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.
 
It's the same "no-true-socialist" trick they always play.

Here's a handy definition, should you be pressed.
Screenshot_20210616-132917_DuckDuckGo.jpg
 
I mean critical race theory really isn't anything more than an extremely simplistic logic diagram, where all arrows lead to "kill whitey." There's no way to obfuscate its central message past a certain point, no matter how much money or expertise is put into the effort. The fact that it has encountered pushback shouldn't be noteworthy (it unambiguously calls for genocide, after all). The number of people that wholeheartedly embrace it is the real story, as it seems to be a very sizeable minority that includes a LOT of white people.
 
Screenshot_20210616-150238_DuckDuckGo.jpg

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.
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.
 
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.
"It's good when children are taught to believe that white people are the very embodiment of evil and all traces of that ethnicity should be erased! Oh wait, did I say it's good? I mean that it's actually not happening. What you're seeing with your own eyes is a boogey man!"

Is retard-tier gaslighting all you guys have?
 
IMO the most effective counter to the constantly-changing evasive descriptions of CRT is just posting photos of the powerpoints/presentations or other literal things they teach.

CRT's definition of things like individuality/objectivity being white supremacist is pretty consistent across each program, for example, a quick image search

1623873942441.png

(^ from nextgenlearning.org)
1623873921994.png

^ afaik this is the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History's guidelines for talking about race, most of us have probably seen this one before

1623873911277.png

^ todayuknews article that no longer exists outside of the google cached image

1623873889782.png

(^from columbia university)

There's also those meme photos of the actual presentations, with background power point lists of things like "baseball" being white supremacist and whatever.
 
Last edited:
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.
Neither did the white hating people who use it as a bludgeon. Also, if it is checking out in social reality then maybe there is something to it.
 
IMO the most effective counter to the constantly-changing evasive descriptions of CRT is just posting photos of the powerpoints/presentations or other literal things they teach.

CRT's definition of things like individuality/objectivity being white supremacist is pretty consistent across each program, for example, a quick image search

View attachment 2267618
(^ from nextgenlearning.org)
View attachment 2267616
^ afaik this is the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History's guidelines for talking about race, most of us have probably seen this one before

View attachment 2267611
^ todayuknews article that no longer exists outside of the google cached image

View attachment 2267610
(^from columbia university)
Few things make EssJayDubz screech like a chorus of pod people as reliably as scrutiny and quoting them directly.

Sorry for the frequent Twitter screencaps, but it's a prime example of the headline being "Republicans Pounce!" instead of the conroversy that prompted the pouncing.
Screenshot_20210616-111937_DuckDuckGo.jpgScreenshot_20210616-112003_DuckDuckGo.jpgScreenshot_20210616-115839_DuckDuckGo.jpg
....remember what I always say? "If they're denying, they're lying."
 
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.
So why don't you enlighten us with a bullet point view of what Critical Race Theory actually is since none of the defenders of this trash can actually do that.

This is as borderline autistic as when you said we'd all be flying around in electric airplanes.
 
Last edited:
Back