I go by what the Republican politicians themselves say.
The boogeymanning of “critical race theory” began, I think, with the asshole, Rufo. He started writing about it in alarming tones, got onto Fox News and thus came Trump’s attention resulting in the federal ban last September on any use of training relating to the concepts of “white privilege”and “critical race theory”.
And the boogeymanning subsequently has grown to become on of the latest Republican/conservative attempt at (m/d)isdirected passion for political gain.
What it seems to boil down to is a bunch of snowflakes who can’t handle the notion that if being black in ‘murica has been and is a disadvantage then not being black has been and is an advantage. Sure, it’s fine (maybe, sort of) to talk about the history of errors made by others in the past, but that’s all in the past! Some people wanting to question the notion that the effects of racism are essentially historical and fairly limited (or asserting otherwise) now that’s going too far!! It must be STOPPED! To the school board meeting (etc.)!
Meanwhile, let’s ignore real problems.
Good job, Republicans.
I’m talking about the current conservative “battle” against the boogeyman of “critical race theory”.
I don’t think my post about this is ignorant or inaccurate.
Certainly you’ve not shown it to be.
The boogeymanning of “critical race theory” began, I think, with the asshole, Rufo. He started writing about it in alarming tones, got onto Fox News and thus came Trump’s attention resulting in the federal ban last September on any use of training relating to the concepts of “white privilege”and “critical race theory”.
And the boogeymanning subsequently has grown to become on of the latest Republican/conservative attempt at (m/d)isdirected passion for political gain.
What it seems to boil down to is a bunch of snowflakes who can’t handle the notion that if being black in ‘murica has been and is a disadvantage then not being black has been and is an advantage. Sure, it’s fine (maybe, sort of) to talk about the history of errors made by others in the past, but that’s all in the past! Some people wanting to question the notion that the effects of racism are essentially historical and fairly limited (or asserting otherwise) now that’s going too far!! It must be STOPPED! To the school board meeting (etc.)!
Meanwhile, let’s ignore real problems.
Good job, Republicans.
You shouldn't do that, for Pubs or Dems. What politicians say the law says is not what the law says. What the law says is what the law says.
I know this is difficult to accept for the "We have to pass the law to know what it says" crowd, but it is, in fact, how law works.
The bolded is, apparently, your understanding of the objections to critical race theory.
That is ignorant.
If the bolded is not your understanding of the objections to critical race theory, then you've built a mighty nice strawman there.
Either way, congratulations.
I think you know exactly what’s going to happen despite your “above it all” law is the law whining.
Teachers who try to teach something race/slavery related will have their careers and lives ruined by awful parents and grandstanding Trumpist lawyers by frivolous lawsuits. Years and $ down the line maybe they get some justice after appeal. Unless of course it’s an awful Federalist judge at which point Junebug shrugs and says oh well.
Or the teachers save themselves the trouble and self censor to avoid getting anywhere near the line, effectively wiping out far more than what the law says. Which is the real goal.
Actually I think the real goal is the conflicts in the first scenario, that way there can be wedge issues to drive GOP voter turnout.
I think you know exactly what’s going to happen despite your “above it all” law is the law whining.
Teachers who try to teach something race/slavery related will have their careers and lives ruined by awful parents and grandstanding Trumpist lawyers by frivolous lawsuits. Years and $ down the line maybe they get some justice after appeal. Unless of course it’s an awful Federalist judge at which point Junebug shrugs and says oh well.
Or the teachers save themselves the trouble and self censor to avoid getting anywhere near the line, effectively wiping out far more than what the law says. Which is the real goal.
Actually I think the real goal is the conflicts in the first scenario, that way there can be wedge issues to drive GOP voter turnout.
+1. That's what most of us have been arguing here, complete with numerous articles posted where teachers and school officials/school board members in various states are saying that the self-censorship and second-guessing of lesson plans and curriculum requirements has already started.
Oh for the love of God they're pulling out the exact same playbook that they've used against integration and every other change to society.If so, that's because fear-mongers like you whip them into a frenzy by telling them the law prohibits things it doesn't.