you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Chipit[S] 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (11 children)

School boards are being packed with previously apolitical parents who don't want their children taught hate. The federal education authority responded by reporting them as domestic terrorists.

[–]AcceleratedWallops 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

For some reason I get the feeling "not teaching hate" is exactly the issue these people have...but sure, I'll take a read, got a link?

[–]Chipit[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

Here is the brand new mandatory critical curriculum from Connecticut, authored by SERC which used to be focused on special education for handicapped students and is now squarely focused on CRT. Created under Public Act No. 19-12:

https://files.serc.co/pa1912/20211101-CT_BL_Curric_OCT21.pdf

Many Critical Pedagogues are increasingly coming out of the woodwork and are being interviewed by the media.

https://areomagazine.com/2022/01/18/yes-children-are-being-taught-critical-race-theory-in-k-12-schools-in-the-us/

If you prefer video: https://newdiscourses.com/2022/03/deep-ideological-origins-critical-race-theory/

This stuff is deep and deliberately obtuse. It goes back over a century. However it's well documented and with effort we can trace it to its sources.

[–]AcceleratedWallops 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Oh yeah, I forgot y'all consider teaching history "hate." Better to sweep any past shamefulness under the rug.

I'd bring up the irony of white fragility here but you probably don't know what that is.

[–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

You didn't read the links. After saying you would.

Robin DiAngelo's white fragility "theory" is the most brazen rhetorical fortress I've ever seen constructed and taken seriously. It's just a Kafka trap proposed by a "race relations expert" who insists that one race is inherently bad. People like DiAngelo are putting The Onion out of business. In her portrayal, all white people seem to engage in endless atrocities against all people of color, who are described as if their whole experience were that of being brutalized victims.

You probably don't know what a kafkatrap is.

Negative aspects of white people include planning for the future, delayed gratification, valuation of time as a commodity, decision-making, self-reliance and politeness.

Are they seriously trying to say that non white people:

  • Don't plan for the future
  • Do things when they feel like it
  • Waste time
  • Suck at decision making and self-reliance
  • And are impolite

That's SJWism in a nutshell. SJWs like you don't accuse blacks of being animals, you just act on it.

[–]AcceleratedWallops 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I did read the links. The CT curriculum seems like a black history course; didn't see any references to CRT in a skim. And your second link is a lovely description of how CRT used to have a specific legal definition but now means "anything conservatives don't like", so not really helping your case there.

Your description of white fragility sounds like you learned about it exclusively from Tucker Carlson and demonstrates a lack of ability to introspect. Which, hey, that's pretty much what it's about.

And I'm not an SJW. I'm just someone who recognizes that yes, Jim Crow happened, and yes, it was bad. Holy shit, CRT over here! Better not teach kids any American history before 1990 or the white kids might feel uncomfortable.

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

For someone who's not SJW, you sure are using their talking points.

What's a kafkatrap?

Asking for evidence or pointing out contradictions is taken as a moral affront: only people acting in bad faith could ask to be convinced of the ubiquity of such a glaring problem. Debating people who think like this is a deeply unsettling experience. No matter the discussion, they will constantly and automatically change the subject to the conditions of the discussion itself, in order to derail the good points being made.

Arguing with them and trying to meet them on a level field is like trying to argue with a Jehovah's Witness. Only difference is a JW is at least willing to talk to disbelievers in hopes of converting/winning them over. An SJW thinks doing so is pointless because those disbelievers should know better and is therefore a way for them to sort the "tainted" from the "pure". In fact, according to this, logic itself is seen as a harmful tool of "the Devil" it tries to purge from civilization.

They're not liberals. They're just bigots. No wonder we despise them on instinct.

[–]AcceleratedWallops 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

They're responses to your links, that you picked, how could they be SJW talking points?

they will constantly and automatically change the subject to the conditions of the discussion itself, in order to derail the good points being made.

Ie exactly what you are doing now?

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

They're exactly what SJWs say. The part about it's OK to teach children to hate each other because of the debunked theory of "white fragility". Boy, for someone who's not an SJW, you sure talk like one.

Say, how about that George Floyd? Was he an innocent victim, or a multiple felon who abandoned his children and pointed a gun at the belly of a pregnant woman?

[–]AcceleratedWallops 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So you ignored everything I wrote and are repeating yourself. Bro, you a bot?

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm just gonna leave this here: https://i.imgur.com/WvwJ6AU.jpg