Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...her actual words were "republicans are spinning a false narrative" ....same thing..that's lying
“Republicans love to create outrage over things that aren’t actually happening. People should be asking them, what elementary, middle and high school is teaching Critical Race Theory and why they are spinning false narratives,”
If you're going to flat out lie about something....seems you'd be a tad smarted than she is....
They're already doing exactly what I said they'd do. That was quick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger
Don't use their language. If we define the issue as "critical race theory," they'll just change the name, and all the effort will have been wasted.
Go after their overt racism. Call it out for what it is, without using their terms.
The Left is very adept at defining the discussion, especially the language used to have it. Fight the urge to engage in the discussion on their terms, and enter it on your own terms, using your own language.
Yes great start to a thread, claim she is lying and then use Breitbart and Twitter to support your opinion.
Still waiting to hear a specific district that is teaching CRT.
The republicans seem to think this is a winning strategy "down with CRT"
She IS lying. The problem is she thinks she's smart by telling people to check on school websites that show the curriculum each elementary, middle, and high school offers for said school in said town, city, and state. You won't actually see CRT listed on there.
HOWEVER!
That is because only colleges are offering the course with it's actual name, CRT. Elementary, middle, and high schools have been rolling it out in small courses in existing classes. Many schools are doing it during history class. Some are labeling it "race theory," "critical theory," etc. Other schools have been sending out multiple notices to parents informing them that they want to add CRT to their curriculum.
The parents aren't stupid. They know what's going on. They're kids are going to them questioning this country and questioning if they or their family members racist and privileged. And when the parents ask "where did you get that from?", the response is, "we're learning that in schools." Its teaching our kids to judge each other by their skin color and not the content of character; the opposite of what MLK preached.
Even Ibram X. Kendi, the guy pushing for all schools to have this, can't even define what racism is:
CRT is essentially a godless religious cult. They believe that everything bad that ever happens all can be blamed on white supremacy, slavery, colonialism, etc. If a man massacres his entire family, white supremacy is to blame. If I stub my toe, white supremacy it to blame. If you want to organize this new religion as a religion and make all of it's dogma voluntary for consumption, fine and good. But any school receiving any public funding has no business teaching it. Either that or allow Christians to establish equal numbers of required classes that preach the good word to students.
...The issue: Something called “Critical Race Theory," the idea that racism is an inherent part of all institutions in society. The county insists it’s not part of the school curriculum. But many parents suspect the county’s new equity initiative is just Critical Race Theory in disguise...
So a bunch of folks that aren't professional educators "suspect" something about a brand new inititiative?
Not terribly compelling.
Angela Harris:
Quote:
Marx famously wrote, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.”4 Critical theory differs from pure philosophy in its motivation to provoke change, and thus it necessarily traffics in the emotions.5 Challenging power relations, as critical theorists love to do, means provoking anger, disquiet, anxiety, and even fear in those with a settled understanding of who they are and where they belong...
In this Essay, I am interested in the relationship among ideology, ideological critique, and emotion. I argue that the ideological critique produced by Marx in the nineteenth century and by critical legal theorists in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries undertakes not only to persuade our minds but also to rally our emotions. To accomplish this, critical theorists show us that ideology is already a technique of emotion management. Ideology makes suffering invisible and compassion inappropriate by assuring us that the status quo is natural, normal, and necessary. Ideological critique, in turn, reveals the suffering beneath the bland façade of ideological concepts like “capital” and “property.” It tries to persuade us, moreover, that this suffering is unjust and unnecessary: that politics and not nature is its source, and that we should act to relieve it.
Like Marx, critical race theorists therefore want us to care about the subordinated.8 Yet several pitfalls await. First, caring must be connected to moral outrage to produce a commitment to action. Caring without outrage is only merely pity, an emotion that requires no action, only the feeling of sympathy. Critical theorists
must strive to cultivate indignation as well as caring in their readers’ hearts. A second pitfall is related to the first. Observing the suffering of others may provoke compassion, but it may also reinforce a sense of their inferiority, their need for our charity. Conversely, a politics rooted in displays of suffering threatens to become “therapeutic,” a politics in which the subordinated seek only public recognition of their wounds and a sense of moral superiority rather than the transformation of social relations.9 Third, critical theory must simultaneously convince us that injustice is everywhere, and that change is possible.
Critical Theory has a narrow and a broad meaning in philosophy and in the history of the social sciences. “Critical Theory” in the narrow sense designates several generations of German philosophers and social theorists in the Western European Marxist tradition known as the Frankfurt School. According to these theorists, a “critical” theory may be distinguished from a “traditional” theory according to a specific practical purpose: a theory is critical to the extent that it seeks human “emancipation from slavery”, acts as a “liberating … influence”, and works “to create a world which satisfies the needs and powers of” human beings (Horkheimer 1972b [1992, 246]). Because such theories aim to explain and transform all the circumstances that enslave human beings, many “critical theories” in the broader sense have been developed.
Herbert Marcuse (1898–1979) was one of the most prominent members of the Frankfurt School or The Institute for Social Research (Institute für Sozialforschung) in Frankfurt am Main. The Frankfurt School was formed in 1922 but went into exile in the United States in the early 1930s during the reign of the Third Reich. Although most of his colleagues returned to Germany after World War II, Marcuse remained in the United States.
The Frankfurt School has had an enormous impact on philosophy as well as social and political theory in the United States and around the world. In the 1960s Marcuse ascended to prominence and became one of the best known philosophers and social theorists in the world. He was often referred to as the Guru of the New Left (a title which he rejected). During the late 1970s through the 1990s, Marcuse’s popularity began to wane as he was eclipsed by second and third generation critical theorists, postmodernism, Rawlsian liberalism, and his former colleagues Theodor Adorno and Walter Benjamin. In recent years there has been a new surge of interest in Marcuse.
So dude was popular, and stuff. What’s the big deal?
You’re right! They’re not teaching kids critical race theory to children. They’re applying it to them… That’s so much better in the grand scheme of things. Leave it up to the left to force the truth to have to come out.
So does it make more sense why we’re politically polarized? The USG has taken upon itself an attempt to apply Critical Theory to “Pre-Nazi America.”
Marcuse is literally the person who figured out how to frame Nazi Germany to the American people AS THE ENEMY.
No one finds it odd that we’re all discussing CRT, an offshoot of Marcuse’s brand of CT and Marcuse just happens to have been a huge figure in the psychological operations of the OSS, forerunner to the CIA? Marcuse himself became instantly the go-to. “Wild Bill” knew he was a Marxist but didn’t care, the best ideas win. Ultimately they didn’t use the framework exactly as the Frankfurt School proposed after the war. I’ve shown in other threads the lineage that goes from Marcuse to the Crits or Crats, I don’t know which they like.
Well yeah, starting a thread claiming CRT is taught in schools should have some examples or is that too much to ask. If you don't like MSM then use Fox News.
But in the meantime republicans are passing legislation to ban something that doesn't exist.
Oh look, a woketard grade school teacher in his classroom defending his use of CRT and "systemic racism" "education" to the young ones.
Still waiting to hear a specific district that is teaching CRT.
the Fort Worth Independent School District says they want their administrators and teachers to know and understand CRT, and be able to apply it in their current roles.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
