-
You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Just ask the UK, the UK conservative political parties have been struggling trying to shut down CRT since 2015 in the UK and it became prominent in the country in 2012
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13613324.2012.638860?journalCode=cree20
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ory-trump-conservatives-structural-inequality
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13613324.2012.638860?journalCode=cree20
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ory-trump-conservatives-structural-inequality
CRT is only related to White Majority countries.
LCRT is related to Latino Majority countries and is called Latino Critical Race Theory
ACRT is related to Asian Majority countries and is called AsianCrit Theory
A newer branch of CRT is emerging called Disability Critical Theory or DisCrit which is the study of the intersection of disability and race
LCRT is related to Latino Majority countries and is called Latino Critical Race Theory
ACRT is related to Asian Majority countries and is called AsianCrit Theory
A newer branch of CRT is emerging called Disability Critical Theory or DisCrit which is the study of the intersection of disability and race
If that is accurate -- then I definitely agree with @UrbanCowboy1. And although I am generally in favor of less laws and local control, glad that states are keeping this "proposed theory" from K-12. Let people in colleges/universities study "theories" all they want -- but time should not be spent during critical learning time in elementary, middle, and high schools - and certainly not required curriculum.
Quick example of a problem that arises, can you teach or even have discussions about the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow? The idea that those systems have lingering effects is a core part of CRT, as well as other sociological and economic frameworks that have substantial evidence. Depending on how it got interpreted, those lecture and discussions could get banned.
Then in order to remove things that don't lend to CRT and not teach them in public schools...... FOR EXAMPLE...If you don't want CRT principles taught in public school.......you have to remove everything prior to 1870 when it comes to teaching kids about voting rights. Voting rights in the US PRIOR to 1870 are shining examples of the principles of CRT that the Voting system in the US was created by the White Majority and was protect and adjusted by the white majority to prevent POC from voting and inherently is a racist system based on its origins....heck even at one point a POC counted as 3/5's of a person by LAW in the US voting systems when determining population for delegates.
It has been awhile since I have been in schools, but I know I learned about voting rights, slavery, Tulsa Race Massacre, and Jim Crow in high school. My assumption is that this has neither changed nor is that planned on changing. To my knowledge there is nothing, at least in the Oklahoma bill, that changes that teaching.
Your exact quote about CRT was that "all the public, social, and economic systems were created to be inherently favorable to the white person and discriminate against the POC. It says the basis of all our systems was racist when it was started".
Teaching that ALL public, social, and economic systems were built with racism in mind is IMO beyond dubious. Again, let CRT sit in university academic circles, but hope we can all agree it doesn't below in elementary or high schools.
Question to ponder: Was Social Security created to be inherently favorable to the white person and discriminate against the POC??? Since I think the answer is NO and you said CRT teaches that ALL the public systems were created against POC ....did CRT just get proven wrong??
Your exact quote about CRT was that "all the public, social, and economic systems were created to be inherently favorable to the white person and discriminate against the POC. It says the basis of all our systems was racist when it was started".
Teaching that ALL public, social, and economic systems were built with racism in mind is IMO beyond dubious. Again, let CRT sit in university academic circles, but hope we can all agree it doesn't below in elementary or high schools.
Question to ponder: Was Social Security created to be inherently favorable to the white person and discriminate against the POC??? Since I think the answer is NO and you said CRT teaches that ALL the public systems were created against POC ....did CRT just get proven wrong??
When a child is taught that by Law in the United States that a black person only counted as 3/5ths of a person.
And then that child ask the question.
Why is a black person only counted as 3/5ths of a person
IF we want to teach the truth, then you must teach that it was a law set up by the white majority to protect their own interest and the interest of other white slave owners to gain political power
And then that child ask the question.
Why is a black person only counted as 3/5ths of a person
IF we want to teach the truth, then you must teach that it was a law set up by the white majority to protect their own interest and the interest of other white slave owners to gain political power
Legacy college admissions - I tend to agree with you on this issue. Colleges shouldn't show preferential treatment to anyone. They shouldn't show preferential treatment to someone because their parents went there, and they shouldn't show preferential treatment to someone based off their race. They should treat everyone the same.
Interest rates - Loan approval and interest rates are based off a multitude of factors such as credit score, credit history, debt to income ratio, etc. Differences in these areas will produce inequality of outcome between different groups. The federal government has had oversight of financial institutions for decades to ensure they aren't discriminating based off race.
Job applicant names - There was a study on this a couple decades ago that showed that certain names got called back for interviews at a higher rate. The world has changed significantly since then though. With the diversity quotas that exist now, you might get the exact opposite results.
I've never argued that systemic racism is non-existent. Systems are made up of people, and people are flawed. I just don't think it exists to the extent that many people think it does in today's world.
Interest rates - Loan approval and interest rates are based off a multitude of factors such as credit score, credit history, debt to income ratio, etc. Differences in these areas will produce inequality of outcome between different groups. The federal government has had oversight of financial institutions for decades to ensure they aren't discriminating based off race.
Job applicant names - There was a study on this a couple decades ago that showed that certain names got called back for interviews at a higher rate. The world has changed significantly since then though. With the diversity quotas that exist now, you might get the exact opposite results.
I've never argued that systemic racism is non-existent. Systems are made up of people, and people are flawed. I just don't think it exists to the extent that many people think it does in today's world.
Last edited:
-
1
- Show all
So lets take the one you agree on.
So affirmative action in college admissions is introduced to counteract the Legacy college admissions....Notice it wasn't a REMOVAL of the White Majoritys advantage...it was the addition of a "catch up" policy to narrow the gap.......Both of them WRONG.
However, the only thing I've seen a huge fight over is trying to get Affirmative Action removed and OUTLAWED...which would then leave the legacy admissions system still in tact thus once again swinging the advantage to the white majority that created the system.
There are the things CRT would look at in depth.
So affirmative action in college admissions is introduced to counteract the Legacy college admissions....Notice it wasn't a REMOVAL of the White Majoritys advantage...it was the addition of a "catch up" policy to narrow the gap.......Both of them WRONG.
However, the only thing I've seen a huge fight over is trying to get Affirmative Action removed and OUTLAWED...which would then leave the legacy admissions system still in tact thus once again swinging the advantage to the white majority that created the system.
There are the things CRT would look at in depth.
-
1
- Show all
Love hearing a bunch of white liberals defend an obviously racist teaching concept believing telling white children they're racist will heal a divided nation. If it's that simple, where have all you sociological genius' been hiding all these years? I think you should all drown in your white guilt and angst. I've known (and still know) dozens of successful blacks who came up through truly racist times and look at today's complainers and white apologists with humorous curiosity as they seek to cure the black man's problems. Talk about the ultimate hubris.
I think at its core that CRT gets down to teaching the brutal and realistic facts of societies through the lens of the majority of race in country (yes, including Asian and Latino). Be honest...White settlers who were successful and became majorities in the areas they settled, wrote laws to protect themselves and their own interest, Spanish colonist wrote laws in South America to protect themselves and their own interest
However, as you point out..the brushes its authors paint with are still way to broad to be applied effectively .
CRT is only 40 years old, and it is still has a long way to go to where it is refined enough to be taught in public schools to children. However, I think if it continues to refine itself and hone in on these realistic discussions it can be useful
However, as you point out..the brushes its authors paint with are still way to broad to be applied effectively .
CRT is only 40 years old, and it is still has a long way to go to where it is refined enough to be taught in public schools to children. However, I think if it continues to refine itself and hone in on these realistic discussions it can be useful
Fifty eight years ago a black man of note weighed in on the white liberal. Reading this thread (and others) tells me he knew what he was talking about.
"The white liberal differs from the white conservative only in one way: the liberal is more deceitful than the conservative. The liberal is more hypocritical than the conservative. Both want power, but the white liberal is the one who has perfected the art of posing as the N###o's friend and benefactor; and by winning the friendship, allegiance, and support of the N###o, the white liberal is able to use the N###o as a pawn or tool in this political "football game" that is constantly raging between the white liberals and white conservatives.
Politically the American N###o is nothing but a football and the white liberals control this mentally dead ball through tricks of tokenism: false promises of integration and civil rights. In this profitable game of deceiving and exploiting the political politician of the American N###o, those white liberals have the willing cooperation of the N###o civil rights leaders. These "leaders" sell out our people for just a few crumbs of token recognition and token gains. These "leaders" are satisfied with token victories and token progress because they themselves are nothing but token leaders.
Malcolm X
(Edited his words for the faint of heart)
"The white liberal differs from the white conservative only in one way: the liberal is more deceitful than the conservative. The liberal is more hypocritical than the conservative. Both want power, but the white liberal is the one who has perfected the art of posing as the N###o's friend and benefactor; and by winning the friendship, allegiance, and support of the N###o, the white liberal is able to use the N###o as a pawn or tool in this political "football game" that is constantly raging between the white liberals and white conservatives.
Politically the American N###o is nothing but a football and the white liberals control this mentally dead ball through tricks of tokenism: false promises of integration and civil rights. In this profitable game of deceiving and exploiting the political politician of the American N###o, those white liberals have the willing cooperation of the N###o civil rights leaders. These "leaders" sell out our people for just a few crumbs of token recognition and token gains. These "leaders" are satisfied with token victories and token progress because they themselves are nothing but token leaders.
Malcolm X
(Edited his words for the faint of heart)
-
1
- Show all