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.
Although originating in the mid-1970s, CRT is still in its infancy; thus, it has not yet reached its zenith. This is fortunate for people of color, when factoring in the polemical nature and history of U.S. race relations. CRT celebrates success in the 21st century. According to Valdes, Culp, and Harris (2002), “Despite the doubts, sneers, and attacks, CRT has not only survived but is also flourishing as it enters its second decade” (p. 4). When discussing CRT’s brief history in the U.S., it is valuable to frame the CRT movement in terms of what it has already faced and overcome; otherwise, its past will be forgotten and it will become a relic of the past and remain inert, or even worse, be modified by future historians to reflect white self-interests and self-preservation.
That tells us really all we need to know about these types. The absolute worst thing that could happen is for CRT to be used for and by whites.
How is this person not a bigot?
Anyways.
The bigot goes on to point out the five tenants of CRT:
Quote:
There are five major components or tenets of CRT: (1) the notion that racism is ordinary and not aberrational; (2) the idea of an interest convergence; (3) the social construction of race; (4) the idea of storytelling and counter-storytelling; and (5) the notion that whites have actually been recipients of civil rights legislation.
1. Racism is everywhere and in everything.
2. Whites won’t do anything to help blacks unless it helps them.
3. Genetics are mostly the same with just a smidgeon of a difference in each of us (I know groundbreaking apparently). We can tell distinct features of each other and others have cultures based purely on their skin color except whites, they’re just some “other” inhuman thing. So race is a social construct but one that we can use for power to unite anyone who is not a white male against them. We’ll call this Intersectionality. No worries, it’s not for a coming race war or anything.
4. We won’t argue against your establishment facts, we don’t believe in objective reality. What we’ll do is position ourselves as some special prophet because of our skin color and say that only those prophets can speak. Then we will make up stories to win over the public. Ask Smollett, he’s the worst example of someone trying to tell a story that wasn’t true for “equity.”
5. We hate pretty much any civil rights that stop the revolution from happening.
There, I saved the General from having to continue to lie or act like he read the 100 pages of garbage in CRT.
Then there is the aspect of CRT not being a single book. It’s a “movement” with “activist scholars” who don’t believe in the constitution or the liberal order. So there’s that, General. Is that what you needed to know so that you can figure out what white rage is? It seems like you should know if freaking Vox has it all figured out…
24 Maybe more important the process of sorting by worldview has created a peril for our institutions and for civil order that was not previously likely. Donald Trump did not cause the worldview divide; it had been in place for a decade or more before he emerged. But it makes the country more vulnerable to someone like Trump, who has often expressed sentiments quite antithetical to democracy. Because the stakes are so high and because the vision the other side presents seems so antithetical to basic moral values, behaviors that seemed previously to violate accepted norms of politics become justifiable, even necessary, to maintain the “greatness” of the nation’s past. If the other side is so dangerous, so bereft of basic character and decency, playing by the rules becomes a luxury decent people cannot afford.
25 No modern political figure has framed the stakes in such stark terms as Trump. His supporters may not hunger for authoritarian rule on its own. But they are perfectly ready to believe that any actions to stem the threat liberals pose are acceptable. Likewise, liberals see in Trump a mortal threat to our social and political fabric. Disagreement on specific issues, though those are loud and intense, scarcely matter. It is the nature and character of the man, and his supporters that is so shocking and horrifying. Only a politics whose foundation is itself so anchored in gut level psychology could engender this state of affairs.
If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts; if you have the law on your side, pound the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table.
A very few corrections and you have the situation as it is, without the Left-wing spin:
"[the Left's] supporters may not hunger for authoritarian rule on [their] own. But they are perfectly ready to believe that any actions to stem the threat [Conservatives] pose are acceptable. Likewise, [Conservatives] see in [Wokeness] a mortal threat to our social and political fabric. Disagreement on specific issues, though those are loud and intense, scarcely matter. It is the nature and character of [Wokeness], and [it's] supporters that is so shocking and horrifying. Only a politics whose foundation is itself so anchored in gut level psychology could engender this state of affairs.
Last edited by Misty108; 06-26-2021 at 02:01 AM..
Reason: Formatting
A very few corrections and you have the situation as it is, without the Left-wing spin:
"[the Left's] supporters may not hunger for authoritarian rule on [their] own. But they are perfectly ready to believe that any actions to stem the threat [Conservatives] pose are acceptable. Likewise, [Conservatives] see in [Wokeness] a mortal threat to our social and political fabric. Disagreement on specific issues, though those are loud and intense, scarcely matter. It is the nature and character of [Wokeness], and [it's] supporters that is so shocking and horrifying. Only a politics whose foundation is itself so anchored in gut level psychology could engender this state of affairs.
Authoritarian to them is not a bad word, in case I didn't make that clear. Authoritarian could just as easily be said to be dominant personality type. Humans, like all the rest of nature, has hierarchies that naturally form. There's always the chance of a power struggle but someone will always find their way to the top. That's why communism is a complete and utterly failure every time it has been tried. Equity in the Soviet Union was millions of paupers with a ruling class of brutal bureaucrats lording over them.
And to be fair they did also make comments about the authoritarian nature of HRC and Obama in a 2012 article. Still the authoritarian type is more likely to be on the right side of the political spectrum. But more to their point, America is fractured down the middle with two personalities in a struggle to win over the host. Essentially.
This is what communication is for and if that stops or becomes impossible like it already has then all there is is war and infighting to work things out. Only the strong survive that type of environment and it's anything but democratic.
When you put all his comments together, he appears to be defining an enemy.
CRT claims to encompass all white people. He gives his endorsement of that teaching, which only makes him his own worst enemy, and the box CRT forms offers him no exit. And no amount of soap can cleanse from an embrace of that teaching.
I see where he is leading, and I can only wonder if he see's the road he is travelling. I will give him the benefit of the doubt, to leave room for him to do an about face.
He wants to keep his job and pension and get a big job in government or with a politically connected defense contractor. Of course he is going to say what the Administration wants.
The LEADERSHIP of the military is now becoming the Enemy of the American people, especially the majority whom are WHITE.
If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts; if you have the law on your side, pound the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table.
Martin A. Davis, Jr.
You neglect to mention the 'King of Pathos' option illustrated by Joe McCarthy in the Army v. McCarthy hearings:
There is a distinction that you don't seem to grasp. The military has the concept of "indoctrination"--which is explicitly termed "indoctrination." That's not what they're doing with CRT.
Now, to be sure, "anti-racism" certainly is part of military indoctrination...and it has been for fifty years.
Although the class is called Critical Race Theory and the assigned book is Critical Race Theory: An Introduction, you first claim CRT is 'discussed,' not 'taught.' Now you claim CRT isn't used as 'indoctrination.' How do you know ? Are critiques of CRT part of the readings ?
The fact is, Congressman Waltz was telling the truth when he said CRT is taught at West Point.
I'll leave being 'anti-racist' alone for now, but if you look at its meaning today in leftist terminology, it's very different than merely not being racist.
Last edited by jazzarama; 06-26-2021 at 07:01 AM..
He wants to keep his job and pension and get a big job in government or with a politically connected defense contractor. Of course he is going to say what the Administration wants.
The LEADERSHIP of the military is now becoming the Enemy of the American people, especially the majority whom are WHITE.
I don't know what the General's motives are, but I do see him speaking out of both sides of his mouth, because when all those protesters and rioters were threatening the white house last summer, he didn't want to be involved in civilian and political issues and now on this front he dove in head first.
I consider all the people who seek to justify CRT to be indoctrinator's. And those who embrace that teaching think that spreading it somehow vindicates them as if they can separate themselves from what it teaches, but that is all in vain, because it always points right back at them, and they never find freedom from it. Unless they reject it. The only people they are fooling are themselves.
I am always reminded of Obama's preacherman saying the he doesn't say God bless America, he says God d---- America. And this CRT teaching is of the same spirit.
If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts; if you have the law on your side, pound the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table.
Martin A. Davis, Jr.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
They were all prominent Democrats, and Nathan Bedford Forrest was not only a Democrat, he was the grand Poo-Bah of the KKK.
One name stands out to me, and that's Joseph Wheeler. Reading his history, besides being on the wrong side of the Civil War, he reads like a great American.
To hell with debating over the names for military bases... We should have forced the Democratic Party to disband as a political party.
The following piece not only describes how Joe McCarthy first declared himself a Democrat and a “militant” backer of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s liberal policies, before he flip-flopped over to the GOP & "pounded the table" lacking facts & evidence to support his fear & paranoia-fueled campaign:
Trump keeps taking pages from Joe McCarthy’s playbook
So many of Trump’s moves can be understood by studying McCarthy’s history
In 1954, polling pioneer George Gallup penned a prediction about Joe McCarthy’s minions: “Even if it were known that McCarthy had killed five innocent children, they would probably still go along with him.”
Sixty-two years later, candidate Donald Trump issued a chillingly similar boast about the durability of his support that sadly forecast his disinclination to compromise: “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters.”
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.
