Posted on 07/05/2022 3:19:11 PM PDT by Rummyfan
There’s an old joke about a chemist, a physicist, and an economist stranded on a desert island with only a sealed can of food. The chemist and physicist each propose their own ideas about how to open the can. The punch line comes from the economist, who proffers: “First, assume a can opener.”
I’ve been brooding over this joke while watching “antiracism” teaching—some might call it Critical Race Theory (CRT) or social justice—take over the American education world with Omicron-like speed. Lesson plans, books, tips for in-class activities, discussion points, and curricula swamp the teachers’ corner of the Internet. The proposals come from a metastasizing number of pedagogic entrepreneurs and activist groups, some savvy newcomers, some influential veterans like Black Lives Matter at School, Learning for Justice (formerly Teaching Tolerance), Teaching People’s History (the Zinn Education Project), the Racial Justice in Education Resource Guide (from the National Education Association), and, of course, the current star: the 1619 Project (the Pulitzer Center). To me, all these ideas seem like the ruminations of desert-island economists. They start with an impossible premise: that the students of these recommended texts actually know how to read.
(Excerpt) Read more at city-journal.org ...
Sadly, the United States of America is home to systemic/institutional racism/sexism, and its name is “affirmative action.”
Straight, white males are the only people it is legal to discriminate against, and discrimination against them is required by law.
CRT is about hating white people and sowing division within America.
Russia was funding the leftist enviro groups to change oil policy over ‘climate change’ and likely these leftist programming after funding by One World Government / China sources.
Marxism disguised as anti-racism.
An “antiracist” as understood by Woketards is like a Republican in Congress who thinks their job is to get along with Democrats no matter what, no matter the cost to their supporters back home, who not only never roll back but really never even resist: they aren’t just self defeating and useless, they’re idiots not worth giving them the time of day.
Never be an “antiracist” as understood by Woketards.
I’ve been studying CRT lately and I really can’t imagine how people come to believe it has anything to do with what’s taught in secondary schools.
When I started out thinking about CRT I went by the descriptions I read in Wikipedia and other places, and these descriptions were (it turns out) completely worthless. Maybe because the people interpreting CRT to the general public were social theorists. That’s my current theory, anyway. Social theorists seem to learn, by diligent study, how to not communicate really really well. See the Sokal hoax for a really good example.
Then I decided if I was going to hate it so much I should know a little bit more about it. I got the book by Kimberle Crenshaw and others, Critical Race Theory (1995). Surprise! CRT actually has some interesting things to say about race. Many of these documents are in the public domain and so anyone can read them. Read what Derrick Bell had to say about the civil rights lawyers and their disconnection with their clients, in “Serving Two Masters: Integration Ideals and Client Interests in School Desegregation Litigation.” This is a really good article. Or read what Kimberle Crenshaw had to say about the mutual critiques of the civil rights efforts and neocons like Thomas Sowell, in “Race, Reform, and Retrenchment: Transformation and Legitimation in Antidiscrimination Law.” A wonderful article.
Now, they don’t know what they’re talking about when they talk about race, any more than anyone else does. Race is a very curious subject. Mystery and danger and control and the lack of control, sociology and psychology and social psychology and biology, all mixed up together. Nobody really knows what they’re talking about, when it comes to race.
I get what this author is saying, and I agree. Teach the damn kids to read, for God’s sake. Absolutely.
But don’t ignore what CRT theorists actually have to say, either, I would say. They’re not all dummies, and some of them have really interesting things to say.
“But evidence that racial disadvantage should not be an obstacle to literacy is there for anyone who bothers to look. Nearly 60 percent of black children in New York City charter schools read proficiently; that’s true for only 35 percent of those in district schools. (And 80 percent of the kids in New York City charters are economically disadvantaged.) Unless someone can prove that district teachers are more racist than those at charters—an unlikely theory—it would seem that charters simply do a better job of teaching kids to read. “
I’ve read it twice now and I have to say, this is a wonderful article. I think the paragraph above is central. Yeah. Antiracists need to focus on teaching kids to READ.
Maybe if they had a little more humility, and could admit that they do not know what racism is... ah, I’m fantasizing...
It doesn’t matter what you do. If you are a conservative they will find a reason to label you racist. These aren’t people who want to debate, they want to destroy you and use race as one of their tools in their arsenal.
This has not been my experience. I have been in education for 30 years. Two years ago, my district implemented “Culturally Relevant Teaching” , CRT by another name. The expert brought in was a collegue of Kendi and participated in the 1619 project.
He presents as all light and love but as a psychologist I have seldom seen someone who seethes with such rage. I learned about Post Traumatic Slave Disorder, a theory to explain the angry, anti-social behavior of young black males. Of course while a marginally interesting fiction,there is no data short of anecdotes to try to explain what more readily is explained by what the welfare state did to the black family.
I learned all American institutions are structurally racist against blacks and that any disparity in performance of black and white students is evidence of systemic racism. None of the material I have seen has any evidence to support it and asking for evidence is white supremecy.
What I see is a lot of theory, mostly bad, with little to no evidence, and excuse making for inner city black cultural pathology. Somehow this apparently is all my fault for simply existing.
I am curious to know what you learned from these two articles that impressed you as they did.
I learned a lot when the 2020 riots exploded, but have not read anything by either writer you mentioned.
“I have been in education for 30 years. Two years ago, my district implemented “Culturally Relevant Teaching” , CRT by another name. The expert brought in was a collegue of Kendi and participated in the 1619 project.”
My most sincere sympathies. I feel for you, believe me. If people would stop teaching what they don’t know, wouldn’t the world be a better place?
“I am curious to know what you learned from these two articles that impressed you as they did.”
The Bell article pointed out that civil rights lawyers, while nominally working for their clients, the students they supposedly represent in court, actually take direction only from their supervisors, those who pay their salaries, and that when parents ought to be involved in decisions the lawyers make, they’re not. Now, I don’t doubt that this is common in class action law. People are actually putting in money to pay the lawyers while the case is fought, and they, being lawyers themselves, understandably have a lot more to say about legal strategy than the much less legally savvy clients. Nevertheless, in the civil rights cases, this resulted in NAACP-centrally directed strategies which didn’t necessarily prioritize the good of the actual students.
The Crenshaw article was good because it pointed out very significant issues with both the neocon analysis of civil rights law and the Critical Legal Studies analysis of civil rights law. The neocons make all sorts of claims about the “real” source of so called blacks’ problems, claims they have no actual evidence for, and the Critical Legal Studies analyses seem to ignore the existence and significance of racism, in their thinking. Overall, it was really a remarkably thoughtful critique of both sides of the issue. I thought it was, anyway!
Thanks so much for your clear and concise reply! I have started reading the first one and plan to read the second as well.
I do think one good thing about the shutdowns for me was the chance to watch videos online by black people. I found a much wider range of thought than I had expected and it was eye-opening to me to learn more.
Thanks again!
“Antiracist” is a propaganda term invented by Ibram Henry Rogers, a bigoted negro punk who grew up in upper middle class neighborhoods in New York and Virginia, and who makes a living pretending to be a victim of oppression. An “antiracist” is a bigot who hates White people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.