Is Critical Race Theory a thing within Westchester schools? (Jefferson: loans, house)
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.
CRT, and most of what the left says and does regarding race, is designed to continue their electoral dominance with black voters, and to a lesser extent, hispanic voters. In order for them to win state and national level elections, they need near 100% of the black vote. In order to ensure this, they must continue, in perpetuity, the idea that white people/republicans are racists, and that black people must vote Democratic to combat this. The moment black people believe racism is over, they will vote on issues, and you will start seeing more of a 50/50 split in how they vote. Until then, conservative black people will continue to vote Democratic.
An example of this are the various state laws recently enacted regarding voting rules and regulations. They are labeled as racist vote suppression laws - and the message to black people is "you have to vote for us in order to combat this". These laws are not racist and don't suppress the vote in any respect. Its just a foothold for the Democrats to say "you must keep voting for us based solely on the color of your skin".
Another example is the idea of "systemic racism". You ever notice how the left rails about this, but they never offer any solutions or changes? It's because systemic racism no longer exists. Its just an idea that will be shouted out in perpetuity in order to make sure the so-called victims of this "systemic racism" still vote for the people who claim to be working against it.
Ironically, it used to be this way in the early 1900's in regard to party affiliation. So, there is more at play.
https://www.factcheck.org/2008/04/bl...ocratic-party/ Keep in mind that about 90% of the country's black population lived in the South in the early portion of the 1900's, which was heavily Democrat. So, there was more to the party affiliation dynamics given the law in those Southern states at that time. Meaning, loyalty to the "Southern Way of Life" overruled party affilation(there were Southern Republican groups that
Another irony with using the term "the law" is the CRT is actually a theory that goes back to the 1970's in law schools to see how the law plays a part in discrimination of certain groups. What I personally think "scares" people is the label, when what schools really could do is teach the complete truth about history. An example of this is the notion that the North was always a bastion of freedom in relation to the topic of enslavement or even laws. However, as I've mentioned many times on this forum, NY State had enslavement until the early 1830's, even though the law of Gradual abolition came about in 1799, with the freeing of enslaved persons usually being noted as July 1st 1827 in the state. NY State had more enslaved persons than many Southern states at times and also had laws such as these on the books at times: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/project...slavelaws.html So, I'm saying this to illustrate how a lot of history is just not taught that can help illustrate a more complete picture of history in this country. Meaning, when we take away the label of CRT, would it just be alright to teach a more complete historical picture of this nation?
I'm just saying this in a general context, by the way.
Last edited by ckhthankgod; 07-13-2021 at 03:09 PM..
That's not true. Look, I 100% agree there is absolutely both overt and implicit racism in the world. I agree it's perfectly appropriate to talk about the evils in slavery in history class. I agree that conservatives are trying to escalate CRT to be a scary boogyman just to win elections.
But that said, conservatives are not just entirely making this issue up out of thin air. For instance, when a company like Coca-cola has mandatory training for employees that includes a slide ordering employees to "try to be less white" ( https://www.newsweek.com/coca-cola-f...lusion-1570875 ) you wouldn't call that "teaching white guilt" and implying there is something inherently bad about being white?
This whole debate is one of those culture war flashpoints where both sides have reasonable points and both sides have people doing bad things, but very few people will ever admit their side is committing any abuses.
First, it is 100% true. There is no proposal before any school board calling for teaching white guilt or black fetishization to school children. You are discussing a commercial entity having its adult workforce have access to various learning platforms, some of which include topics of critical race theory. These are VASTLY different things. I think critical race theory is a fantastic discussion point in high schools, advancing more in colleges and post-graduate schools, or in work places. It is not meant for elementary school children as the concepts require self examination and concepts of privilege, blamelessness, social engineering, and more that are simply not at this level. At this elementary and middle school level, changing curriculums to ensure that a variety of cultures are discussed and shown to be equal, exposing children to notions that bullying based on race, or anything, is wrong, and teaching fact based history and social studies, not white washed versions of these things, are the goals of cultural changes to education.
Now, as for Coke, your comments are 100% wrong. Coke had ZERO mandatory training for employees that includes a slide ordering employees to "try to be less white." Instead, Coke does what my employer does. It buys access to a LinkedIn Learning platform, which certain required "classes" (which are short video presentations followed by a quiz). In addition to the required classes, there are hundreds or thousands of other classes on LinkedIn's platform that any employee has access to and can CHOOSE to view. Coke does not endorse or refute any class on the platform other than endorsing the classes it requires its employees to take. The class you are discussing was not a required class, but instead one of hundreds that any employee could choose to view on their own to further their understandings of a variety of issues.
Now, I also disagree that the class you are discussing was "teaching white guilt" and implying there is something inherently bad about being white. "Be less white" is indeed a feeling that many non-white people finally feel comfortable openly discussing at an adult level. This is exactly where these topics belong. Among open-minded adults trying to understand each other. I think if you listen to the entire presentation, you would find that the class teaches that many people find that many white people, without intending to do so, display that it is better to be white. These discussions, for people who are open to listen, learn and act, are wonderful tools to understand what someone means. Misunderstanding is so common in racial discussions, and the fear of sounding racist dominates everyone's minds while in these conversations. So open and frank discussions, on all issues and from all points of view, are indeed great for adults in a corporate culture. But no, not for 6 year olds in their classroom. 6 year olds simply have not yet acquired the tools needed to have such discussions nor do they know the history of the world enough to analyze the issues.
Whether or not a person feels "white guilt" is entirely up to that person. But no class I have seen implies there is something inherently bad about being white. Instead, they discuss that there are benefits to being white that many white people simply feel are either available to anyone or do not even consider a benefit. Its these issues that adult discussion can help all people of any race begin to understand each other and move us forward as humans.
I can not speak to any sides to a debate on racism, but I do understand that there is a culture war on this issue. I further agree that there are bad people everywhere, and usually the acts a a few bad people are wrongfully attributed to a much larger group of people that agree with the bad people on some points. I also think claiming that there are "both sides" is part of the problem. There are hundreds of viewpoints and some overlap on certain issues and diverge on others. I have yet to find a human being that I agree with on 100% of every issue, not my wife, children, family, friends, and certainly not any activist, politician, media personality, or elected official.
CRT, and most of what the left says and does regarding race, is designed to continue their electoral dominance with black voters, and to a lesser extent, hispanic voters. In order for them to win state and national level elections, they need near 100% of the black vote. In order to ensure this, they must continue, in perpetuity, the idea that white people/republicans are racists, and that black people must vote Democratic to combat this. The moment black people believe racism is over, they will vote on issues, and you will start seeing more of a 50/50 split in how they vote. Until then, conservative black people will continue to vote Democratic.
An example of this are the various state laws recently enacted regarding voting rules and regulations. They are labeled as racist vote suppression laws - and the message to black people is "you have to vote for us in order to combat this". These laws are not racist and don't suppress the vote in any respect. Its just a foothold for the Democrats to say "you must keep voting for us based solely on the color of your skin".
Another example is the idea of "systemic racism". You ever notice how the left rails about this, but they never offer any solutions or changes? It's because systemic racism no longer exists. Its just an idea that will be shouted out in perpetuity in order to make sure the so-called victims of this "systemic racism" still vote for the people who claim to be working against it.
And CRT and most of what the right says and does regarding race is designed to continue their electoral dominance with middle class male white voters. In order for the right to win state and national level elections, they need near about 75% of the middle class white vote. In order to ensure this, they must continue, in perpetuity, the idea that white males are being hurt by the left and that the only way to protect you and your family is to vote Republican to combat this. The moment that middle class white males realize that republicans will feed them sexy social issues but continue to deny them any serious tax benefits and focus economic growth on expanding the wealth class and creating a large working class that gets little to no economic chance to move into the wealthy class, middle class white men will vote on issues and you will start seeing 75% of them voting for democrats, who actually want a strong middle class of workers. Its called politics for a reason. Political science is actually a science and employing a skill set in this area to achieve certain results is a valuable skill.
And CRT and most of what the right says and does regarding race is designed to continue their electoral dominance with middle class male white voters. In order for the right to win state and national level elections, they need near about 75% of the middle class white vote. In order to ensure this, they must continue, in perpetuity, the idea that white males are being hurt by the left and that the only way to protect you and your family is to vote Republican to combat this. The moment that middle class white males realize that republicans will feed them sexy social issues but continue to deny them any serious tax benefits and focus economic growth on expanding the wealth class and creating a large working class that gets little to no economic chance to move into the wealthy class, middle class white men will vote on issues and you will start seeing 75% of them voting for democrats, who actually want a strong middle class of workers. Its called politics for a reason. Political science is actually a science and employing a skill set in this area to achieve certain results is a valuable skill.
I agree with most of what you are saying except for the part where you indicate that the Democrats want a strong middle class of workers. This is not true. The democrats want a donut economy. A white collar upper class (which mostly includes them, of course) and a lower class (which mostly includes people voting for them and beholden to them for government benefits).
Also, the Republicans need a large percentage of the middle class white vote precisely because of the (successful) tactics of the left. People can make "chicken or the egg" arguments all they want, and will never win or lose them. This type of stuff on both sides has been growing and growing for many years now. But there is no doubt that identity politics is much more dominant today that it ever has been, and we are moving more and more into tribalism, which is very sad and very dangerous.
All in all, if there was somehow a magic pill that everyone took which made everyone vote purely on issues and nothing else, I think the Republicans would sign up for that in a second, while the Democrats would not. Or stated differently, if there was somehow a magic pill that everyone took which eliminated race/ethnicity, I think the Republicans would sign up for that in a second, while the Democrats would not. The Republicans are interested in a country where everyone is judged and treated by merit. The Democrats are not.
I agree with most of what you are saying except for the part where you indicate that the Democrats want a strong middle class of workers. This is not true. The democrats want a donut economy. A white collar upper class (which mostly includes them, of course) and a lower class (which mostly includes people voting for them and beholden to them for government benefits).
Also, the Republicans need a large percentage of the middle class white vote precisely because of the (successful) tactics of the left. People can make "chicken or the egg" arguments all they want, and will never win or lose them. This type of stuff on both sides has been growing and growing for many years now. But there is no doubt that identity politics is much more dominant today that it ever has been, and we are moving more and more into tribalism, which is very sad and very dangerous.
All in all, if there was somehow a magic pill that everyone took which made everyone vote purely on issues and nothing else, I think the Republicans would sign up for that in a second, while the Democrats would not. Or stated differently, if there was somehow a magic pill that everyone took which eliminated race/ethnicity, I think the Republicans would sign up for that in a second, while the Democrats would not. The Republicans are interested in a country where everyone is judged and treated by merit. The Democrats are not.
We are clearly on different ends of the spectrum. It is 100% true that Democrats want a strong middle class of workers. Republicans want an upside down pyramid with a small white collar upper class (which includes all the republicans in power, and to give the impression that all the other less wealthy republicans can someday join this upper class) and a massive lower working class with no chance to move up who will just come to accept their lot and be good workers, supporting the uber-rich upper class. All in all, if there was somehow a magic pill that everyone took which made everyone vote purely on what impacts only their life, and not suppressing others to be less than them, I think the democrats would sign up for that in a second, while the republicans would not. Democrats are interested in a country where everyone has an equal opportunity and republicans are not. They want themselves, and others like them, to be given a better chance than others not like them. They want to be able to control others. They let these middle class white workers feel that they can force others to live the way they dictate, and that will blind them to voting for people who have no intention of ever helping you, and instead want to move you down economically.
It is 100% true that Democrats want a strong middle class of workers. Republicans want an upside down pyramid with a small white collar upper class (which includes all the republicans in power, and to give the impression that all the other less wealthy republicans can someday join this upper class) and a massive lower working class with no chance to move up who will just come to accept their lot and be good workers, supporting the uber-rich upper class.
Whelp, there's our problem, a few posts ago you were talking about "open minded debate" and 'trying to understand other viewpoints' but now if you really believe all republicans want what you said, then I submit you're not actually making a realistic attempt to understand the other viewpoint. You're just characterizing your opponents as evil. Republicans are ~47% of the country, and sure some of them may be bigoted or stupid or evil or whatever, but not all. If you really can't acknowledge any validity whatsoever to their viewpoint, then there's no point in discussing.
I mean, I could write dumb stuff like "All republicans want everybody to be able to succeed, but all democrats want pure socialist economies where everyone is dependent on big government hand-outs" but no, there are some democrats who want that but it's not true of most democrats. And neither is what you wrote about republicans.
Whelp, there's our problem, a few posts ago you were talking about "open minded debate" and 'trying to understand other viewpoints' but now if you really believe all republicans want what you said, then I submit you're not actually making a realistic attempt to understand the other viewpoint. You're just characterizing your opponents as evil. Republicans are ~47% of the country, and sure some of them may be bigoted or stupid or evil or whatever, but not all. If you really can't acknowledge any validity whatsoever to their viewpoint, then there's no point in discussing.
I mean, I could write dumb stuff like "All republicans want everybody to be able to succeed, but all democrats want pure socialist economies where everyone is dependent on big government hand-outs" but no, there are some democrats who want that but it's not true of most democrats. And neither is what you wrote about republicans.
So you are talking about two different conversations. One is about discussions in schools vs an employment place on racial issues. The other is what I consider a playful and purposeful use of words to show exactly what you are saying. My comments purposefully mimicked 987ABC's comments, but from the opposing viewpoint. I see you got my point, that making such comments serve only to badmouth the other side. It does nothing to further discussion and debate. But since 987ABC made the comments first, I felt the need to respond in kind. I notice that you only called me out but chose to ignore his use of the same, but opposing view based, rhetoric. There are indeed differences between the two main political parties in the US, and I truly feel both do more harm than good, but if someone is going to attack the left, I will always respond by raising the exact issues as with the right, or the political parties usually aligned with those positions.
I disagree that Republicans or Democrats have anywhere near the percentage of the country you reference, but I agree that the country is fairly evenly divided based upon a broad paintbrush of conservative v. progressive. And I think I said it in this threat earlier that in any population there are "bad" people, be they bigoted or stupid or evil or whatever. I also disagree that one must acknowledge validity to a viewpoint to justify a discussion about a topic. I have no problem discussing an issue with someone who believes my viewpoint is 100% wrong. I still enjoy the debate.
I will say that my comments were 100% as accurate as the comments I was responding to. I wish you would have picked it up on the other side of the discussion too.
I will say that my comments were 100% as accurate as the comments I was responding to. I wish you would have picked it up on the other side of the discussion too.
Ok, that is fair. I missed 987ABC's comments due to the page break. My apologies, I do now see the strawman "democrats want this.../republicans want that..." arguments were started in the post before yours, and my apologies for calling out only your post. I would have called out both except I didn't see the other until now.
Ok, that is fair. I missed 987ABC's comments due to the page break. My apologies, I do now see the strawman "democrats want this.../republicans want that..." arguments were started in the post before yours, and my apologies for calling out only your post. I would have called out both except I didn't see the other until now.
I appreciate that. I also appreciate your reasons for calling out both. I was trying to be particular with my word to call attention to the fact that the criticisms of one side can be flipped to the other when they are only based on political ideology. Thanks for your comments.
It's a thing but as of now it's worse in private schools than public schools so not sure if you can escape it that way.
I also dont think this is a left/right thing at all. Republicans are seizing this as a major talking point - understandably so because most rational people on both sides think these ideas are crazy. But just because Republicans are using it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's real and I hope centrist democrats start distancing themselves from it or we are going to lose big on this.
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.
