stupid and lazy to actually be able to do the same level of work that everyone else can do.
And note: both the 1921 KKK member and the 2021 CRT pusher are either Democrats or even further to the left, if that’s possible.
So it’s of course anti-white racism. But it’s also anti-black racism. And a lot of black parents oppose CRT curriculum because it teaches their children are inferior because of their skin color.
I should point out that that the Marxist proponents of critical theory also denigrated the same values as the critical race theory proponents. But of course the Marxists denigrated them as bourgeois values. As I said, Max Horkheimer’s 1937 essay “Traditional and Critical Theory” Horkheimer uses all the standard Marxist terms. And that those bourgeois values have to be delegitimized to destroy the capitalist system, which is an oppressive system that serves the bourgeois class interests. So in Britain where the underclass, those multi-generational recipients of welfare, are mostly white they still use the traditional Marxist terms. So if a member of the permanently poor tries to do well in school they are accused of acting above their class.
All critical race theory does is change the terms of the the criticism in order to bring about the Marxist revolution. The capitalist system is racist and serves the interests of white supremacists. All norms, values, and institutions that support the capitalist system have to be delegitimized. Hence the focus on denigrating politeness, hard work, getting the right answer, etc.
MSNBC propagandists have adopted the techniques, mannerisms, and overall attitude of adolescent girls — the ones who aspire to be leaders in the ‘cool kids’ crowd.
Mean girls
I wish his eyes would get stuck like that. I was told it was a possibility when I was a kid but I’m skeptical now that I’m older. I’m also skeptical about this new curriculum.
“But part of what we have to do in this moment, Joe, and we’ve talked about this, is to confront the ugliness of who we are.”
I’m not ugly. You’re ugly.
I’m OK. You are very definitely NOT OK.
This may seem off topic but it isn’t. It is all part of a campaign to destabilize and disrupt by attacking the very legitimacy of our society.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1RpxwExBSI
They are using our constitutional rights with open disdain for those rights and rubbing our noses into our weakness. We are not going to win by continuing to allow this to happen everywhere and ALL of the time. It is far past time to open our eyes to understand that they can win, They ARE winning.
We are at a flash point for major war with China and their allies yet allow ourselves to be needlessly paralyzed at home with all of this foolishness. And with a corrupt one-party system enthralled to the globalist elites and the reluctance of “our” side to accept the obvious that the 2020 election was STOLEN, I am quickly losing hope in my countrymen. What are people expecting will happen? Deus ex-machina? Blind faith in what? That stronger people than us, , the missing adults, will suddenly appear out of nowhere and do all of the dirty work for us? We, and I don’t just mean our the libs, refuse to even name the enemy when they are telling exactly what they are going to do to us while we are nose-to-nose with them. Wake up! They are winning!
Its a con game. The race pimps want to provoke and stir up reactions so they can point to them as “proof” of racism. An old grift, nothing new, Tom Wolfe called it Mau Mauing the Flack Catchers…
A thoughtful and well-reasoned eye-roll.
Not sure who Glaude is but he looks vaguely familiar. He also looks, in the included picture, like nothing so much as a spoiled kid who has been called out for violating the rules but doesn’t think he will pay the price. Glad may not pay a personal price, but if he gets his way, millions of kids will pay the price for him.
Uh-oh, he said “white papers!!!” Start the witch hunt…
Conservatives need to stop going to mainstream media it is never operating in good faith.