Daily Show on Critical Race Theory

BradStevens

Benchwarmer
Silver Member
Mar 16, 2021
256
352
63
You posed a hypothetical that is nonsensical or at least so rare as to be unimaginable. Like DANC having a cogent argument. Or like DANC even knowing what the word "cogent" means.
It's unimaginable that schools are detracking--thereby eliminating honors math courses along with other subjects--in the name of racial equity?

Because that is the example I posed. And it is going on all over the nation:






 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
20,356
7,781
113

BradStevens

Benchwarmer
Silver Member
Mar 16, 2021
256
352
63
OK, you don't want to discuss this. There was probably a more mature way to express that, though. Sorry to have brought your son into it.
 

INRanger27

All-American
Jan 11, 2005
9,093
10,363
113
I'm just going to post this because it shows the two most preeminent people connected to the Military applying a smackdown to Matt Gaetz. And I love seeing that clown get smacked around...

I 100% agree with GEN Milley but I think he’s responding and directing to Congressman Waltz given that he points out they are both Green Berets. Gaetz is a piece of trash - not a Green Beret.
 

INRanger27

All-American
Jan 11, 2005
9,093
10,363
113
LMAO! A General goes on a rant and no reply from Gaetz is shown. Yeah, what a smackdown, when the other person isn't allowed to respond because his time is up.

The General also said Gaetz was a Green Beret. I didn't know that. How does your military service stack up to that?
Milley wasn’t ranting. Everything he said was highly logical and he wasn’t responding to Gaetz he was talking to the big boy in the room, Waltz.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aloha Hoosier

Aloha Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 30, 2001
29,121
10,632
113
I guess?

It’s imperative we teach that while our founders were certainly enthralled with the concept of an egalitarian paradise of representative government they were also willing to cut a deal to make an entire race of people worth 3/5’s of a white man in furtherance of this goal. And that, in doing so, set the stage for so many of the problems which have underpinned our society thereafter. And that doesn’t even mention their treatment of women and the non-propertied riff raff.

Yes we should 100% learn the concepts they espoused but we should also be faithful to the truth. And that truth is that, at the time of the founding, all people were not equal. We’ve done so much to right these wrongs but, like the Germans, we must be unafraid to tell the truth.
Those that opposed slavery but still wanted a "United States" wanted slaves to count as 0 people and free persons of every race to count as 1 person. Those that wanted to have slavery wanted their slaves to count as 1 person so that their states (the free people in them, of course) would have more power in the new United States. 3/5ths was a compromise the founders reached in order to form the United States government, not a judgment that slaves were only worth 3/5ths of white men.
 

Marvin the Martian

Hall of Famer
Sep 4, 2001
29,453
13,054
113
Those that opposed slavery, but still wanted a "United States" wanted slaves to count as 0 people and free persons of every race to count as 1 person. Those that wanted to have slavery wanted their slaves to count as 1 person so that their states (the free people in them, of course) would have more power in the new United States. 3/5ths was a compromise the founders reached in order to form the United States government, not a judgment that slaves were only worth 3/5ths of white men.
Right, the judgement was that slavery was legal and a slave was worth far less than 3/5ths. 3/5 overstates their value in the slaveholding areas
 

Aloha Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 30, 2001
29,121
10,632
113
Right, the judgement was that slavery was legal and a slave was worth far less than 3/5ths. 3/5 overstates their value in the slaveholding areas
Yes. The slave holding states wanted to increase their power in the new United States by counting slaves as 1/1 for representation purposes despite considering them essentially non-persons otherwise. Those against slavery preferred to count all free persons as a whole person and enslaved persons as no person at all. 3/5ths was never a judgment on what enslaved persons were worth it was a compromise and it kicked the problem of slavery down the road resulting in dealing with it through a civil war.
 

larsIU

Junior
Gold Member
Apr 17, 2010
1,732
2,069
113
3/5ths was never a judgment on what enslaved persons were worth it was a compromise and it kicked the problem of slavery down the road resulting in dealing with it through a civil war.

You're correct in the first part of the statement that the slave holding states wanted to increase representation due to their numerical population disadvantage. However 3/5ths, while a compromise, is a decision based on race inequality and a further usage of slaves/black people as objects by whites.

While I don't fall into the radical side of the statement "The US was founded in racism", it can't be denied that slavery was an integral part of the social and economic fabric at the time when decisions had to be made as to how to "count" slaveholder's property.
 

Aloha Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 30, 2001
29,121
10,632
113
You're correct in the first part of the statement that the slave holding states wanted to increase representation due to their numerical population disadvantage. However 3/5ths, while a compromise, is a decision based on race inequality and a further usage of slaves/black people as objects by whites.

While I don't fall into the radical side of the statement "The US was founded in racism", it can't be denied that slavery was an integral part of the social and economic fabric at the time when decisions had to be made as to how to "count" slaveholder's property.
In the first part of the statement? Explain how my entire statement wasn't correct.
 

larsIU

Junior
Gold Member
Apr 17, 2010
1,732
2,069
113
In the first part of the statement? Explain how my entire statement wasn't correct.
Apologies. I only took issue with the quoted section. 3/5ths is a judgment. We can call it a compromise, which is most certainly was, but b/c the founders placed a value it became a judgment. Clearly blacks were judged lesser in colonial America (even freed men). There is no way around that nor should there be. You previously noted those who opposed slavery still thought slaves should count for 0 persons. Explain how that isn't a judgment. That the founders ended at 3/5ths as a compromise makes little difference to me. Slaves were judged in that compromise.
 

Cortez88

All-Big Ten
Jan 7, 2017
3,509
4,079
113
Those are historical, documented facts that should be taught. I’ve seen few dispute that. What I want left out of my son’s education is presenting opinions on what effect it has on blacks today. Those are discussions to be had in a venue where ideas & opinions can be shared & debated, not presented to children as fact.
I’d also add that it is way over the head for kids. This seems like a great discussion topic for a college course but not so much for grade school. I’m not dismissing the theory out of hand (I don’t know enough about it to do so) but it seems way too much for kids.
 

DANC

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
11,247
15,608
113
If there was a cause of action for stupidity, you'd be a frequent defendant.
Hey, that was actually an original insult - almost like you came up wtih it yourself.

Kudos on improving from your usual 5th grade comebacks!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crayfish57

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
20,356
7,781
113
What are the relative odds that

a) your school district teaches CRT
b) your school district has had a school shooting incident

I don't know the answer, but I suspect that b>>>>a

Yet, "a" is the source of all the outrage?
 

HooDatGuy

Junior
Sep 10, 2020
1,704
1,736
113
What are the relative odds that

a) your school district teaches CRT
b) your school district has had a school shooting incident

I don't know the answer, but I suspect that b>>>>a

Yet, "a" is the source of all the outrage?
As far as I can tell, you haven't even expressed support for CRT. So your opposition to to the anti-CRT movement seems to be entirely based on the fact that it is being championed largely by Republicans.

Grow up dude.
 

Aloha Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 30, 2001
29,121
10,632
113
Apologies. I only took issue with the quoted section. 3/5ths is a judgment. We can call it a compromise, which is most certainly was, but b/c the founders placed a value it became a judgment. Clearly blacks were judged lesser in colonial America (even freed men). There is no way around that nor should there be. You previously noted those who opposed slavery still thought slaves should count for 0 persons. Explain how that isn't a judgment. That the founders ended at 3/5ths as a compromise makes little difference to me. Slaves were judged in that compromise.
I said they wanted them to count as zero persons if enslaved, but free blacks should count as one. The desire to count them as zero persons as slaves was to reduce the power of slave states not to judge them as lesser persons. In fact, they wanted them to be free and to count as one person. It was a compromise and not a judgment.
 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
20,356
7,781
113
No, my opposition to the anti-CRT movement is that it is a manufactured crisis. That most school administrators had never heard of it or even considered teaching it, since it is not mainstream.

All of this exposure, though, is sure to make it mainstream.

Banning the teaching of CRT will explode the frequency of teaching CRT, or at least widespread teaching of very similar principles.

But that never seems to be understood. It's how we got people to stop drinking, by prohibition, according to DANC-brains!
 

DANC

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
11,247
15,608
113
No, my opposition to the anti-CRT movement is that it is a manufactured crisis. That most school administrators had never heard of it or even considered teaching it, since it is not mainstream.

All of this exposure, though, is sure to make it mainstream.

Banning the teaching of CRT will explode the frequency of teaching CRT, or at least widespread teaching of very similar principles.

But that nevers seems to be understood. It's how we got people to stop drinking, by prohibition!
Are you a Purdue grad?
 

HooDatGuy

Junior
Sep 10, 2020
1,704
1,736
113
No, my opposition to the anti-CRT movement is that it is a manufactured crisis. That most school administrators had never heard of it or even considered teaching it, since it is not mainstream.

All of this exposure, though, is sure to make it mainstream.

Banning the teaching of CRT will explode the frequency of teaching CRT, or at least widespread teaching of very similar principles.

But that nevers seems to be understood. It's how we got people to stop drinking, by prohibition!
Now you want to debate the extent of the problem rather than denying that it is a problem. No one follow him down this rabbit hole. Brad has made a pretty good case that it is a real phenomenon but you don't want to listen.

The rest of this is just stupid conjecture.
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,226
8,195
113
I said they wanted them to count as zero persons if enslaved, but free blacks should count as one. The desire to count them as zero persons as slaves was to reduce the power of slave states not to judge them as lesser persons. In fact, they wanted them to be free and to count as one person. It was a compromise and not a judgment.
It’s amazing to me how little people know about this important history. Out of that ignorance comes a revision like the post you responded to.
 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
20,356
7,781
113
Citing anecdotal case stories of where CRT was used does not make it an enormous problem. It's like an being hyper-focused on 7 people getting a blood clot after 700 million get a shot.

A great way to shut down teaching is to ban it! Yep, that always works great!
 

DANC

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
11,247
15,608
113
Unlike you, I didn't flunk out of Ivy Tech and ruin my dreams of "working on the big rigs"
Well, I don't claim to have 4 degrees - 2 from Ivy League schools (or did you mean Ivy Tech?) - and spend my entire day on an internet site arguing Leftist talking points.

If your claims of that many degrees are true - and I don't believe for one second they are - you are the very example of an educated idiot.
 
Last edited:

Bowlmania

All-Big Ten
Sep 23, 2016
3,961
8,750
113
Hey, that was actually an original insult - almost like you came up wtih it yourself.

Kudos on improving from your usual 5th grade comebacks!
Projecting again, Danny? You probably want to add that to the lengthy agenda for your next therapy session.
 

larsIU

Junior
Gold Member
Apr 17, 2010
1,732
2,069
113
but free blacks should count as one

Damn. I missed that in your earlier post and rescind my prior comment.

I'm being sloppy in explaining my point which is that agreeing that a slave is 3/5 of a white man for the purpose of representation is, in itself, a valuation that the slave is worth 3/5's of a white man. The "anti-racists" would say those opposed to slavery should have never agreed with the compromise in the first place and should have stuck it to the southern states, overwhelmed them in numbers, or even fought the Civil War right there. As you note, the 3/5 compromise just delayed that same action by 80 years.


Thanks for your responses on this.
 

HooDatGuy

Junior
Sep 10, 2020
1,704
1,736
113
Damn. I missed that in your earlier post and rescind my prior comment.

I'm being sloppy in explaining my point which is that agreeing that a slave is 3/5 of a white man for the purpose of representation is, in itself, a valuation that the slave is worth 3/5's of a white man. The "anti-racists" would say those opposed to slavery should have never agreed with the compromise in the first place and should have stuck it to the southern states, overwhelmed them in numbers, or even fought the Civil War right there. As you note, the 3/5 compromise just delayed that same action by 80 years.


Thanks for your responses on this.
But you have affirmed your own argument kind of. We need to do a better job teaching the 3/5 compromise in school.