11
   

Critical Race Theory: Voters versus Liberal Extremism

 
 
neptuneblue
 
  4  
Reply Wed 10 Nov, 2021 08:26 am
@oralloy,
It's worth the humour invested, I guess.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Wed 10 Nov, 2021 08:29 am
@neptuneblue,
Remember his extremely limited vocabulary.

Schools are just shooting ranges for the NRA for someone like that.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 10 Nov, 2021 08:30 am
@neptuneblue,
Could you two get a room?
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Wed 10 Nov, 2021 08:31 am
@neptuneblue,
neptuneblue wrote:

Here I thought you were an intelligent man.


How on Earth did you come to that conclusion?

I've never made that mistake.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Wed 10 Nov, 2021 08:36 am
Again there's that limited vocabulary.
neptuneblue
 
  5  
Reply Wed 10 Nov, 2021 08:36 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
Could you two get a room?


There's many on this forum I'd love to sit down with and just talk.

You're just not one of them.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 08:12 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

When you tell voters that they are idiots, you lose the political argument.

Voters are saying that they are worried about what their kids are being taught in school. Particularly they are worried that anti-racist material singles out White students and separates kids into opressor and oppressed.

The Republicans are adressing these concerns. They have listened to voters and distilled their message into a single sentence involving the phrase "critical race theory".

This is politically saavy, they have kind of hijacked a liberal academic term. But more importantly Republicans are signalling voters that they are listening to their concerns.

The Democrats are responding with long winded explanations that

1) Ignore real facts and reasonable concerns from voters.

2) Are mainly geared at telling voters that they are stupid.

And that is how Democrats lose elections.


Here is the topic.

So far we have general support for my thesis, there is general agreement that voters are "racist idiots" and their has been no respectful discussion on the concerns of parents about what is taught in the classroom.
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 09:43 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
...and their has been no respectful discussion on the concerns of parents about what is taught in the classroom.

I think it's good for parents to have some concern about what their kids are being taught. But I don't think parents have the right to determine school curricula or prevent certain facts or subjects from being discussed. If parents specifically object to something being taught, they should have a conversation with their child and explain that the school is providing the particular interpretation of facts which is generally accepted by society and is worth being familiar with. Just because the parents believe in I.D., there's no reason their child can't learn the particulars of evolutionary theory while withholding actual belief in the theory.
maxdancona
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 10:26 am
@hightor,
There is a difference between science and history.

When I was a Physics teacher, what I was teaching was the only correct science. By correct, I mean that the scientific community is in complete agreement, any college professor (excluding clearly crazy people) will all agree that F = ma.

That isn't true in history. The 1619 project, which did enter public schools taught that a primary motivation for the American revolution was to preserve the institution of slavery. This dubious claim is not only politically motivated, it is also rejected by many (or most) expert historians.

The fear is that political ideology is entering the history classroom. And, there is real evidence that this is the case. Teaching history is about narratives; and a narrative isn't a fact. There will always be this tension.

The fear of political ideology influencing how history is being taught in public school classrooms is a reasonable fear.
Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 10:38 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
There is a difference between science and history.
[...]
Teaching history is about narratives; and a narrative isn't a fact. There will always be this tension.
I've studies "history sciences" at university (didn't teach it besides 'history of social work' as university lecturer).

The science of history is the methodically assured research and reconstruction of aspects of human history or history on the basis of a critically analysed and interpreted tradition (sources) under a specific question.
maxdancona
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 10:43 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter, are you claiming that a historical narrative is an objective fact?
hightor
 
  4  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 10:45 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
The 1619 project, which did enter public schools taught that a primary motivation for the American revolution was to preserve the institution of slavery.


(I'll take your word on that, as I haven't read the results of the project, only articles about the results of the project.)

What's wrong with this being presented for exactly what it is – a critical look at the influence of slaveholding states at the time of the revolution? It could be contrasted with other interpretations of USAmerican history, of which there are many. Various insights from the 1619 Project could be discussed and students would have another perspective which they could adopt as a whole, in part, or reject altogether. I think a case can be made that the truth about our country's connection with slavery is often Bowdlerized, such as the claim that the South was fighting only to protect "states' rights". And I think this Bowdlerization is obviously a different sort of politicized ideological history, but politicized ideological history all the same.

Quote:
The fear of political ideology influencing how history is being taught in public school classrooms is a reasonable fear.


A reasonable fear of what exactly?

Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 11:04 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
Walter, are you claiming that a historical narrative is an objective fact?
I didn't use that term nor wrote about it. (I worked a bit with oral history, though.)
Real Music
 
  4  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 11:08 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
The Democrats just lost big races in Virginia and Pennsylvania (states that Biden won). The exit polls said that Critical Race Theory was a significant reason for voters to vote against the Democrats.

1. I've seen several news reports discussing how the topic of Critical Race Theory may have impacted the election results in Virginia.

2. I have not seen or heard any such news reports of Critical Race Theory having anything to do with the election results in Pennsylvania.

3. Yes, I've seen reports that said that the republicans did better than the democrats in Pennsylvania.

4. But, I haven't heard anything on the subject of Critical Race Theory being discussed as the reason.

5. I am referring to Pennsylvania.

6. It is possible that you may have seen some news reports that I have not seen.

7. What source do you have that has any mention of Critical Race Theory having anything to do with the Pennsylvania election results?

0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 11:17 am
@hightor,
A reasonable fear of Max's narrative being disproven by facts.

The Revolution is a supreme piece of American propaganda that drowns out any negative aspects.

Certain uncomfortable truths, (for an American,) remain. The revolutionaries were very self serving, Washington was America's first millionaire and like Jefferson was a slaveowner, although unlike Jefferson I've not heard any reports of him raping his slaves.

The treatment of the indigenous population also deteriorated sharply, as evidenced by the Trail of Tears.

The only soldiers fighting for freedom were the soldiers of the Ethiopian Regiment who were ex slaves fighting for Britain under Colonel Tye. They had all escaped from Virginia plantations to join the army of liberation.

Not saying that there weren't genuine revolutionaries motivated by a desire for freedom about, but not to the extent the propagandists would have us believe. Thomas Paine didn't hang around, he wasn't overly impressed with the founding fathers.

History has shown that freedom, justice and the American way aren't really things Amefica wants to share with everyone else. The Arab Spring and the attacks on democratic activists in Egypt have shown that American interests Trump American values every time.
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 11:31 am
This CRT disinformation campaign by the right-wing press reminds me of the loony left claims about labour councils during the dark days of Thatcherism.

It was reported that certain councils in London had banned the nursery rhyme Baa baa black sheep.

It was a lie, and just like the lie about CRT it was believed, it so effective it was believed by Northern Labour Council members.

That's exactly what's happening here. Lash is the teacher she has told us the truth CRT isn't taught in schools, but Max knows better because he's a man.

An opinionated man who has never let facts get in the way of his misogyny.

0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -3  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 11:47 am
@hightor,
The fear is that political ideology will influence how history is being taught. I would argue that political ideology will always influence a historical narrative being presented. But in this case, the political ideology is not supported by the community involved.

The Republicans raised a simple question; Is America a racist country?

That one question shows the problem.
maxdancona
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 11:55 am
@izzythepush,
I am trying to ignore Izzy, but he makes me laugh.

George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were born British. They owned slaves because they were part of the British Empire, and the British Empire was behind the slave trade especially in their colonial trade.

The genocide of Native Populations was common in British colonies.

There are Americans with Asian roots, and Spanish roots, and Indigenous roots, and African roots. None of them are responsible for slavery or the genocide of indigenous populations or White Supremacy.

That is all a result of us having been a British colony.

Let's be honest. If the US wasn't colonized by Britain, none of the worst parts of American history would have happened.

0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 11:57 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

maxdancona wrote:
Walter, are you claiming that a historical narrative is an objective fact?
I didn't use that term nor wrote about it. (I worked a bit with oral history, though.)


I am unclear what your point is then.

Science is based on objective facts. On the major points of science, scientists agree.

History is based on subjective narrative. History is backed by facts, but the lessons and narrative history are necessarily subjective, and Historians will disagree.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2021 12:04 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote:
The fear is that political ideology will influence how history is being taught.

You've already stated as much. I'm asking, what exactly we're supposed to have reason to fear? Why should we fear the USA being exposed as a racist country? Do you believe that race relations here are ideal? Is that what you want to be taught – presumably to spare the feelings of the racially intolerant?
 

 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/18/2022 at 07:12:18