Banning Critical Race Theory

[Highland Deac]

The new GOP Social Studies curriculum - guaranteed to promote patriotism and not be racially divisive!

 

[WakeBored]

That last part is at the core of the conservative argument. White is right. That's why even if jhmd and Junebug don't actually think this is a big deal, they have to fight because if we challenge the dominant white history narratives to include other viewpoints, what will we do next? Challenge white supremacy in our society.

Weird response. Which of the prohibitions of the anti-CRT law do you think is violated by teaching that the preservation of slavery was one of the motivations of the defenders of the Alamo?

 

[ImTheCaptain]

What are your arguments about that assertion?

 

[ImTheCaptain]

The party of “We report, you decide” folks

 

[Colonel Angus]

I look forward to Brad posting more bombshells from Mr. Rufo. This one shook me to my core.

If only Rufo had the credibility of your favorite FL covid 'scientist', Dr. Rebekah Jones, or some of the other experts posted on the Tunnels like Claude Taylor and Louise Mensch.

 

[PhDeac]

Weird response. Which of the prohibitions of the anti-CRT law do you think is violated by teaching that the preservation of slavery was one of the motivations of the defenders of the Alamo?

The best answer is that it hasn’t been taught. Actual facts.

 

[WakeBored]

What are your arguments about that assertion?

The assertion that the preservation of slavery was one of the motivations of the defenders of the Alamo?

I'm just an armchair historian, but I was familiar with that claim. I don't know enough about it to know whether there is academic consensus on that point, but if there is (or something remotely close to it) then teach it, by all means, especially in Texas.

Despite your (and Ph's) efforts to claim otherwise, I don't subscribe to the notion that we should hide from our history.

 

[Deleted member 7528]

The assertion that the preservation of slavery was one of the motivations of the defenders of the Alamo?

I'm just an armchair historian, but I was familiar with that claim. I don't know enough about it to know whether there is academic consensus on that point, but if there is (or something remotely close to it) then teach it, by all means, especially in Texas.

Despite your (and Ph's) efforts to claim otherwise, I don't subscribe to the notion that we should hide from our history.

But just to be safe, we should tear down statues of historical figures.

 

[PhDeac]

But just to be safe, we should tear down statues of historical figures.

Why would you want statues of enslavers and those who fought for slavery?

There were some Southern white abolitionists. You can honor them instead without feeling like you’re betraying your heritage.

 

[Deleted member 7528]

Why would you want statues of enslavers and those who fought for slavery?

There were some Southern white abolitionists. You can honor them instead without feeling like you’re betraying your heritage.

 

[Highland Deac]

So what does the vandalism of a Lincoln statue have to do with officially taking down statues of Confederate generals and politicians and moving them to museums or Civil War battlefield parks?

 

[06deacon]

Despite your (and Ph's) efforts to claim otherwise, I don't subscribe to the notion that we should hide from our history.

Maybe not, but you’re happy to let your party legislate it on your behalf if it nets you some judges in the deal.

 

[WakeBored]

Maybe not, but you’re happy to let your party legislate it on your behalf if it nets you some judges in the deal.

Oh, good. With a claim like that surely you can tell me which of the anti-CRT’s prohibitions would preclude teaching that slavery was among the motivations for the Alamo.

 

[ConnorEl]

…and it’s efforts to understand the historical and enduring effects of slavery/racism that are at the heart of what’s being fought by those who’ve joined the efforts to disparage and discourage “critical race theory”.


Here’s a little primer of sorts… What Is Critical Race Theory, and Why Is It Under Attack?


I’m not enough of an expert to say if it’s got everything right (probably not) but I suspect it’s mostly correct.

And I think the ending is accurate…

The culture wars are always, at some level, battled out within schools, historians say.

“It’s because they’re nervous about broad social things, but they’re talking in the language of school and school curriculum,” said one historian of education. “That’s the vocabulary, but the actual grammar is anxiety about shifting social power relations.”

 

[WFFaithful]

You're making some kid feel distress that their ancestor who fought at the Alamo supported slavery.

 

[ConnorEl]

Can’t edit…my immediately prior post was adding on to 06’s comment.

 

[birdman]

It would be nice, for the sake of discussion, if Wakebored could address the notion that 6-7 of the 8 provisions in the OK law are already prohibited by federal anti-discrimination laws.

 

[PhDeac]

Notice how Junebug hasn't explained his issue with CRT and wants to center the discussion around the anti-CRT position. He centers white reactionary anger instead of multiracial scholarship.

 

[WakeBored]

It would be nice, for the sake of discussion, if Wakebored could address the notion that 6-7 of the 8 provisions in the OK law are already prohibited by federal anti-discrimination laws.

Without getting into the weeds of whether any of the provisions of the OK law are actually duplicative of federal anti-discrimination law, in our federalist system, states are sovereigns and have the power to regulate activity within their borders, even if that activity is also regulated by federal law. For example, the federal government passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964, Title VII of which prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of race, sex, etc. for employers that have 15 or more employees. Despite this fact, almost every state has its own laws that prohibit discrimination in employment on the basis of race, sex, etc. Those state laws reflect the public policy of the state--anti-discrimination in employment--even though they are duplicative of federal law.

It is very common, and would not at all be odd, for a state to pass laws that are duplicative of federal law.

Moreover, Title IX, the federal law that applies to discrimination in education, only applies to institutions that receive federal funding. State laws would be a gap-filler to regulate those institutions that do not take federal funding.

Further, a state might perceive that a duplicative federal law is being under-enforced and decide that it needs to enact a law that is more specific and/or more restrictive than its federal counterpart.

 

[WakeBored]

Notice how Junebug hasn't explained his issue with CRT and wants to center the discussion around the anti-CRT position. He centers white reactionary anger instead of multiracial scholarship.

Until I explained otherwise, you idiots seem to have assumed the laws said "No schools may teach CRT." I guess that's what MSNBC told you, but when debating the merits of a law, I find it best to discuss what the law actually, you know, says.