Abbott signs "anti-critical race theory" bill into law

9,201 Views | 292 Replies | Last: 2 mo ago by quash
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/2021/06/15/gov-abbott-signs-anti-critical-race-theory-bill-into-law-over-objections-from-educators-and-civic-groups/



Gov. Abbott signs 'anti-critical race theory' bill into law over objections from educators and civic groups

Opponents say the Texas law, which goes into effect Sept. 1, will have a chilling effect on schools.

Texas on Tuesday became the latest conservative state to bar certain concepts related to race and racism from being discussed in the classroom, ignoring the passionate objections of educators who say the new law will make it harder for them to teach about America's true past and present.

A bill that legislators say sought to ban "critical race theory" in school but never defined or mentioned the concept explicitly stirred fear among educators that there could be repercussions for broaching current events during class.

Gov. Greg Abbott signed the broad legislation into law without fanfare, according to the Texas Legislature Online service. The law will go into effect in September. The governor's spokeswoman did not respond to The Dallas Morning News' requests for comment Tuesday night.

Now, educators and civics advocates question how the vague language in the bill actually translates into the classroom and whether a legal challenge could strike it down. They'll be closely watching how the State Board of Education takes on the Legislature's mandate and revamps Texas' social studies curriculum.

"We've got a piece-of-junk legislation for us to work with," said Pat Hardy, a Republican member of the State Board of Education and a former history teacher who had hoped Abbott would veto the legislation.

The Legislature approved the bill in the dramatic final days of session after hours of debate and procedural back and forth. Teachers and education groups made impassioned pleas against it, saying it would have a chilling effect on social studies classrooms particularly in teaching current events and stymie districts' work to address racism and equity in schools.

"This will stifle the teaching of huge, important facts about history, which still affect much of our life today," said Clay Robison, the Texas State Teachers Association spokesman. "Teachers and students need and deserve the whole truth about our history, our culture and what our problems are."

But Republican lawmakers championed the bill, which mirrors language being passed in other red states and parrots parts of former President Donald Trump's rescinded executive order targeting "critical race theory."

The bill's author, Rep. Steve Toth, R-The Woodlands, told his Texas House colleagues that the legislation was necessary "at a time when racial tensions are at a boiling point" and that "we don't need to burden our kids with guilt for racial crimes they had nothing to do with."

The current critical race theory debate "misinterprets the intentions of those of us who are working to build more inclusive schools," said Richardson ISD Jeannie Stone.
What does this law prohibit?

While the legislation was labeled an "anti-critical race theory" bill, it doesn't actually contain those words. Instead, it includes a long list of subjects and ideas that must or must not be taught. Critical race theory is an academic framework that explores how racism is embedded in U.S. policies and systems.

Recently, though, conservative pundits and politicians have attempted to conflate it with a slew of other concepts, such as diversity and inclusion efforts, anti-racism training, social justice activism or multicultural curricula.

Teachers can't be "compelled to discuss a particular current event or widely debated and currently controversial issue of public policy or social affairs," according to the new law. In January, for example, teachers grappled with how to properly teach about the U.S. Capitol insurrection and the inauguration of the first female vice president knowing that the topics could be considered controversial but that the issues were on students' minds.

If schools do discuss such issues, they can't give "deference to any one perspective." That provision enraged Democrats, who questioned how teachers should, for example, explore both sides of the deadly white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va.

Teachers also aren't allowed to give credit for students to participate in lobbying or public policy internships. Civics groups say such work prepares students to be engaged citizens and connects what they're learning in the classroom to the real world. But some argue that it inappropriately steers students to activism.

Within social studies classrooms, teachers can't teach a variety of ideas, including that a person is inherently racist, sexist or oppressive, either consciously or unconsciously. This comes as many districts are working on exploring how teachers' unconscious bias the stereotypes people may not be aware they have can negatively affect students of color.

School districts are also prohibited from requiring training that presents any form of race or sex stereotyping or blame on the basis of race or sex.

Dallas Superintendent Michael Hinojosa fears this provision could prevent ongoing districtwide training efforts over cultural competency. The training is part of a larger initiative to address the disparities Black students face at school. Trustees last year unanimously adopted a resolution declaring that Black lives matter.

The 1619 Project a favorite target of conservatives is explicitly called out in the legislation. The New York Times' Pulitzer Prize-winning work sought to reframe American history around slavery's consequences and the contributions of Black people.

The law prohibits teaching that "slavery and racism are anything other than deviations from, betrayals of, or failures to live up to, the authentic founding principles of the United States." Several of the Founding Fathers owned slaves.


Advocates worry conservative lawmakers could tack on the substance of the bill elsewhere before the end of session.
What will this mean inside classrooms?

The language in the bill is vague and subject to interpretation. Education groups worry that ambiguity and fear could stop some teachers from broaching many topics in the classroom.

"We'll have principals in conservative communities who don't want a backlash and will put in place blanket expectations of 'Don't talk about anything controversial in your classroom,''' said Renee Blackmon, president of the Texas Council for the Social Studies. "That way they'll feel like they're safe from community reproach and then teachers are on eggshells."

It's unclear how the law's provisions will be executed, leaving Blackmon concerned about "whack-a-mole enforcement."

Veteran social studies teacher August Plock has taught at Pflugerville High School near Austin for 22 years and feels he has earned the support of his campus leaders, which makes him more comfortable navigating tough issues.

But a young teacher newly out of college may not have the same confidence in current events discussions that could draw pushback from families.

And while Plock acknowledged that each teacher should strive to present a diverse range of perspectives on any controversial topic, he said the legislation could remove debate from the classroom.

He said teachers will have to consider: "Are you willing to present something, knowing that potentially you could get blowback from it? Are you willing to go there?"

Hinojosa worries that "every teacher will be terrified that someone is going to be recording them and turn them into the 'racial police.'"

"That is no way to operate," he said.

Dallas officials have reached out to statewide and national groups for guidance on how educators should proceed as district lawyers evaluate exactly what the bill will mean for teachers and students when it goes into effect.


Dallas school leaders are "doing their homework" on a potential legal battle related to a pair of bills that targets how students are taught about race and racism.
Will there be a legal challenge?

Even before Abbott signed the bill, there were rumblings of potential legal action among civics and education groups.

DISD's Hinojosa was among the most outspoken regarding possible litigation. During a May school board meeting, he noted that district lawyers were "doing their homework" on the bill.

"I don't like to threaten litigation very often, especially not from behind a microphone, but some of us have been talking," he said, alluding to a group of school leaders nationwide who are concerned about similar legislation.

Dallas school leaders were still in the process of reaching out to lawyers and game-planning their response, he said this month.

And district leaders aren't the only ones doing their homework.

"We're investigating potential legal claims," said David Hinojosa, director of the Educational Opportunities Project at the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights, based in Washington, D.C.

What is the role of the State Board of Education?

One section of the new law is quite prescriptive on social studies as it requires specific lessons, such as those on Native Americans and on the history of white supremacy and the ways it is morally wrong.

Some of these curriculum additions were tacked on by Democrats who opposed the overall bill the night the measure passed the House.

But before Texas students see the changes in their classrooms, it will be up to the State Board of Education to incorporate them into curriculum standards. The bill's passage aligns with a process of revamping social studies curricula that is set to start in early 2022 a decade after the process was last completed.

Revamping curriculum typically takes a year, but that could change depending on other factors, said board Chair Keven Ellis, R-Lufkin. A revision of science standards that started in early 2020 is continuing, he noted.

Once the board approves the new standards, members then will have to approve new textbooks and teaching materials. That means changes to social studies curriculum may not be rolled out to students for some time, though the legislation instructs the board to revise the standards by Dec. 31, 2022.

A slow process could be a good thing, said board member Marisa Perez-Diaz, D-Converse, who is hesitant to touch the legislation amid threats of litigation.

"I want to be very, very cautious in terms of what we amend in the current [social studies standards] because we don't know what is going to happen with this bill moving forward," she said.

And Perez-Diaz isn't the only one wary of the bill.

Hardy, the Republican member, does not think critical race theory should be taught in schools but considers this bill neither an effective deterrent nor a way of strengthening civics education. She had hoped the governor would not sign it.

"I think the bill is just that worthless," she said.

What is critical race theory?

The mere insinuation of critical race theory in schools has riled the Legislature, trustee races and board meetings, even as it's often misunderstood.

Critical race theory is a decades-old method of legal analysis that centers on race and racism in the understanding of the country's systems and policies. Discussion of it was long confined to academia.

Among the tenets of critical race theory are that racism is commonplace; that progress for underrepresented groups is encouraged only to the extent that changes benefit the status quo; and that concepts such as colorblindness and meritocracy are myths to be rejected.

In today's political climate, the theory has become a catch-all for a variety of other concepts such as diversity and inclusion efforts, anti-racism training, social justice activism or multicultural curricula. It's derided by many conservatives and often slammed on Fox News.

Salandra Grice, author of The Conscious Educator, said one of the biggest misconceptions about critical race theory is that it is being taught in grade schools.

"Critical race theory is not being taught in K-12 schools," she said during a recent NAACP Dallas panel. "This is not what we do. What are y'all talking about?"
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doubt this will have much effect.

Liberal ideology will continue to be pushed in the schools.

Most are smart enough to not use the term CRT and the legislation does not even use the term.

Liberals will continue to do what liberals do in public education...make everything about slavery, race, gender, and now sexuality.

Conservatives will continue to complain and get no where with their concerns.

Been like this for decades...and it just gets worse every decade.
BellCountyBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The left ruins everything.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"But liberals only have themselves to blame for the anti-CRT backlash. They fully embraced this stuff for political reasons and made it the ideological cornerstone of their political coalition. They thought it could be contained within politics and only be wielded for the purposes of accruing power. That was a delusion. But now they're stuck with it, and the only way to fight back is not to defend it on the merits, but instead to pretend it's fake news, or pretend it's a debate about some esoteric academic theory, or pretend it's about banning lessons on slavery or racism. I think deep down most liberals are at least a little embarrassed of this stuff and uncomfortable with the silly jargon and rhetoric, the deranged and toxic ideas, the Robin D'Angelo grifter types, the cringe HR department struggle sessions."

-Stant Mesrobian
Canon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Excellent bill. K-12 has been used as a leftist indoctrination tool for far too long. This bill does nothing to prevent discussion of current events. It simply works to deter teachers from propagandizing with a left wing narrative.

The 'teachers' objecting in the story showed their leftist bonafides by stupidly calling 6 Jan an 'insurrection' or lamenting that they couldn't paint all the protesters at Charlottesville, many who just objected to tearing down history, as inveterate racists.
Greenbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Conservatives tend to play by the rules. Progressives tend to make them up as they go along. If anyone here believes this bill is going to stop liberal bias in our schools they are mistaken. It may be a "feel good" bill for some, but it will have no impact except conservative leadership can pound their chests at their next rally and tell how they saved TX from the liberals.
Canon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It can be used as a tool to fight against leftist teachers. I would welcome the day a teacher gets fired or jailed for propagandizing children.
Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Twitter is saying that guy is Candace Owen's brotherbut that's not verified

RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And Hunter Biden is Joe Biden's son. It has been verified.
The last variant will be named Communism.
HuMcK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Instagram post saying she's his sister at least is real. Seems to be some dispute about his "medical degrees" too, someone says what he means by that is an CNA certification and a Phlebotimist certification.

Republicans do this a lot, present some partisan activist as a neutral observer by ignoring (i.e. lying about) their background entirely. Conservative columnist Selena Zito is famous for gathering GOP influencers and advocates for a topical discussion, but labeling them as "concerned parents" or something else that gives a purposefully misleading impression of who is speaking.
Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Have not verified this is not Brandon Tatum's sister but here you go...

HuMcK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This all just feels so reminiscent of the "sharia law" panic from 10-ish years ago, when conservatives kept launching crusades against public education because facebook astroturfing told them to, and no amount of "we really don't teach this stuff" could convince them. It's gotten to a point where the opponents of CRT can't or won't even articulate what it is, and it seems like what they actually don't like is an emphasis on teaching the history of US slavery in public education, which is weird because they also said we should keep Confederate statues because even if objectionable they represent "history".
Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

This all just feels so reminiscent of the "sharia law" panic from 10-ish years ago, when conservatives kept launching crusades against public education because facebook astroturfing told them to, and no amount of "we really don't teach this stuff" could convince them. It's gotten to a point where the opponents of CRT can't or won't even articulate what it is, and it seems like what they actually don't like is an emphasis on teaching the history of US slavery in public education, which is weird because they also said we should keep Confederate statues because even if objectionable they represent "history".


+1
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

This all just feels so reminiscent of the "sharia law" panic from 10-ish years ago, when conservatives kept launching crusades against public education because facebook astroturfing told them to, and no amount of "we really don't teach this stuff" could convince them. It's gotten to a point where the opponents of CRT can't or won't even articulate what it is, and it seems like what they actually don't like is an emphasis on teaching the history of US slavery in public education, which is weird because they also said we should keep Confederate statues because even if objectionable they represent "history".
Stop acting like CRT has not been defined.

Here is Delgado & Stefanic providing a definition of CRT.




Leftists can't argue that its somehow so opaque and elite a academic concept that it can't be defined or understood without years of study...and also super obvious that its benign and should not be opposed.

As far as statues, I have always opposed letting leftists & liberals tear down the statues of men who died in war. Republicans have certainly not...in many cases they have worked with the same activist groups tearing them down. They have never done much but oppose it expect in PR materials to get money from conservatives.
jupiter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
anything other than privatization is a waste of time
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

It's gotten to a point where the opponents of CRT can't or won't even articulate what it is, and it seems like what they actually don't like is an emphasis on teaching the history of US slavery in public education, which is weird because they also said we should keep Confederate statues because even if objectionable they represent "history".
What makes it seem that way? Have you read the bill?
Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:

Twitter is saying that guy is Candace Owen's brotherbut that's not verified


Nope.

"I was wrong...BUT"

ABC BEAR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Like UFO's we know oreo's exist, yet it is so strange to see two in the same photo.....this is what passes for excitement in the twitter universe.
Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear said:

HuMcK said:

This all just feels so reminiscent of the "sharia law" panic from 10-ish years ago, when conservatives kept launching crusades against public education because facebook astroturfing told them to, and no amount of "we really don't teach this stuff" could convince them. It's gotten to a point where the opponents of CRT can't or won't even articulate what it is, and it seems like what they actually don't like is an emphasis on teaching the history of US slavery in public education, which is weird because they also said we should keep Confederate statues because even if objectionable they represent "history".
Stop acting like CRT has not been defined.

Here is Delgado & Stefanic providing a definition of CRT.




Leftists can't argue that its somehow so opaque and elite a academic concept that it can't be defined or understood without years of study...and also super obvious that its benign and should not be opposed.

As far as statues, I have always opposed letting leftists & liberals tear down the statues of men who died in war. Republicans have certainly not...in many cases they have worked with the same activist groups tearing them down. They have never done much but oppose it expect in PR materials to get money from conservatives.
There is a definition. The problem is that the legislators pushing these bills don't know, and certainly don't understand, that definition.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

Redbrickbear said:

HuMcK said:

This all just feels so reminiscent of the "sharia law" panic from 10-ish years ago, when conservatives kept launching crusades against public education because facebook astroturfing told them to, and no amount of "we really don't teach this stuff" could convince them. It's gotten to a point where the opponents of CRT can't or won't even articulate what it is, and it seems like what they actually don't like is an emphasis on teaching the history of US slavery in public education, which is weird because they also said we should keep Confederate statues because even if objectionable they represent "history".
Stop acting like CRT has not been defined.

Here is Delgado & Stefanic providing a definition of CRT.




Leftists can't argue that its somehow so opaque and elite a academic concept that it can't be defined or understood without years of study...and also super obvious that its benign and should not be opposed.

As far as statues, I have always opposed letting leftists & liberals tear down the statues of men who died in war. Republicans have certainly not...in many cases they have worked with the same activist groups tearing them down. They have never done much but oppose it expect in PR materials to get money from conservatives.
There is a definition. The problem is that the legislators pushing these bills don't know, and certainly don't understand, that definition.
What is it, and how have they misunderstood it?
Porteroso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
While I agree CRT shouldn't be taught in schools, the bill makes illegal for a teacher to teach that slavery and racism are anything but deviations from the founding fathers' principles. How ignorant is that lol?

And if you're going to ban CRT, ban CRT, not some generic "you can't talk about race anymore." Bill is a train wreck, but it apparently used enough Trumpian language to satisfy Trump lovers, and that's all Texas Repubs care about.
Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Booray said:

Redbrickbear said:

HuMcK said:

This all just feels so reminiscent of the "sharia law" panic from 10-ish years ago, when conservatives kept launching crusades against public education because facebook astroturfing told them to, and no amount of "we really don't teach this stuff" could convince them. It's gotten to a point where the opponents of CRT can't or won't even articulate what it is, and it seems like what they actually don't like is an emphasis on teaching the history of US slavery in public education, which is weird because they also said we should keep Confederate statues because even if objectionable they represent "history".
Stop acting like CRT has not been defined.

Here is Delgado & Stefanic providing a definition of CRT.




Leftists can't argue that its somehow so opaque and elite a academic concept that it can't be defined or understood without years of study...and also super obvious that its benign and should not be opposed.

As far as statues, I have always opposed letting leftists & liberals tear down the statues of men who died in war. Republicans have certainly not...in many cases they have worked with the same activist groups tearing them down. They have never done much but oppose it expect in PR materials to get money from conservatives.
There is a definition. The problem is that the legislators pushing these bills don't know, and certainly don't understand, that definition.
What is it, and how have they misunderstood it?
The House floor leader for the Texas bill argued:

Repeatedly invoking critical race theory, Toth later asked, "Do you want our Texas kids to be taught that the system of government in the United States and Texas is nothing but a cover-up for white supremacy? Do you want them to be taught a souped-up version of Marxism?"

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/11/critical-race-theory-texas-schools-legislature/

CRT as I know it is the study of how racism impacts policy. The underlying argument is that racism informs every aspect of our legal and social structures to the disadvantage of minorities and African-Americans in particular.

I see a world of difference between Toth's characterization and my understanding of the matter.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Stupid bill. Nobody wins by banning ideas.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

Sam Lowry said:

Booray said:

Redbrickbear said:

HuMcK said:

This all just feels so reminiscent of the "sharia law" panic from 10-ish years ago, when conservatives kept launching crusades against public education because facebook astroturfing told them to, and no amount of "we really don't teach this stuff" could convince them. It's gotten to a point where the opponents of CRT can't or won't even articulate what it is, and it seems like what they actually don't like is an emphasis on teaching the history of US slavery in public education, which is weird because they also said we should keep Confederate statues because even if objectionable they represent "history".
Stop acting like CRT has not been defined.

Here is Delgado & Stefanic providing a definition of CRT.




Leftists can't argue that its somehow so opaque and elite a academic concept that it can't be defined or understood without years of study...and also super obvious that its benign and should not be opposed.

As far as statues, I have always opposed letting leftists & liberals tear down the statues of men who died in war. Republicans have certainly not...in many cases they have worked with the same activist groups tearing them down. They have never done much but oppose it expect in PR materials to get money from conservatives.
There is a definition. The problem is that the legislators pushing these bills don't know, and certainly don't understand, that definition.
What is it, and how have they misunderstood it?
The House floor leader for the Texas bill argued:

Repeatedly invoking critical race theory, Toth later asked, "Do you want our Texas kids to be taught that the system of government in the United States and Texas is nothing but a cover-up for white supremacy? Do you want them to be taught a souped-up version of Marxism?"

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/11/critical-race-theory-texas-schools-legislature/

CRT as I know it is the study of how racism impacts policy. The underlying argument is that racism informs every aspect of our legal and social structures to the disadvantage of minorities and African-Americans in particular.

I see a world of difference between Toth's characterization and my understanding of the matter.
It sounds like they understand it pretty well. If racism informs every aspect of our legal and social structures, that includes liberalism, rationalism, legal reasoning, equality theory, etc. The idea that neutral constitutional principles are a facade for the exercise of power is directly related to CRT's undeniable origins in Marxism, which analyzed social structures in terms of class conflict and false consciousness.

Republicans may be obnoxious, but they're not wrong.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Porteroso said:

While I agree CRT shouldn't be taught in schools, the bill makes illegal for a teacher to teach that slavery and racism are anything but deviations from the founding fathers' principles. How ignorant is that lol?



I would argue that slavery was in fact a huge deviation from the Founders actual vision.

They wanted a free Republic of independent land holding White farmers...and other types of free tradesmen (blacksmiths, carpenters, etc)

Having millions of Sub-Saharan African slaves here was certainly not part of their dream scenario.

Most assumed slavery would die out in a few decades after independence and those Africans eventually repatriated back to Africa.

Just because it didn't work out that way does not mean it was not in fact a HUGE deviation from what they wanted.
Forest Bueller
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CRT has been around for a long time. It is a rather obscure academic theory and for some reason is becoming mainstreamed or trying to become such.. If it actually becomes the educational standard in schools, the level of ****ed up our society will become cannot be overstated. Might as well plan to become Lesotho.


Quote:

Critical Race Theory
  • believes racism is present in every aspect of life, every relationship, and every interaction and therefore has its advocates look for it everywhere
  • relies upon "interest convergence" (white people only give black people opportunities and freedoms when it is also in their own interests) and therefore doesn't trust any attempt to make racism better
  • is against free societies and wants to dismantle them and replace them with something its advocates control
  • only treats race issues as "socially constructed groups," so there are no individuals in Critical Race Theory
  • believes science, reason, and evidence are a "white" way of knowing and that storytelling and lived experience are a "black" alternative, which hurts everyone, especially black people
  • rejects all potential alternatives, like colorblindness, as forms of racism, making itself the only allowable game in town (which is totalitarian)
  • acts like anyone who disagrees with it must do so for racist and white supremacist reasons, even if those people are black (which is also totalitarian)
  • cannot be satisfied, so it becomes a kind of activist black hole that threatens to destroy everything it is introduced into

I could go into great detail of each tenant as there is more, and many other subsets of each individual tenant.

The most destructive is the one where science, reason, knowledge, logic ect. is whiteness and white supremacy. And parables, storytelling, and shared lived experience is black learning. Just a tiny excerpt.


Quote:

The Theory of Critical Social Justice is particularly skeptical of, if not hostile to, science. This hostility is so profound that it isn't entirely incorrect to say that the point of Critical Social Justice (and much of the postmodern Theory it has adapted to its purposes) exists to undermine scientific credibility without bothering to learn any science at all. Critical Social Justice sees science as just one way of knowing among many. Further, it considers it a cultural artifact of white, Western, masculinist cultures, which makes it a "way of knowing" that is inherently problematic and in need of having its hegemonic influence disrupted, dismantled, deconstructed and replaced with alternatives. Obviously, those would be critical theories, instead.


So actual science is just "whiteness" and the "white" way of learning and needs to be replaced with a CRT way of learning, through parables, storytelling and lived experiences, aka ancedotal evidence not actual science.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

Sam Lowry said:

Booray said:

Redbrickbear said:

HuMcK said:

This all just feels so reminiscent of the "sharia law" panic from 10-ish years ago, when conservatives kept launching crusades against public education because facebook astroturfing told them to, and no amount of "we really don't teach this stuff" could convince them. It's gotten to a point where the opponents of CRT can't or won't even articulate what it is, and it seems like what they actually don't like is an emphasis on teaching the history of US slavery in public education, which is weird because they also said we should keep Confederate statues because even if objectionable they represent "history".
Stop acting like CRT has not been defined.

Here is Delgado & Stefanic providing a definition of CRT.




Leftists can't argue that its somehow so opaque and elite a academic concept that it can't be defined or understood without years of study...and also super obvious that its benign and should not be opposed.

As far as statues, I have always opposed letting leftists & liberals tear down the statues of men who died in war. Republicans have certainly not...in many cases they have worked with the same activist groups tearing them down. They have never done much but oppose it expect in PR materials to get money from conservatives.
There is a definition. The problem is that the legislators pushing these bills don't know, and certainly don't understand, that definition.
What is it, and how have they misunderstood it?
The House floor leader for the Texas bill argued:

Repeatedly invoking critical race theory, Toth later asked, "Do you want our Texas kids to be taught that the system of government in the United States and Texas is nothing but a cover-up for white supremacy? Do you want them to be taught a souped-up version of Marxism?"

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/11/critical-race-theory-texas-schools-legislature/

CRT as I know it is the study of how racism impacts policy. The underlying argument is that racism informs every aspect of our legal and social structures to the disadvantage of minorities and African-Americans in particular.

I see a world of difference between Toth's characterization and my understanding of the matter.


What's ironic is you think your definition is all that different from Toth's when it's not.
Proud 1992 Alum
How long do you want to ignore this user?
An example of this CRT thinking is the new math guidelines that basically said that the idea that there is a correct answer to a mathematical equation is a product of white supremacy. Crazy sh*.
Canon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:


Stupid bill. Nobody wins by banning ideas.


"There is a thought that stops thought. That is the only thought that ought to be stopped." G.K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy

Marxism is that thought.
Forest Bueller
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hopefully most people who support CRT. are just reflexively supporting something they haven't deeply investigated and think it is simply a system that is supporting equality for all.

If they have done a deep dive evaluation and are intelligent enough to understand it's tenants and how it views one subset of the human race and how it wishes to deconstruct normal society with CRTs version of reality, they are at best incredibly misguided at worst incredibly racist.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Woke liberalism in education:

[Basic kindness and empathy requires us to teach black 4-year-olds that others feel their lives don't matter. If you oppose teaching black kids that, according to tons of people, their lives don't matter then you are part of the problem. "I like you and think you matter but everybody else hates you for the color of your skin"]

This is a manipulative, abusive relationship tactic
Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Proud 1992 Alum said:

An example of this CRT thinking is the new math guidelines that basically said that the idea that there is a correct answer to a mathematical equation is a product of white supremacy. Crazy sh*.


Link?
D. C. Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Porteroso said:

While I agree CRT shouldn't be taught in schools, the bill makes illegal for a teacher to teach that slavery and racism are anything but deviations from the founding fathers' principles. How ignorant is that lol?

And if you're going to ban CRT, ban CRT, not some generic "you can't talk about race anymore." Bill is a train wreck, but it apparently used enough Trumpian language to satisfy Trump lovers, and that's all Texas Repubs care about.


If the founding father's principles include the assertion that all men are created equal etc. etc. help me understand how slavery/racism can be anything other than a deviation from those principles.
Proud 1992 Alum
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

Proud 1992 Alum said:

An example of this CRT thinking is the new math guidelines that basically said that the idea that there is a correct answer to a mathematical equation is a product of white supremacy. Crazy sh*.


Link?


California Leftists Try to Cancel Math Class https://www.wsj.com/articles/california-leftists-try-to-cancel-math-class-11621355858

https://katu.com/news/local/debate-emerges-over-racism-and-white-supremacy-in-math-instruction

https://www.baltimoresun.com/maryland/carroll/opinion/cc-op-sprinkle-031321-20210313-m2lg4tomcndolfj5kebf6asike-story.html

Includes these gems:

The Oregon DOE states: "The concept of mathematics being purely objective is unequivocally false." Tracy Castro-Gill, the ethnic studies program manager of the Seattle Public School, suggests that the problem is "how math is used as a tool for oppression."

But the Oregon DOE is not alone in distributing its racist mathematics propaganda. Reported by David Freddoso of the Washington Examiner, Rochelle Gutierrez, education professor at the University of Illinois, stated, "On many levels, mathematics itself operates as Whiteness."

Another group known as the Mathematical Association of America released a statement on Oct. 2, declaring: "As mathematicians we see the pattern of science being ignored [speaking specifically of the federal response to COVID-19] and the pattern of violence against our colleagues that give rise to race and racism." The MMA continues, "It's time for all members of our profession to acknowledge that mathematics is created by humans and therefore inherently carries human biases."

Laurie Rubel, Brooklyn College Professor of Math Education, offered her words of wisdom on Twitter, writing that the 2+2=4 equation "reeks of white supremacist patriarchy."

 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.