What is Critical Race Theory?

[Gameface]

I agree it is a dog whistle. I just think it is a dog whistle for the political left.

I'm going to see if I can find a good source for transcripts over the past year to do some data mining. I know that CRT has been mentioned a lot on FoxNews but I'd bet it has been mentioned more over the past year on CNN, MSNBC, etc. If you go back and look at the election night coverage on the various channels, racism, CRT, and the like were almost all they talked about on left leaning media.

It would be interesting to have the regular posters do a political compass test here on JazzFanz, and map the mentions of CRT, racism, etc, to user's political compass maps. I would bet money that users on the political left like The Thiller bring it up far more than right-wing users like Hax0rs.

I highly highly doubt MSNBC and CNN talked about CRT more. And let's not lose the context on their coverage because I also highly doubt that they cover it in a "we need to teach CRT" type of way, while the FOX, OANN and Newsmaxxx likely reported on the dangers of the radical left pushing CRT on their kids.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

let's not lose the context on their coverage because I also highly doubt that they cover it in a "we need to teach CRT" type of way, while the FOX, OANN and Newsmaxxx likely reported on the dangers of the radical left pushing CRT on their kids.

It is the same thing. It is hate and fear. The thing most likely to get your attention, which can then be sold to advertisers, is hate and fear.

Right-biased outlets use CRT to sell hate & fear as:
Schools are using CRT to teach kids that skin color is important. They are teaching your kids to be bigots. They are teaching other kids to be bigots against your kid. They are dividing kids against each other and lying about it. It is loathsome.

Left-biased outlets use CRT to sell hate & fear as:
Right-wing parents are bigots. They want their kids to be bigots and are upset schools are doing their best with anti-racist efforts to raise all children up to the level that used to be exclusive to white kids. Their attack on CRT, which isn’t even in schools, is white supremacy pure and simple. It is loathsome.

Both outlets mention CRT in their sales pitch to hate and fear the outgroup that is the group that not the target audience of the media outlet. Depending on your personal politics, one of those is more likely to resonate with you and the other will feel false but it is the exact same. It is about attention. The only thing that matters is if you’ll keep watching, if you’ll click on the link.

 

[Deleted member 365]

Is this CRT? In a county more than 25 percent black where white dudes killed a black man, this happens?


Will anyone be surprised if these dudes get off when considering the makeup of the jury? It’s going to be very hard (not impossible) for a conviction. But considering the history in the south, I think we know where this is most likely heading…

 

[TheGoldStandard]

Is this CRT? In a county more than 25 percent black where white dudes killed a black man, this happens?


Will anyone be surprised if these dudes get off when considering the makeup of the jury? It’s going to be very hard (not impossible) for a conviction. But considering the history in the south, I think we know where this is most likely heading…

In addition to challenges for things such as actual or implied bias, he defendent has so many peremptory challenges, which allows a juror to be removed for any reason. Not supposed to be based on race alone, but it happens.

In an area with 25% of one race, it isn't surprising. Right or wrong, our justice system is designed to protect defendants. I don't see this as a built in form of systemic racism per se.

I also think they'll be found guilty, as even most white people will see this for what it was.

 

[Gameface]

In addition to challenges for things such as actual or implied bias, he defendent has so many peremptory challenges, which allows a juror to be removed for any reason. Not supposed to be based on race alone, but it happens.

In an area with 25% of one race, it isn't surprising. Right or wrong, our justice system is designed to protect defendants. I don't see this as a built in form of systemic racism per se.

I also think they'll be found guilty, as even most white people will see this for what it was.

I hope you're right.

 

[Gameface]

This case is one more in a line that was brought to attention by the George Zimmerman case. One where an armed person (or people, in this case) essentially goes out looking for trouble. They instigate a confrontation, confidence boosted by the fact that they are armed, and then in the confrontation they initiate they use deadly force to resolve the confrontation. The Rittenhouse case is in the same category.

There are a few others where it was so blatant that the people were not allowed to claim self defense. One happened at a gas station where a couple parked in a handicap spot, the male went inside and while he was inside a guy who was well known in the neighborhood as busybody that went around injecting himself in other people's business, confronted the woman in the car. The man comes out of the gas station and sees a guy leaning in his car window aggressively confronting his wife/girlfriend. He goes and pushes the guy away from his car, the guy falls, collects himself onto his knees, pulls a handgun from his waistband. At this point the man who pushed him starts backing up while putting his hands in the air. The little do-gooder then shoots the man a few times and kills him. He claims self defense. In this instance the cops weren't having it.

There are a few of these cases and in too many of them the shooter is allowed to get away with murder after initiating a confrontation.

I think we need to update the rules on self-defense to bar people from seeking confrontation while armed and then using their gun to resolve the resulting conflict.

 

[Safetydan]

I was unaware you considered @Safetydan to be the ultimate possessor of truth.

I firmly believe the world would be a better place if everybody just agreed with me.

His definition is highly over-simplified, and therefore no more accurate than other such simplifications. That said, it is certainly true that CRT says systemic racism exists, and I'm pretty sure @Safetydan already knew it was a simplification.

Yes.

 

[Deleted member 365]

Cancel culture strikes again

This Utah high school dropped an ethnic studies class. Here’s why students are upset

Amid the national frenzy over critical race theory, Utah lawmakers wanted schools to ban what they considered “harmful” concepts. The State School Board obliged, and now Jordan High School has eliminated one of its ethnic studies courses. Here’s why students are pushing back.

www.deseret.com

 

[Gameface]

Cancel culture strikes again

This Utah high school dropped an ethnic studies class. Here’s why students are upset

Amid the national frenzy over critical race theory, Utah lawmakers wanted schools to ban what they considered “harmful” concepts. The State School Board obliged, and now Jordan High School has eliminated one of its ethnic studies courses. Here’s why students are pushing back.

www.deseret.com

OMG the comments on that article.

So here I thought people had an actual problem with a specific concept referred to as CRT. No, nope, that's not it. They want to whitewash the teaching of American history and ban any mention that racism played a role in getting us where we are today.

So this is not about figuring out what CRT is because as I suspected, this has nothing to do with any sophisticated analysis of a theory and rejecting it on the facts. This is white people being all like "don't you dare tell my kids that their great grandpa participated in overtly racist societal norms. Don't you dare mention slavery, segregation, separate but equal, red-lining, etc.. That stuff never really happened, you just used your Dominion voting machines to delete the real history and substitute this fake news garbage about 'merica being racist and stuff."

 

[Al-O-Meter]

I thought people had an actual problem with a specific concept referred to as CRT. No, nope, that's not it.

Correct. That is not it. The specific concept referred to as CRT is only serving as a stand-in for what parents find objectionable.

They want to whitewash the teaching of American history and ban any mention that racism played a role in getting us where we are today.

So this is not about figuring out what CRT is because as I suspected, this has nothing to do with any sophisticated analysis of a theory and rejecting it on the facts. This is white people being all like...

This is a B.S. narrative peddled by race hustlers. The chattel slavery that existed in the United States was quintessential racism and its existence is taught in every school. The bigoted idea that “white people being all like…”, and I do believe it is bigotry to think that all people of a particular skin tone think a thing, is simply wrong. In fact, the statute causing concern at the district specifically cites the importance of “education on history, civil rights, and racism”.

The statute bans 3 things.

1. that one race is inherently superior or inferior to another race
2. that an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment because of the individual's race
3. that an individual's moral character is determined by the individual's race

You can read the text here: https://le.utah.gov/~2021X1/bills/static/SR0901.html

The school district is concerned the textbook for the college course would open the school up to a legal liability. They’re worried they’d get sued, which would take hundreds of thousands of dollars out of their budget to pay legal fees. The students of Jordan High School can still take the class. The class isn’t banned. It just isn’t on campus. Any Jordan High student 9th grade or above can enroll in the ETHS 2400 class and have the option of either attending class on the SLCC Taylorsville Redwood campus or via SLCC online. That solution provides the educational opportunity to their students and gets the district off the legal liability hook.

I can see the 3 restrictions have greatly bothered you. Would you care to expand on why you think Utah High Schools should be teaching these 3 things?

 

[Gameface]

Correct. That is not it. The specific concept referred to as CRT is only serving as a stand-in for what parents find objectionable.

This is a B.S. narrative peddled by race hustlers. The chattel slavery that existed in the United States was quintessential racism and its existence is taught in every school. The bigoted idea that “white people being all like…”, and I do believe it is bigotry to think that all people of a particular skin tone think a thing, is simply wrong. In fact, the statute causing concern at the district specifically cites the importance of “education on history, civil rights, and racism”.

The statute bans 3 things.

1. that one race is inherently superior or inferior to another race
2. that an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment because of the individual's race
3. that an individual's moral character is determined by the individual's race

You can read the text here: https://le.utah.gov/~2021X1/bills/static/SR0901.html

The school district is concerned the textbook for the college course would open the school up to a legal liability. They’re worried they’d get sued, which would take hundreds of thousands of dollars out of their budget to pay legal fees. The students of Jordan High School can still take the class. The class isn’t banned. It just isn’t on campus. Any Jordan High student 9th grade or above can enroll in the ETHS 2400 class and have the option of either attending class on the SLCC Taylorsville Redwood campus or via SLCC online. That solution provides the educational opportunity to their students and gets the district off the legal liability hook.

I can see the 3 restrictions have greatly bothered you. Would you care to expand on why you think Utah High Schools should be teaching these 3 things?

My post is a response to the comments on that article. Not a commentary on the law or the details of why the class is not going to be at Jordan High.

The comments bothered me, not the law.

 

[Deleted member 365]

Weird. No one is talking about this anymore. It's almost like it was a cheap gimmick for November's elections.