US The Left is trying to redefine critical race theory because they are losing

The Left is trying to redefine critical race theory because they are losing​

Zachary Faria
Wed, June 16, 2021
https://sneed.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/1rtCC1lrrxpdRootngrBjQ--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTY0MDtoPTM5MC42NDkzNTA2NDkzNTA2NQ--/https://sneed.yimg.com/uu/api/res/1.2/iomc0IwxJSXPyFIyy6jdww--~B/aD05NDA7dz0xNTQwO2FwcGlkPXl0YWNoeW9u/https://media.zenfs.com/en/washington_examiner_articles_265/be0409ae997de566fa3f7e0a59cda4d6
The Left tried to use last summer’s momentum from the Black Lives Matter movement to push its destructive ideas of so-called “anti-racism” and critical race theory. Now, they’re frantically trying to redefine the terms of the debate, as the momentum has built up against them instead.

Liberals are now asking that you pay no attention to the curriculum behind the curtain. They have taken to insisting that critical race theory isn’t actually being taught in K-12 schools, even though there are clear examples that show that it is. The New York Times even wrote in July 2020 about the “anti-racism” programs being brought to parents and staff in various school districts. Another New York Times piece published just two weeks ago noted that critical race theory is a "framework that has found its way into K-12 public education."

The controversial, Pulitzer-winning 1619 Project, which was riddled with historical inaccuracies and crafted on the false premise that the American Revolution was fought to preserve slavery, has also been pushed into K-12 curricula. The project’s architect, Nikole Hannah-Jones, is among the many liberals trying to cast critical race theory in the narrowest terms possible.

She is trying to distance her shoddy “journalism” from critical race theory because the push against it is real and effective.

As with nonsensical definitions of "assault weapon" or weapon of war" in the gun debate, the Left constantly tries to redefine the terms of debate when they are losing an issue. Were it not for the shield of the Supreme Court, abortion would be far more restricted in the United States. That is also a losing issue for them, so much so that they must redefine the pro-life movement as “anti-choice" and abortion is a “procedure” or, more simply, a “women’s rights issue.” In recent years, they have tried hard to shift attention from abortion itself to birth control.

Now, they’re trying to erase their own connections to Ibram X. Kendi, Robin DiAngelo, and other racial hucksters whom they zealously promoted not long ago — people who, yes, have managed to worm their way into K-12 curricula. All of those school districts spending thousands on Kendi’s books, “anti-racism” programs, and bureaucrats with words such as “equity” in their title — now, these clowns want to make us all think that we imagined all of it.

This is obviously a good sign. It means that the push against these toxic ideas, from both Republican state governments and the concerned parents at local school board meetings, is working. Much like Hannah-Jones did in constantly moving the goalposts on the merits of the 1619 Project, she and other liberals are doing the same here because they are losing the fight to indoctrinate America’s youth with their toxic and divisive racial obsession. We are on the right path, and the push to reject these ideas must continue apace.
Article Archive
——-
I wouldn’t say the Democrat party is losing but they realize that support for critical race theory isn’t as high as they thought and now they’re backtracking.

 

[Unpaid Emotional Labourer]

View attachment 2267617

You don't need to know the theory behind it to know how, and that, it affects you.

I don't need to know the physics behind why Earth has gravity to know I should stay out of the way of falling objects.

I don’t need to know anything more than what actions it results in in the classroom. And that is racialized emotional and verbal abuse and deliberate humiliation and tearing down of white kids. I’ve seen the materials and the videos and I can’t be gaslighted.

 

[Blamo]

Ah yes. The right flailing in the dark for some sort of relevance.

The Gop is the weakest its ever been in decades.

In 4 short years look at all you have lost. I say it over and over.

Lost the presidency
Lost the senate
Lost the house

Now the best you can do is accuse each other of being glow in the dark and are now too scared to come out and organize some sort of coherent response to this bullshit

The GOP is part of the problem. Good riddance for it.

 

[Pentex]

She is trying to distance her shoddy “journalism” from critical race theory because the push against it is real and effective.

There's not one of these big enough:

The long march through the institutions has been largely successful because of the weakness of liberals to defend their supposed values against people committed to destroying them from within.

 

[Kosher Dill]

Critical Race Theory means different things in academia and public discourse.

This is an important distinction to make, because left extremists love to play rope-a-dope using terms with multiple definitions.
Academic CRT doesn't really exist anywhere outside of academia, and it can stay there for all I care. The "CRT" being pushed in public schools, at corporate D&I struggle sessions, and in the media is just plain old racism and we should call it what it is rather than getting bogged down debating what CRT really is.

 

[Chaos Theorist]

it is clear there are many on here who have not read anything much about Critical Race Theory.

Except what they've seen on the news and perhaps a quick look on Wiki. The right have a new boogey man.

Explain it to me in layman terms then because my understanding of it. I'm being sincere in this post, I'm generally curious to know.

 

[MrJokerRager]

There's not one of these big enough:

The long march through the institutions has been largely successful because of the weakness of liberals to defend their supposed values against people committed to destroying them from within.

I consider it more like liberalism has been redefined heavily.

Trump's ideals would have made him a liberal in the 1980s. Bill Clinton in the 1990s used harsher rhetoric on immigration than Trump did.

 

[fineapple]

By the name at first I thought Critical Race Theory was like a /pol/ thing where it would bring up differences between races like IQ and crime rate. I see it's the polar opposite, a la clown world. I wonder what would happen if redpills were part of the curriculum, how that generation would turn out. This is obviously just going to make kids more racist because it's nature to be anti-authority.

 

[Bland Crumbs]

Yeah it is not a great sign when white, black, hispanic, and a chinese woman who escaped the CCP start showing up to give well thought out and accurate speeches about what is going on in schools right now.

They overreached on a lot of things CRT was just the first to fall because people tend to get pretty angry when you call their kid a loser because of their skin color or an oppressor because of their skin color.

 

[Stoneheart]

I still dont get why the people in the Colonies still talk about critical theory and all the small sub critical theories it spawned.

Its a retarded theory and that has been settled for 50 years. in a debate between the smartest lefties and the father of modern scientific theory.
Popper won and Adorno became a laughing stock.

 

[IAmNotAlpharius]

I still dont get why the people in the Colonies still talk about critical theory and all the small sub critical theories it spawned.

Its a retarded theory and that has been settled for 50 years. in a debate between the smartest lefties and the father of modern scientific theory.
Popper won and Adorno became a laughing stock.

Because they’re idiots.

 

[Iceland Heavy]

By the name at first I thought Critical Race Theory was like a /pol/ thing where it would bring up differences between races like IQ and crime rate. I see it's the polar opposite, a la clown world. I wonder what would happen if redpills were part of the curriculum, how that generation would turn out. This is obviously just going to make kids more racist because it's nature to be anti-authority.

That would be 'race realism', though what they have in common is shitting on the meritocratic colorblind ideal. But where race realists say race is real and it's foolish to pretend it isn't critical race theorists claim it isn't but everything bad is caused by people pretending it is so race is essentially real anyway.

 

[IAmNotAlpharius]

That would be 'race realism', though what they have in common is shitting on the meritocratic colorblind ideal. But where race realists say race is real and it's foolish to pretend it isn't critical race theorists claim it isn't but everything bad is caused by people pretending it is so race is essentially real anyway.

The difference is that one blames white people and the other one blames white people with funny hats.

 

[MadStan]

Explain it to me in layman terms then because my understanding of it. I'm being sincere in this post, I'm generally curious to know.

It is important to understand the difference between a theory and the belief system of those who are heralding it.

Example: If a theory (remember, a theory as in idea) is proposed with a proposition, the proposition can quickly get lost when we start listening to it's adherents and start to lose focus on the actual theory. Often proponents of a theory want to install THEIR belief system into the theory or through the use of the theory really forward their own theory. We see this on talking heads all the time who take something and then give hours of opinions on the matter and insert their case into it so viewers adopt it, but it is not the original proposition any longer.

While CRT is a flawed theory it does have some merits, it is worth looking at as it was based on observations which while are subject to interpretation are convincing enough to propose the theory of systemic racism and prejudice, alas the main proponents of it have thrust their ideologies and interpretations into it and thus what they are clamoring for is fundamentally distant from actual CRT. An analogy would be gay rights being blended with the abhorrent demands of the Trans community that attempt to hijack the movement for their own purposes. Thus the Equality Act is seen as for Trans people when it started out as something else and is permanently associated with a tiny fraction of the people it is supposed to cover.

My main problem with banning CRT is that we are banning thought. It is a theory, not anything else based on some observed facts. If we do not teach it then we do not get it refined or debated to a workable theory or removed as a theory worth even a pursuit.

No matter how horrible I consider other forms of belief or ideas held by others, the idea of banning it's teachings is fundamentally wrong. If we can not teach people how to think to make up their own minds, then I guess we will have to start banning Ancient Aliens and Mermaids on the History Channel also. While at it, we open the door to banning religion also and other philosophies.

You just don't do it. And every time you ban an idea, it never ever works out how you hope it will.

Teach people HOW to think, not WHAT to think.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

When did the left not redefine their dictionary to suit the argument?

 

[IAmNotAlpharius]

It is important to understand the difference between a theory and the belief system of those who are heralding it.

Example: If a theory (remember, a theory as in idea) is proposed with a proposition, the proposition can quickly get lost when we start listening to it's adherents and start to lose focus on the actual theory. Often proponents of a theory want to install THEIR belief system into the theory or through the use of the theory really forward their own theory. We see this on talking heads all the time who take something and then give hours of opinions on the matter and insert their case into it so viewers adopt it, but it is not the original proposition any longer.

While CRT is a flawed theory it does have some merits, it is worth looking at as it was based on observations which while are subject to interpretation are convincing enough to propose the theory of systemic racism and prejudice, alas the main proponents of it have thrust their ideologies and interpretations into it and thus what they are clamoring for is fundamentally distant from actual CRT. An analogy would be gay rights being blended with the abhorrent demands of the Trans community that attempt to hijack the movement for their own purposes. Thus the Equality Act is seen as for Trans people when it started out as something else and is permanently associated with a tiny fraction of the people it is supposed to cover.

My main problem with banning CRT is that we are banning thought. It is a theory, not anything else based on some observed facts. If we do not teach it then we do not get it refined or debated to a workable theory or removed as a theory worth even a pursuit.

No matter how horrible I consider other forms of belief or ideas held by others, the idea of banning it's teachings is fundamentally wrong. If we can not teach people how to think to make up their own minds, then I guess we will have to start banning Ancient Aliens and Mermaids on the History Channel also. While at it, we open the door to banning religion also and other philosophies.

You just don't do it. And every time you ban an idea, it never ever works out how you hope it will.

Teach people HOW to think, not WHAT to think.

Not pushing something is not the same as banning it. IMO it shouldn’t constantly be pushed at work and at schools.

Would people be ok if corporations and schools started pushing Bible or Koran studies? Would people be ok with work seminars that push Judeo-Christian ideals? How would people feel if schools started teaching intelligent design? Christians and Muslims would face an enormous backlash if they tried to push their worldview onto others via the school and workplace, why is it ok for a secular movement- one which is practically a religion- to do the same?

The entire theory is hogwash anyway because it’s predicated upon the outdated concept of race. The issue I have with it isn’t whether it’s right or wrong simply that I can’t escape the bs and I can’t talk about it when it’s being shoved on me. I don’t have a problem with a middle class black autist thinking he’s a true Egyptian, but when it starts getting pushed on myself and my kids and I can’t speak out about it, is when I start taking issues with it.

 

[Sped Xing]

Yeah okay, sure, they''ll lose control of the government, media and finance soon enough....
View attachment 2267558

That rainbow is backwards. This offends me.

 

[Kiwisee]

If religion is the drug of the masses, then CRT is the opium of the elites.

There’s a small part of me that would much rather see the Chinese overlords than whatever the fuck the States is right now. At least the Chinese wouldn’t put up with this nonsense if in power.

 

[MadStan]

Not pushing something is not the same as banning it. IMO it shouldn’t constantly be pushed at work and at schools.

Would people be ok if corporations and schools started pushing Bible or Koran studies? Would people be ok with work seminars that push Judeo-Christian ideals? How would people feel if schools started teaching intelligent design? Christians and Muslims would face an enormous backlash if they tried to push their worldview onto others via the school and workplace, why is it ok for a secular movement- one which is practically a religion- to do the same?

The entire theory is hogwash anyway because it’s predicated upon the outdated concept of race. The issue I have with it isn’t whether it’s right or wrong simply that I can’t escape the bs and I can’t talk about it when it’s being shoved on me. I don’t have a problem with a middle class black autist thinking he’s the true Egyptian, but when it starts getting pushed on myself and my kids and I can’t speak out about it, is when I start taking issues with it.

Nothing to argue with you about. I am just pointing out that CRT essentially became a catch-all for any racism and some of the materials being thrown about are written by people throwing a lot of crap into it that wasn't part of the original theory.

This government actively supports the push of religion into almost every form of our lives from oaths to funding schools that teach religion and giving them tax breaks to almost banning a non-religious person from running for the big office.

Any curriculum in any school should be checked and ensured it is balanced. And if it is not then sure, out the window it goes, no problem there. But let's be sure exactly what we are banning here and I have a pretty good idea the legislators have read summaries from other people who want to see it banned and actually haven't read it beyond some excerpts.

Also I suspect what CRT is in one place probably differs from another in content. It certainly has changed a great deal over the years and morphed to include a lot that was never part of it.

It would be best to remove it from the curriculum as inappropriate; but calling a ban on teaching it is ridiculous. By banning it in its current form we are entering a trap whereby even a few of the points of it they may be valid from the hundreds that are not are getting lumped in to the bathwater.

Remove from the curriculum if it doesn't pass the muster test, but do not ban anything. We wouldn't even have KF if thoughts that were disgusting couldn't be voiced, but we all recognize we are adults and can think for ourselves.
As for our kids, if peer reviews find the CRT that is in your school to be loaded with quite obvious hacks, then please proceed to have it removed - but don't ban it.

 

[Snekposter]

Its bold of you to tell us Kiwis, probably the world's foremost archive on CRT and its proponents, that we don't know what CRT is.

 

[a terminal posture]

Explain it to me in layman terms then because my understanding of it. I'm being sincere in this post, I'm generally curious to know.

Critical Race Theory claims that the ideals, standards, moral and ethical values developed by Western Europeans over the centuries (aka "Whiteness" or "White supremacy culture") were intentionally formulated to oppress blacks & other racial minorities, even the ones that are seemingly race-neutral or colorblind. This previous post lists a lot of these: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/the-l...ry-because-they-are-losing.92729/post-9235156 . So, for example, punctuality as a virtue was invented by whites to oppress blacks because black culture does not adhere to rigid schedules.