For those of you who were so scared of the CRT bogeyman

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/07/09/controversy-teachers-dumbest-colleges/

“Hillsdale College — which Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas called “a shining city on a hill” and which hired his activist wife, Ginni Thomas, to help establish a full-time presence in the nation’s capital — has became an important force in that movement under the leadership of Arnn, who has allied himself with former president Donald Trump. The college has helped launch dozens of “classical” charter schools across the country (Hillsdale doesn’t own or operate the schools but trains faculty and staff and shares curriculum) — and, now, at Lee’s invitation, Hillsdale is helping to open at least 50 charter schools in Tennessee. Charter schools are publicly funded but privately operated.”

“The charter schools use a Hillsdale K-12 curriculum that is centered on Western civilization and designed to help “students acquire a mature love for America.” A Hillsdale K-12 civics and U.S. history curriculum released last year extols conservative values, attacks progressive ones and distorts civil rights history, saying, for example: “The civil rights movement was almost immediately turned into programs that ran counter to the lofty ideals of the Founders.” Hillsdale College itself offers a “classical liberal arts core” to its students; the website lists more than 30 authors and thinkers that students will encounter — nearly all of them White men”

While there is still not a single K-12 school that teaches CRT, conservatives are openly attacking education and rewriting history. On one hand, I’m impressed they were able to make Dems out as CRT monsters while they were the ones doing the actual manipulating of history. On the other, I’m so embarrassed for my friends and fellow voters in VA that fell for it.

You are manipulating language to serve your political goals. CRT in the media is shorthand for the tenets that are outgrowths of CRT and you know this. And from my view as a teacher, you absolutely must know that those tenets have infected nearly every lesson plan. So stop with your "no school teaches CRT" and realize that no one is that dumb. Go to teacherspayteachers or any curriculum vendor and see the fruits of the CRT tree.

Omg. Schools acknowledged that racism exists.

Better tear it all down.

I hate the conservative CRT panic, and I also hate the disingenuous responses from the left about CRT. Yes structural racism has perpetuated inequality that persists today. No, "critical race theory" is not specifically taught in K-12 classrooms. However, "CRT" is used as a broader catch-all for "anti-racist" type thinking that has made its way into the instruction of teachers and into classroom curriculum. It is not merely acknowledging racism or teaching that racist things happened in the past. It also includes focusing on things like white privilege (which exists) without also necessarily focusing on the myriad of other variables that form an individual and put things like "white privilege" into context.

Omg. Someone somewhere acknowledged that white people have privilege.

BURN IT ALL DOWN.

There you go again. Just a completely disingenuous response. Yes "white privilege" exists in the sense that -- if all other variables are equal -- the white person is going to have an advantage in the U.S. over the nonwhite person. But, it's also true, that all other variables are never equal. For example, in most situations, an educated black person from a middle class background is going to have a leg up on an uneducated white person from a background of poverty.

How does a failure to adequately teach about socio economic classism make it wrong to teach about racism? There is no logical connection there. It is a false argument to hide the fact that you don't want kids taught about racism in school.

You've got me wrong. Absolutely teach about racism. Teach about the horrid shit that's been done to blacks in this country for centuries. Especially please teach more about how southern whites successfully used terrorism and violence to short circuit democracy in the old Confederacy after Reconstruction. I certainly didn't learn enough about that in the 70s and 80s. And teach them that everything in our history, good and bad, has ripple effects that impact life today.

But don't teach kids that there is no alternative between "racist" and "anti-racist" (a la Kendi). Don't teach kids that they are racist for simply existing in a society where structural racism exists. Don't teach kids that if they disagree with anti-racist teachings, it's merely because they're "uncomfortable" with having their white privilege revealed. Don't teach white kids from poverty born to parents who are uneducated that they are "privileged" merely because they're white -- unless you're going to put in the context of a lot of other intersectional privileges that others may have that they don't have (which, I suppose goes to your question about "how failure to teach about socio-economic classism makes it wrong to teach about racism".) Any individual has a bunch of privileges and lack of privileges that combine to affect their lot in life. Teaching about one and omitting the others creates a distorted lens.

+1000

+ 1 million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it “boogeyman”? I see bogeyman and I think enemy fighter jet in “Top Gun”.

I am the pp and also an English major:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogeyman

The anti CRT platform was just a way to get somewhat racist people to vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/07/09/controversy-teachers-dumbest-colleges/

“Hillsdale College — which Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas called “a shining city on a hill” and which hired his activist wife, Ginni Thomas, to help establish a full-time presence in the nation’s capital — has became an important force in that movement under the leadership of Arnn, who has allied himself with former president Donald Trump. The college has helped launch dozens of “classical” charter schools across the country (Hillsdale doesn’t own or operate the schools but trains faculty and staff and shares curriculum) — and, now, at Lee’s invitation, Hillsdale is helping to open at least 50 charter schools in Tennessee. Charter schools are publicly funded but privately operated.”

“The charter schools use a Hillsdale K-12 curriculum that is centered on Western civilization and designed to help “students acquire a mature love for America.” A Hillsdale K-12 civics and U.S. history curriculum released last year extols conservative values, attacks progressive ones and distorts civil rights history, saying, for example: “The civil rights movement was almost immediately turned into programs that ran counter to the lofty ideals of the Founders.” Hillsdale College itself offers a “classical liberal arts core” to its students; the website lists more than 30 authors and thinkers that students will encounter — nearly all of them White men”

While there is still not a single K-12 school that teaches CRT, conservatives are openly attacking education and rewriting history. On one hand, I’m impressed they were able to make Dems out as CRT monsters while they were the ones doing the actual manipulating of history. On the other, I’m so embarrassed for my friends and fellow voters in VA that fell for it.

You are manipulating language to serve your political goals. CRT in the media is shorthand for the tenets that are outgrowths of CRT and you know this. And from my view as a teacher, you absolutely must know that those tenets have infected nearly every lesson plan. So stop with your "no school teaches CRT" and realize that no one is that dumb. Go to teacherspayteachers or any curriculum vendor and see the fruits of the CRT tree.

Omg. Schools acknowledged that racism exists.

Better tear it all down.

I hate the conservative CRT panic, and I also hate the disingenuous responses from the left about CRT. Yes structural racism has perpetuated inequality that persists today. No, "critical race theory" is not specifically taught in K-12 classrooms. However, "CRT" is used as a broader catch-all for "anti-racist" type thinking that has made its way into the instruction of teachers and into classroom curriculum. It is not merely acknowledging racism or teaching that racist things happened in the past. It also includes focusing on things like white privilege (which exists) without also necessarily focusing on the myriad of other variables that form an individual and put things like "white privilege" into context.

Omg. Someone somewhere acknowledged that white people have privilege.

BURN IT ALL DOWN.

There you go again. Just a completely disingenuous response. Yes "white privilege" exists in the sense that -- if all other variables are equal -- the white person is going to have an advantage in the U.S. over the nonwhite person. But, it's also true, that all other variables are never equal. For example, in most situations, an educated black person from a middle class background is going to have a leg up on an uneducated white person from a background of poverty.

How does a failure to adequately teach about socio economic classism make it wrong to teach about racism? There is no logical connection there. It is a false argument to hide the fact that you don't want kids taught about racism in school.

You've got me wrong. Absolutely teach about racism. Teach about the horrid shit that's been done to blacks in this country for centuries. Especially please teach more about how southern whites successfully used terrorism and violence to short circuit democracy in the old Confederacy after Reconstruction. I certainly didn't learn enough about that in the 70s and 80s. And teach them that everything in our history, good and bad, has ripple effects that impact life today.

But don't teach kids that there is no alternative between "racist" and "anti-racist" (a la Kendi). Don't teach kids that they are racist for simply existing in a society where structural racism exists. Don't teach kids that if they disagree with anti-racist teachings, it's merely because they're "uncomfortable" with having their white privilege revealed. Don't teach white kids from poverty born to parents who are uneducated that they are "privileged" merely because they're white -- unless you're going to put in the context of a lot of other intersectional privileges that others may have that they don't have (which, I suppose goes to your question about "how failure to teach about socio-economic classism makes it wrong to teach about racism".) Any individual has a bunch of privileges and lack of privileges that combine to affect their lot in life. Teaching about one and omitting the others creates a distorted lens.

Way to completely distort anything that was actually taught in VA.

Teaching about “white privilege” isn’t saying anyone is “privileged”. You are completely missing the point.

You fcked over women because you misunderstood anti-racism. Congrats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That large gap mostly exists for black boys. Black girls almost don't have a gap.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/upshot/race-class-white-and-black-men.html.

I'm not saying racism isn't a problem, but there's nuance in there that needs to be teased out. Why do black women seem to fare almost as well as white women when controlled for income, and why do black immigrant boys seem much more upwardly mobile?

A black, middle class girl and a black immigrant boy will in most cases do better than a poor, white boy.

The link you posted does not exist

[Anonymous]

Try this one:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/upshot/race-class-white-and-black-men.html

Mostly talks about black boys but also states that black women have similar outcomes to white women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it “boogeyman”? I see bogeyman and I think enemy fighter jet in “Top Gun”.

I am the pp and also an English major:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogeyman

The anti CRT platform was just a way to get somewhat racist people to vote.

What a lie!

Why am I not surprised you distort the facts or outright lie, OP?

You probably even try to stick to the narrowest of CRT definitions to avoid criticism of CRT - just as Terry McAuliffe did to wriggle out of defending a divisive and vile ideology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it “boogeyman”? I see bogeyman and I think enemy fighter jet in “Top Gun”.

I am the pp and also an English major:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogeyman

The anti CRT platform was just a way to get somewhat racist people to vote.

What a lie!

Why am I not surprised you distort the facts or outright lie, OP?

You probably even try to stick to the narrowest of CRT definitions to avoid criticism of CRT - just as Terry McAuliffe did to wriggle out of defending a divisive and vile ideology.

Defining CRT as a graduate level field of study is the method of choice for short circuiting discussion.

[Anonymous]

A Hillsdale K-12 civics and U.S. history curriculum released last year extols conservative values, attacks progressive ones and distorts civil rights history, saying, for example: “The civil rights movement was almost immediately turned into programs that ran counter to the lofty ideals of the Founders.”

For everyone who truly thinks racism is bad…

Where is the outrage for this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it “boogeyman”? I see bogeyman and I think enemy fighter jet in “Top Gun”.

I am the pp and also an English major:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogeyman

The anti CRT platform was just a way to get somewhat racist people to vote.

in a nutshell yes, more GOP propaganda to stir up fear about a fictional problem to mobilize their base

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/07/09/controversy-teachers-dumbest-colleges/

“Hillsdale College — which Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas called “a shining city on a hill” and which hired his activist wife, Ginni Thomas, to help establish a full-time presence in the nation’s capital — has became an important force in that movement under the leadership of Arnn, who has allied himself with former president Donald Trump. The college has helped launch dozens of “classical” charter schools across the country (Hillsdale doesn’t own or operate the schools but trains faculty and staff and shares curriculum) — and, now, at Lee’s invitation, Hillsdale is helping to open at least 50 charter schools in Tennessee. Charter schools are publicly funded but privately operated.”

“The charter schools use a Hillsdale K-12 curriculum that is centered on Western civilization and designed to help “students acquire a mature love for America.” A Hillsdale K-12 civics and U.S. history curriculum released last year extols conservative values, attacks progressive ones and distorts civil rights history, saying, for example: “The civil rights movement was almost immediately turned into programs that ran counter to the lofty ideals of the Founders.” Hillsdale College itself offers a “classical liberal arts core” to its students; the website lists more than 30 authors and thinkers that students will encounter — nearly all of them White men”

While there is still not a single K-12 school that teaches CRT, conservatives are openly attacking education and rewriting history. On one hand, I’m impressed they were able to make Dems out as CRT monsters while they were the ones doing the actual manipulating of history. On the other, I’m so embarrassed for my friends and fellow voters in VA that fell for it.

You are manipulating language to serve your political goals. CRT in the media is shorthand for the tenets that are outgrowths of CRT and you know this. And from my view as a teacher, you absolutely must know that those tenets have infected nearly every lesson plan. So stop with your "no school teaches CRT" and realize that no one is that dumb. Go to teacherspayteachers or any curriculum vendor and see the fruits of the CRT tree.

Omg. Schools acknowledged that racism exists.

Better tear it all down.

I hate the conservative CRT panic, and I also hate the disingenuous responses from the left about CRT. Yes structural racism has perpetuated inequality that persists today. No, "critical race theory" is not specifically taught in K-12 classrooms. However, "CRT" is used as a broader catch-all for "anti-racist" type thinking that has made its way into the instruction of teachers and into classroom curriculum. It is not merely acknowledging racism or teaching that racist things happened in the past. It also includes focusing on things like white privilege (which exists) without also necessarily focusing on the myriad of other variables that form an individual and put things like "white privilege" into context.

Omg. Someone somewhere acknowledged that white people have privilege.

BURN IT ALL DOWN.

There you go again. Just a completely disingenuous response. Yes "white privilege" exists in the sense that -- if all other variables are equal -- the white person is going to have an advantage in the U.S. over the nonwhite person. But, it's also true, that all other variables are never equal. For example, in most situations, an educated black person from a middle class background is going to have a leg up on an uneducated white person from a background of poverty.

How does a failure to adequately teach about socio economic classism make it wrong to teach about racism? There is no logical connection there. It is a false argument to hide the fact that you don't want kids taught about racism in school.

You've got me wrong. Absolutely teach about racism. Teach about the horrid shit that's been done to blacks in this country for centuries. Especially please teach more about how southern whites successfully used terrorism and violence to short circuit democracy in the old Confederacy after Reconstruction. I certainly didn't learn enough about that in the 70s and 80s. And teach them that everything in our history, good and bad, has ripple effects that impact life today.

But don't teach kids that there is no alternative between "racist" and "anti-racist" (a la Kendi). Don't teach kids that they are racist for simply existing in a society where structural racism exists. Don't teach kids that if they disagree with anti-racist teachings, it's merely because they're "uncomfortable" with having their white privilege revealed. Don't teach white kids from poverty born to parents who are uneducated that they are "privileged" merely because they're white -- unless you're going to put in the context of a lot of other intersectional privileges that others may have that they don't have (which, I suppose goes to your question about "how failure to teach about socio-economic classism makes it wrong to teach about racism".) Any individual has a bunch of privileges and lack of privileges that combine to affect their lot in life. Teaching about one and omitting the others creates a distorted lens.

Way to completely distort anything that was actually taught in VA.

Teaching about “white privilege” isn’t saying anyone is “privileged”. You are completely missing the point.

You fcked over women because you misunderstood anti-racism. Congrats.

I've voted Democrat up and down the line for the last 20 years because the Republicans are terrible. So you can't discount me so easily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/07/09/controversy-teachers-dumbest-colleges/

“Hillsdale College — which Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas called “a shining city on a hill” and which hired his activist wife, Ginni Thomas, to help establish a full-time presence in the nation’s capital — has became an important force in that movement under the leadership of Arnn, who has allied himself with former president Donald Trump. The college has helped launch dozens of “classical” charter schools across the country (Hillsdale doesn’t own or operate the schools but trains faculty and staff and shares curriculum) — and, now, at Lee’s invitation, Hillsdale is helping to open at least 50 charter schools in Tennessee. Charter schools are publicly funded but privately operated.”

“The charter schools use a Hillsdale K-12 curriculum that is centered on Western civilization and designed to help “students acquire a mature love for America.” A Hillsdale K-12 civics and U.S. history curriculum released last year extols conservative values, attacks progressive ones and distorts civil rights history, saying, for example: “The civil rights movement was almost immediately turned into programs that ran counter to the lofty ideals of the Founders.” Hillsdale College itself offers a “classical liberal arts core” to its students; the website lists more than 30 authors and thinkers that students will encounter — nearly all of them White men”

While there is still not a single K-12 school that teaches CRT, conservatives are openly attacking education and rewriting history. On one hand, I’m impressed they were able to make Dems out as CRT monsters while they were the ones doing the actual manipulating of history. On the other, I’m so embarrassed for my friends and fellow voters in VA that fell for it.

Ummmm... thanks but... my kids don't go to charter schools

But if you live in Virginia, this is what Glenn Youngkin is trying to do to schools. He preyed on white moms who were scared about their kids' education during the pandemic and now he's taking advantage of them and using them to set his own agenda. You'll see the changes this year.

This is all part of the GOP master plan which includes curtailing women's civil rights and providing indoctrination for the Christian Theocracy.

Well then get out and vote. Last I checked women are more than half of society. Could have elected anyone you want. I'm an atheist and hate the GOP's backwards religious thinking. However, there are other issues that are important to me and so I was regrettably forced to vote GOP

No one “forced” you to vote GOP.

You fcked over our state for some dumb ass reason.

Own it.

Ha, ha, exactly! Forced by gunpoint to vote GOP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That large gap mostly exists for black boys. Black girls almost don't have a gap.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/upshot/race-class-white-and-black-men.html.

I'm not saying racism isn't a problem, but there's nuance in there that needs to be teased out. Why do black women seem to fare almost as well as white women when controlled for income, and why do black immigrant boys seem much more upwardly mobile?

A black, middle class girl and a black immigrant boy will in most cases do better than a poor, white boy.

1)I think the key in looking at “controlled for income” is also openly acknowledging what that actually means. This could include looking at the income and education of family of origin, as well as current income. This could also look at population norms, since the percentages of Black women of a certain age with UMC incomes might be much smaller than the percentage of similarly situated white women. I’d also want to know a lot of details about what “fare almost as well” actually means.

2) Many immigrants come to the US for a better life —and they find it. Many immigrants are also able to come here as immigrants because they already have significant resources. So compare that optimism, resources and possible community support for upward mobility with the experiences and histories of Black Americans. There are many differences.

Again, it would be helpful to know what “do better” means. Is it just things like income and educational accomplishments— or does it include measures of personal well-being as well?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

A Hillsdale K-12 civics and U.S. history curriculum released last year extols conservative values, attacks progressive ones and distorts civil rights history, saying, for example: “The civil rights movement was almost immediately turned into programs that ran counter to the lofty ideals of the Founders.”

For everyone who truly thinks racism is bad…

Where is the outrage for this?

I’m not clear what you’re asking. When I read this, my first thought was: “Of Course”! Many of “the Founders” owned slaves and fervently believed in white supremacy. So, yeah: “ the civil rights movement was almost immediately turned into programs that ran counter to the lofty ideals” of white male enslavers whose ideals supported the rights and interests of white male property owners. Running counter to those supposed “ideals” was and is the point.

Are you asking for “outrage” at efforts to promote equal rights? Or something else?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That large gap mostly exists for black boys. Black girls almost don't have a gap.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/upshot/race-class-white-and-black-men.html.

I'm not saying racism isn't a problem, but there's nuance in there that needs to be teased out. Why do black women seem to fare almost as well as white women when controlled for income, and why do black immigrant boys seem much more upwardly mobile?

A black, middle class girl and a black immigrant boy will in most cases do better than a poor, white boy.

1)I think the key in looking at “controlled for income” is also openly acknowledging what that actually means. This could include looking at the income and education of family of origin, as well as current income. This could also look at population norms, since the percentages of Black women of a certain age with UMC incomes might be much smaller than the percentage of similarly situated white women. I’d also want to know a lot of details about what “fare almost as well” actually means.

2) Many immigrants come to the US for a better life —and they find it. Many immigrants are also able to come here as immigrants because they already have significant resources. So compare that optimism, resources and possible community support for upward mobility with the experiences and histories of Black Americans. There are many differences.

Again, it would be helpful to know what “do better” means. Is it just things like income and educational accomplishments— or does it include measures of personal well-being as well?

Interesting that you put "optimism" in as a resource. I think I agree, but I don't think I'd really thought of it as something that immigrants might have that native born people - despite potentially being similar in other resources - might lack.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That large gap mostly exists for black boys. Black girls almost don't have a gap.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/upshot/race-class-white-and-black-men.html.

I'm not saying racism isn't a problem, but there's nuance in there that needs to be teased out. Why do black women seem to fare almost as well as white women when controlled for income, and why do black immigrant boys seem much more upwardly mobile?

A black, middle class girl and a black immigrant boy will in most cases do better than a poor, white boy.

1)I think the key in looking at “controlled for income” is also openly acknowledging what that actually means. This could include looking at the income and education of family of origin, as well as current income. This could also look at population norms, since the percentages of Black women of a certain age with UMC incomes might be much smaller than the percentage of similarly situated white women. I’d also want to know a lot of details about what “fare almost as well” actually means.

2) Many immigrants come to the US for a better life —and they find it. Many immigrants are also able to come here as immigrants because they already have significant resources. So compare that optimism, resources and possible community support for upward mobility with the experiences and histories of Black Americans. There are many differences.

Again, it would be helpful to know what “do better” means. Is it just things like income and educational accomplishments— or does it include measures of personal well-being as well?

Interesting that you put "optimism" in as a resource. I think I agree, but I don't think I'd really thought of it as something that immigrants might have that native born people - despite potentially being similar in other resources - might lack.

I think optimism IS a resource — particularly if it’s collective optimism, and the optimism is generally met with positive results.

Compare that with, say, American born Blacks who lived through things like moving to DC for a better life, establishing themselves, only to have the President ramp up racial segregation and Jim Crow laws; or the WWII generation that dealt with both the draft, and segregation at home and in the military; or people who established homes and communities, only to have all that they built obliterated through “urban renewal”. There’s obviously a lot that I could say, including discussing current and ongoing issues like gentrification of formerly tight knit neighborhoods, and the pervasive, threatening, traumas of police brutality.

I’m not trying to diminish the hardships of immigrant experiences in any way — just saying that there’s a huge difference between reaching for a better life and more opportunities and finding them vs having the ongoing traumatic history that includes not just events like Tulsa, but the progressive weakening of hard-won civil rights and economic and social stability.