ADVERTISEMENT

Daily Show on Critical Race Theory

We discussed this about a month ago. Rufo has been very transparent about what he is doing and why he is doing it. Here's a podcast interview of him (I believe the podcaster brings up the article you linked a few times):


I'll assume that you have not read any of the texts I listed prior.
So what specifically are they teaching your kids that’s related to CRT? Implicit bias? I’m genuinely curious.

Also, not safe to assume my teacher friends are protecting their turf. Several are center to right leaning. They just think this is faux outrage where a problem really doesn’t exist.
 

Just another take to add.
tenor.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: Excellent Post
So what specifically are they teaching your kids that’s related to CRT? Implicit bias? I’m genuinely curious.

Also, not safe to assume my teacher friends are protecting their turf. Several are center to right leaning. They just think this is faux outrage where a problem really doesn’t exist.
I think what a lot of people fail to realize is that your own particular school district might not be emblematic of the rest of the country. I live in an inner ring suburb of Chicago. It is hyper-liberal. There are no school districts in Indiana that resemble it, I am guessing. I realize that my district is an outlier. For most districts in Indiana, this whole thing is probably not that big of an issue yet (although the anecdotes from IUCrazy2 are terrible).

Here, in the name of racial equity they are eliminating honors classes in the high school in 2022, and have eliminated hierarchical teaching in my elementary school (pull out classes for advanced kids in math and reading, for example). My oldest will be a freshman when they experiment with trying to teach all levels of students within the same classroom--supposedly teaching the same "topic" while having kids read material and take tests geared towards their ability level (that's my term--administrators here don't recognize kids have different academic aptitudes because that, too, is not antiracist). Here, the belief among the administration and board is that honors classes entrench White Supremacy and that eliminating them is antiracist.

As far as curriculum, it is difficult to figure out exactly what is being taught because, in my district, they don't use textbooks, instead relying on handouts, etc. FOIA requests are outstanding but will no doubt be fought over. I can tell you that in the middle schools courses affiliated with social studies, they specifically teach Ibram Kendi's Stamped (the kids version), and will be integrating the 1619 Project this year (teachers individually used the materials last year but it wasn't formally imbedded in the curriculum yet). An effort to "decolonize" and "de-Europeanize" the curriculum is underway this summer in my elementary and middle schools; no doubt that has been achieved in the high school. Things are more advanced on the antiracist front in the other elementary and jr highs in Oak Park that feed into OPRF High, where the administrators believe "all schools are rooted in White Supremacy."

More generally, the notion of equity or antiracism permeates a lot of subjects and teaching methods, but my particular elementary district is not as bad as the high school (elementary and jr high is one district; high school is its own separate district). The teachers in my elementary and middle school district receive DEI training quite a bit (which is probably not worth the effort given how few minorites my elementary district has), we have quite robust SEL programs (which I'm a big proponent of), and they revamped all the books in the elementary school over the last couple of years to make it antiracist. (I'd love to tell you what they eliminated in this effort, but they didn't keep track).

At the high school, I couldn't list every way in which antiracism has been introduced into the curriculum and teaching methods. It is that school's #1 priority, above everything else. They emulate Evanston. Here's some of what Evanston does:

 
I think what a lot of people fail to realize is that your own particular school district might not be emblematic of the rest of the country. I live in an inner ring suburb of Chicago. It is hyper-liberal. There are no school districts in Indiana that resemble it, I am guessing. I realize that my district is an outlier. For most districts in Indiana, this whole thing is probably not that big of an issue yet (although the anecdotes from IUCrazy2 are terrible).

Here, in the name of racial equity they are eliminating honors classes in the high school in 2022, and have eliminated hierarchical teaching in my elementary school (pull out classes for advanced kids in math and reading, for example). My oldest will be a freshman when they experiment with trying to teach all levels of students within the same classroom--supposedly teaching the same "topic" while having kids read material and take tests geared towards their ability level (that's my term--administrators here don't recognize kids have different academic aptitudes because that, too, is not antiracist). Here, the belief among the administration and board is that honors classes entrench White Supremacy and that eliminating them is antiracist.

As far as curriculum, it is difficult to figure out exactly what is being taught because, in my district, they don't use textbooks, instead relying on handouts, etc. FOIA requests are outstanding but will no doubt be fought over. I can tell you that in the middle schools courses affiliated with social studies, they specifically teach Ibram Kendi's Stamped (the kids version), and will be integrating the 1619 Project this year (teachers individually used the materials last year but it wasn't formally imbedded in the curriculum yet). An effort to "decolonize" and "de-Europeanize" the curriculum is underway this summer in my elementary and middle schools; no doubt that has been achieved in the high school. Things are more advanced on the antiracist front in the other elementary and jr highs in Oak Park that feed into OPRF High, where the administrators believe "all schools are rooted in White Supremacy."

More generally, the notion of equity or antiracism permeates a lot of subjects and teaching methods, but my particular elementary district is not as bad as the high school (elementary and jr high is one district; high school is its own separate district). The teachers in my elementary and middle school district receive DEI training quite a bit (which is probably not worth the effort given how few minorites my elementary district has), we have quite robust SEL programs (which I'm a big proponent of), and they revamped all the books in the elementary school over the last couple of years to make it antiracist. (I'd love to tell you what they eliminated in this effort, but they didn't keep track).

At the high school, I couldn't list every way in which antiracism has been introduced into the curriculum and teaching methods. It is that school's #1 priority, above everything else. They emulate Evanston. Here's some of what Evanston does:

The suit will be an interesting thing to follow. David French had mentioned some time ago that some of the worrisome facets of CRT and CRT-adjacent methods would likely fail to clear the hurdles of Title 6 and Title 7 of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. This suit appears to be a title 6 case. Hopefully the courts can act as a filter to permit reasonable curriculum changes and keep some of the nonsense out.
 
The suit will be an interesting thing to follow. David French had mentioned some time ago that some of the worrisome facets of CRT and CRT-adjacent methods would likely fail to clear the hurdles of Title 6 and Title 7 of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. This suit appears to be a title 6 case. Hopefully the courts can act as a filter to permit reasonable curriculum changes and keep some of the nonsense out.
I wonder how many of the people who consider themselves anti-CRT would embrace this move? Of course, it is Texas, the Southwestern version of Florida Man...

"Public schools in Texas are one step closer to no longer being required to teach about various American civil rights movements in social studies classes.

"Bloomberg reports that on Friday, the state Senate voted 18-4 to pass Senate Bill 3, which drops requirements for teachers to include lessons on Cesar Chavez, Susan B. Anthony, the history of Native Americans, the writings of Martin Luther King, Jr. and other figures and documents in their curriculums."


They're including MLK, so I guess someone pointed out to them that quoting the last couple sentences of the "I Have a Dream" speech while ignoring the rest of the speech (and his life overall) is not going to work indefinitely... So no more mentioning Dr. King in Texas...
 
I wonder how many of the people who consider themselves anti-CRT would embrace this move? Of course, it is Texas, the Southwestern version of Florida Man...

"Public schools in Texas are one step closer to no longer being required to teach about various American civil rights movements in social studies classes.

"Bloomberg reports that on Friday, the state Senate voted 18-4 to pass Senate Bill 3, which drops requirements for teachers to include lessons on Cesar Chavez, Susan B. Anthony, the history of Native Americans, the writings of Martin Luther King, Jr. and other figures and documents in their curriculums."


They're including MLK, so I guess someone pointed out to them that quoting the last couple sentences of the "I Have a Dream" speech while ignoring the rest of the speech (and his life overall) is not going to work indefinitely... So no more mentioning Dr. King in Texas...
I'm anti-CRT and have no problem with those subjects being taught. I probably don't have a problem with it being mandatory, either.

Notably, though, what the bill you linked is supposed to do is open up the discussion and responsibility for which subjects are mandatory. The quoted politician in support of it said that it means that subjects won't be dictated by politicians alone and instead mandatory subjects will be determined by the State Board of Education. That doesn't seem like a crazy idea.
 


Conflating those topics with neoracist propaganda is dishonest nonsense.

The facts are the opposite. As an example, the Texas anti-CRT law lists those topics as "essential" elements of the curriculum.
 
I wonder how many of the people who consider themselves anti-CRT would embrace this move? Of course, it is Texas, the Southwestern version of Florida Man...

"Public schools in Texas are one step closer to no longer being required to teach about various American civil rights movements in social studies classes.

"Bloomberg reports that on Friday, the state Senate voted 18-4 to pass Senate Bill 3, which drops requirements for teachers to include lessons on Cesar Chavez, Susan B. Anthony, the history of Native Americans, the writings of Martin Luther King, Jr. and other figures and documents in their curriculums."


They're including MLK, so I guess someone pointed out to them that quoting the last couple sentences of the "I Have a Dream" speech while ignoring the rest of the speech (and his life overall) is not going to work indefinitely... So no more mentioning Dr. King in Texas...
You will be shocked to learn this isn't true and the claim is dependent on Democrats and pundits conceding they lied about the original "anti-CRT" bill (HB 3979) that already passed (and SB3 would amend).

The original passed bill (3979), which the same people also claimed would prevent teaching history, included a crazy long list of specific topics and texts that were listed as essential to the social studies curriculum.

(Including all of the things they are now citing as SB3 removing)

Some people then said that list was too specific because it made it seem like all those things were required (instead of allowed) for each class. Many of them were also already included in the state's educational standards.

This bill is trying to clean that up. You can certainly hit Texas Republicans for needing to clean up their bill, but it does not take these items out of the curriculum. Also, doing so requires admitting the original bill they attacked had all of this stuff in there as essential.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jet812
Great discussion about CRT by Loury and McWhorter covering some of the topics debated here (start at 24:25):

 


This joker is spreading left-wing misinformation about Texas laws.

This bill would do nothing to prevent teaching about the KKK or any of the other topics mentioned. In fact, most of those topics are required under the Texas standards (TEKS)

Here are the current standards

 
On the south side of Indianapolis, many angry residents showed up and three different school board meetings in three different districts to complain about the teaching of CRT in schools. However, none of the schools taught CRT as part of the curriculum.
 
On the south side of Indianapolis, many angry residents showed up and three different school board meetings in three different districts to complain about the teaching of CRT in schools. However, none of the schools taught CRT as part of the curriculum.


This joker is spreading left-wing misinformation about Texas laws.

This bill would do nothing to prevent teaching about the KKK or any of the other topics mentioned. In fact, most of those topics are required under the Texas standards (TEKS)

Here are the current standards

"This bill would do nothing to prevent teaching about the KKK or any of the other topics mentioned. In fact, most of those topics are required under the Texas standards (TEKS)"

It's part of the 1836 Project, and a key provision is that it must be a "morally neutral" stance when teaching about the KKK and other racist elements... And I thought the "Right" was opposed to "cancel culture"? The authors of "Forget the Alamo" would beg to differ...

 
On the south side of Indianapolis, many angry residents showed up and three different school board meetings in three different districts to complain about the teaching of CRT in schools. However, none of the schools taught CRT as part of the curriculum.
That's embarrassing but fairly common. This on the other hand is a symbolically ridiculous faux pas...This is a Legislative Hearing on TEACHING RACE...o_O:oops:

"A Missouri legislative committee on Monday held a hearing on how educators teach K-12 students about race and racism without hearing from any Black Missourians.

No Black parents, teachers or scholars testified to the Joint Committee on Education during the invite-only hearing on critical race theory."

 
"This bill would do nothing to prevent teaching about the KKK or any of the other topics mentioned. In fact, most of those topics are required under the Texas standards (TEKS)"

It's part of the 1836 Project, and a key provision is that it must be a "morally neutral" stance when teaching about the KKK and other racist elements... And I thought the "Right" was opposed to "cancel culture"? The authors of "Forget the Alamo" would beg to differ...

Level of chutzpah and dishonesty is really something here. This "requirement" was only put in place in June by the Republican anti-CRT bill that folks were railing against. Now they are using a slight adjustment to the law they opposed as proof of wrongdoing.

In June, Texas Republicans passed an anti-CRT bill (HB3979) that is set to become law in September. That law, which critics on the left falsely suggested was whitewashing history, included a ton of specific examples that were listed as "essential" parts of the curriculum.

After passage, some Texas education officials and Republicans pointed out those specific examples had a ton of overlap with already existing standards (TEKS) and that all of those things are mandatory (instead of optional or suggested).

To try to correct what they viewed as an error in the original bill, Texas Senate Republicans proposed a new bill (SB3) taking out many of the specific examples (especially those already covered by TEKS). It does not ban or discourage teaching any of those items.

So now the same people and publications that vigorously attacked and opposed the original bill that put in those examples are amazingly claiming that removing them is indefensible and an attempt to whitewash those topics from history. Hoping no one notices.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jet812 and DANC

It's hard to overstate how dishonest this garbage is.

This article is so bad that it's actually painful to read.

CRT isn't taught in schools, but also Republicans are trying to ban it from being taught and it's actually just the history of racism and slavery.

Just awful gaslighting.

My favorite part is they attack the original Texas "anti-CRT" bill in one paragraph and then misleadingly attack Texas for proposing to remove a requirement that was only put in place in that original bill in the next.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jet812 and DANC

Progressive criticism of Kendi. Really interesting discussion about where the racial wealth disparity in the U.S. manifests itself as well. Those who are some of the biggest proponents of this stuff are the biggest beneficiaries of the divide. In fact, the economic divide is nearly erased if not for one particular group....
Long and rather difficult to read (deep subject and you have to really follow the logic of the author, as well as what Kendi and others mentioned).

But, I concur that wealth or poverty is what defines the condition of both black and whites, rather than race or skin color (that's my simplified understanding).
 
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark
Level of chutzpah and dishonesty is really something here. This "requirement" was only put in place in June by the Republican anti-CRT bill that folks were railing against. Now they are using a slight adjustment to the law they opposed as proof of wrongdoing.

In June, Texas Republicans passed an anti-CRT bill (HB3979) that is set to become law in September. That law, which critics on the left falsely suggested was whitewashing history, included a ton of specific examples that were listed as "essential" parts of the curriculum.

After passage, some Texas education officials and Republicans pointed out those specific examples had a ton of overlap with already existing standards (TEKS) and that all of those things are mandatory (instead of optional or suggested).

To try to correct what they viewed as an error in the original bill, Texas Senate Republicans proposed a new bill (SB3) taking out many of the specific examples (especially those already covered by TEKS). It does not ban or discourage teaching any of those items.

So now the same people and publications that vigorously attacked and opposed the original bill that put in those examples are amazingly claiming that removing them is indefensible and an attempt to whitewash those topics from history. Hoping no one notices.
You're really gaslighting hard here, and pretending that this original bill (HB3979) was some sort of unifying piece of legislation that no one found fault with. But an analysis provided by the House Research Organization presents a far more complex and divisive bill...First off it's a revision, which means it changed certain elements of the Social Studies curriculum...


So let's look at who spoke in Committee for the bill and who testified against it...

April 13 public hearing: For — (Registered, but did not testify: Vanessa Beltran, Girls Empowerment Network; Alison Fernandez, Spark Change Project; Micaela Williams, Spark Change Project; Cindi Castilla, Texas Eagle Forum; and six individuals)

Against — Maggie Stern, Children's Defense Fund-Texas; (Registered, but did not testify: Andrea Chevalier, Association of Texas Professional Educators; Anthony Gutierrez, Common Cause Texas; Earl Gilbert, Equality Texas; Chloe Latham Sikes, IDRA (Intercultural Development Research Association); Susana Carranza, League of Women Voters of Texas; Dena Donaldson, Texas AFT; Paige Williams, Texas Classroom Teachers Association; Carrie Griffith, Texas State Teachers Association (TSTA); Meghan Dougherty)

You and I obviously have differing views of groups like "Eagle Forum", an offshoot of Phylis Schafly and Common Cause or Children's Defense Fund. But the fact remains that many organizations in Texas are opposed to the idea of teaching that the KKK and people who advocated against slavery are both worthy of equal representation and no moral judgment when being discussed in the classroom. And that's what this bill does...

"A teacher who chose to discuss such topics would have to, to the best of the teacher's ability, strive to explore those topics from diverse and contending perspectives without giving deference to any one perspective."

Do you really want to pretend that the GOP in Texas crafted this bill to make sure issues related to Civil Rights are taught? If so there would be no reason to revise the current curriculum. Failure to teach actual history is a reason events like Charlottesville happen...

Was everyone who went to Charlottesville to protest the statues racist? No, but those that weren't were uneducated (about facts) and lazy. How many people would still feel the need to "protect the Legacy of those statues" if they knew that the funding and impetus for the statues came from the KKK and the influence they wielded over local politicians in 1920-30s America?

If you KNOW that and still oppose the unanimous council vote to remove them, then you've really given up any pretense of not being a racist. Because the facts are they were blatantly racist undertakings- the Charlottesville statues were dedicated at the end of a week of KKK marches and rallies...And one of the primary goals of those "festivities" was to INTIMIDATE POC and scare them away from the electoral process...



Criticism of the bill from opponents...

CSHB 3979 would fall short of providing a civics education that prepares students to critically analyze history and current events and to become informed and engaged citizens. All students deserve an education that balances an appreciation of the nation's ideals with the candid reckoning that it has not always lived up to those ideals.

By prohibiting school-wide trainings on issues related to diversity and inclusion, the bill would do little to guarantee a civics education that recognized the complicated history of the United States. Texas should establish a curriculum that prepares students for future self-governance by encouraging them to think about solving problems in their communities and by becoming actively engaged in civic activities"
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT