FCPS paying for Critical Race Theory curriculum. To be implemented in a year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PhD here agin, and guess what? Any criticisms of critical race theory are by definition a critical race theory. Because you are engaging with theories of race in a critical way. Hence, critical theory.

“Banning” critical race theory is nonsensical unless you are banning any discussion of race whatsoever. There is room within critical race theory for criticisms because it’s CRITICAL theory.

I thought that Critical Race Theory originated in law schools and was intended to show how racism is baked into the country’s laws.

I read that in the Atlantic article as well and was frustrated by it.

It did not “originate” in the law, though there are critical race theories in the law. It exists in different ways in many fields of academia, certainly in history and sociology but others as well.

God academics are truly to blame for this, as another PP said. And journalists, because I appreciate that the writer of that Atlantic piece did his research, but it’s clear he only consulted lawyers who only told him about theories as they exist in the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of us white people think that it's an important lesson for our children to realize their privilege. I'm glad FCPS is doing it. Better society = better America.

How does telling a bunch of UMC kids that they’re privileged change society at all? Do you think they don’t realize it?

Given the amount of bellyaching about basic civics issues, no, I don't think they do. They think they are victims, and that people who have less are in that situation because they lack merit.

So if they realize they were wrong and they are privileged, what happens? Do they beg mommy to sign their 529 over to a poor kid or give their car keys to someone oppressed, or do they shrug move on, do well and have more privileged offspring in a couple of decades

DP. Well, the notion that privileged folks can just shrug and move on is what’s being challenged. No more faking it.

No one is faking it. Privileged people have known it and tried to maintain and pass down their privilege for thousands of years now

Well, the point is to keep on top of whatever hierarchy exists in the future. Privileged people will go through the motions of pretending to care about these issues and then use their inherited wealth and privilege and sysytemic advantages to remain on top. Thus, the elite college obsession. What society needs to do is to shake this system up—to say, no, you have to be part of real changes.

Good luck with those kind of changes. The only societies that have had that level of change just end up with a new set of oligarchs/aristocrats/privileges

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fairfax is becoming bizarre. It wants to be woke but also wants to be rich and blessed with the Nation’s most elite public high school. Can’t have everything.

Why not? Why can't you have both? The only people who don't think so are people who don't want others to have the same opportunities so make up stories about equity and dumbing down. When in reality, standards don't change. It just would make their kids less special

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PhD here agin, and guess what? Any criticisms of critical race theory are by definition a critical race theory. Because you are engaging with theories of race in a critical way. Hence, critical theory.

“Banning” critical race theory is nonsensical unless you are banning any discussion of race whatsoever. There is room within critical race theory for criticisms because it’s CRITICAL theory.

I thought that Critical Race Theory originated in law schools and was intended to show how racism is baked into the country’s laws.

I read that in the Atlantic article as well and was frustrated by it.

It did not “originate” in the law, though there are critical race theories in the law. It exists in different ways in many fields of academia, certainly in history and sociology but others as well.

God academics are truly to blame for this, as another PP said. And journalists, because I appreciate that the writer of that Atlantic piece did his research, but it’s clear he only consulted lawyers who only told him about theories as they exist in the law.

The ABA reports that Critical Race Theory began in the legal academy in the 1970s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fairfax is becoming bizarre. It wants to be woke but also wants to be rich and blessed with the Nation’s most elite public high school. Can’t have everything.

Why not? Why can't you have both? The only people who don't think so are people who don't want others to have the same opportunities so make up stories about equity and dumbing down. When in reality, standards don't change. It just would make their kids less special

Because the best high school ranking is based on the rigor of the course work and the students’ success with that course work. Whether or not you care about having the school is a different question, but if you care about the ranking you are going to have to accept cut throat admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fairfax is becoming bizarre. It wants to be woke but also wants to be rich and blessed with the Nation’s most elite public high school. Can’t have everything.

Why not? Why can't you have both? The only people who don't think so are people who don't want others to have the same opportunities so make up stories about equity and dumbing down. When in reality, standards don't change. It just would make their kids less special

Are standards changing at TJ? At UVA? The desire to be both woke and elite is strange. Strange because it still allows privileged whites to be the gatekeepers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PhD here agin, and guess what? Any criticisms of critical race theory are by definition a critical race theory. Because you are engaging with theories of race in a critical way. Hence, critical theory.

“Banning” critical race theory is nonsensical unless you are banning any discussion of race whatsoever. There is room within critical race theory for criticisms because it’s CRITICAL theory.

I thought that Critical Race Theory originated in law schools and was intended to show how racism is baked into the country’s laws.

I read that in the Atlantic article as well and was frustrated by it.

It did not “originate” in the law, though there are critical race theories in the law. It exists in different ways in many fields of academia, certainly in history and sociology but others as well.

God academics are truly to blame for this, as another PP said. And journalists, because I appreciate that the writer of that Atlantic piece did his research, but it’s clear he only consulted lawyers who only told him about theories as they exist in the law.

The ABA reports that Critical Race Theory began in the legal academy in the 1970s.

It entered the legal academy in the 1970s.

It wasn’t legal scholars who first developed critical theories of race!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PhD here agin, and guess what? Any criticisms of critical race theory are by definition a critical race theory. Because you are engaging with theories of race in a critical way. Hence, critical theory.

“Banning” critical race theory is nonsensical unless you are banning any discussion of race whatsoever. There is room within critical race theory for criticisms because it’s CRITICAL theory.

I thought that Critical Race Theory originated in law schools and was intended to show how racism is baked into the country’s laws.

I read that in the Atlantic article as well and was frustrated by it.

It did not “originate” in the law, though there are critical race theories in the law. It exists in different ways in many fields of academia, certainly in history and sociology but others as well.

God academics are truly to blame for this, as another PP said. And journalists, because I appreciate that the writer of that Atlantic piece did his research, but it’s clear he only consulted lawyers who only told him about theories as they exist in the law.

The ABA reports that Critical Race Theory began in the legal academy in the 1970s.

It entered the legal academy in the 1970s.

It wasn’t legal scholars who first developed critical theories of race!

Yes it was. Derrick Bell and others. Why are you so angry about this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/05/gops-critical-race-theory-fixation-explained/618828/
Please read.

From the article:

“ Conservatives are not the only critics of diversity training. For years, some progressives, including critical race theorists, have questioned its value: Is it performative? Is it the most effective way to move toward equity or is it simply an effective way of restating the obvious and stalling meaningful action? But that is not the fight that has materialized over the past nine months. Instead, it is a confrontation with a cartoonish version of critical race theory.”

Sadly, one would think it’s restating the obvious, but many people (of all races) are truly clueless about the racism that is the foundation of our laws, culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/05/gops-critical-race-theory-fixation-explained/618828/
Please read.

From the article:

“ Conservatives are not the only critics of diversity training. For years, some progressives, including critical race theorists, have questioned its value: Is it performative? Is it the most effective way to move toward equity or is it simply an effective way of restating the obvious and stalling meaningful action? But that is not the fight that has materialized over the past nine months. Instead, it is a confrontation with a cartoonish version of critical race theory.”

Sadly, one would think it’s restating the obvious, but many people (of all races) are truly clueless about the racism that is the foundation of our laws, culture.

Indeed. What’s going on now is making many privileged people a little uncomfortable. Not a lot because the don’t see themselves as losing their grip on power and wealth and private property. But we’re advancing the discussion of Justice and what is right and fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really isn’t the place of FCPS to tell kids whether they are privileged or oppressed based on their “race,” or at least it shouldn’t be.

This School Board needs to be voted out in two years. If he is still around at the time the first act of the new Board should be to fire Brabrand.

Absolutely this. How dare they tell white kids that the they’re “privileged oppressors” and POC are “victims”? These people need to focus on educating all our kids and leaving race biases out of it altogether.

Show me evidence this is what they are doing. You have none because it’s made up right wing talking points.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PhD here agin, and guess what? Any criticisms of critical race theory are by definition a critical race theory. Because you are engaging with theories of race in a critical way. Hence, critical theory.

“Banning” critical race theory is nonsensical unless you are banning any discussion of race whatsoever. There is room within critical race theory for criticisms because it’s CRITICAL theory.

Frankly I’m fine with that. In a colorblind society that we are all striving for, race is an irrelevant topic.

We’re not striving for a colorblind society.

Actually we are. That was Dr Kings dream, and it stands as a goal today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some of us white people think that it's an important lesson for our children to realize their privilege. I'm glad FCPS is doing it. Better society = better America.

You’re assuming all white children are privileged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
As a foreigner whose kids are in public school, and who had no idea that race relations were still so bad in the USA, I think it can't be worse than what we have right now, which is nothing.

Perhaps I won't be happy with the particular spin on certain concepts. But again, a little discomfort is part of the solution. If we weren't uncomfortable, it wouldn't be an efficient treatment.

I'm foreign-born, too, having lived in the United States for over 25 years. During that time, I have not encountered a single instance of someone using a racial slur in public or in private. I have not witnessed a single case of discrimination, different treatment by race, etc. I have witnessed, however, in my professional capacities a constant stream of attempts to "fix" some imaginary injustice, often by searching for minority candidates for hiring or admissions decisions. This has resulted in a general understanding that certain groups are being hired mainly because of innate attributes, which is often very hurtful to them because it diminishes them as humans and creates otherwise unnecessary handicaps for them to overcome.

What has happened in the last couple of years in this country is absolutely surprising to me; then again, this is the country of slavery, segregation, prohibition, and McCarthyism, so extremism like the current CRT/woke cancel culture movement by a vocal and temporarily powerful subgroup is par for the course. As these others have, this too will pass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PhD here agin, and guess what? Any criticisms of critical race theory are by definition a critical race theory. Because you are engaging with theories of race in a critical way. Hence, critical theory.

“Banning” critical race theory is nonsensical unless you are banning any discussion of race whatsoever. There is room within critical race theory for criticisms because it’s CRITICAL theory.

Frankly I’m fine with that. In a colorblind society that we are all striving for, race is an irrelevant topic.

We’re not striving for a colorblind society.

Actually we are. That was Dr Kings dream, and it stands as a goal today.

Is it a goal of critical race theory? The leading voices seeking to highlight how systemic racism negatively impacts everything?