[Bay Kid]

Curious why this is being pushed in our schools? This seems like it is designed to divide our country.

[retiredguy123]

It sounds like you answered your own question.

[stadry]

possibly by design, yet nevertheless the final result will be devisive whether or not by design.

we can ignore reality but we cannot ignore the results of ignoring reality.

[spd2918]

Research "Cultural Marxism."

Keeping people divided is the goal. Angry people are easy to control.

[Toymeister]

It is forbidden from being taught in public schools in Florida.

[JerryLBell]

From what I've read, critical race theory is really two ideas.

The first is that the very idea of race is not based on biology or science of any kind. There's nothing about the physiology of humans that neatly divides humanity into categories like "white", "black", "Asian", etc. The attempts to divide people into these categories were done societally, not scientifically.

The second idea is that American history shows us that governments put in place in the Americas by European settlers were and continue to be racist in nature. To steal land away from the indigenous people, governments put into place laws that made those peoples have fewer or any rights and encouraged the suppression of those peoples. Prior to the industrial revolution, manual labor was vital and slave labor was cheaper than paid labor, so laws were put into place to allow kidnapping, torturing and enslaving peoples from other countries, especially Africa. Laws were put into place over time to exclude Asians. During World War II, people of Japanese heritage were robbed of their properties and imprisoned while people of German heritage were not. Even after the emancipation of enslaved people in America, voting rights were suppressed and continue to be so to this day.

Critical race theory doesn't paint an artificially pretty picture of American history or governance. If you read history deeply, however, it is probably a more accurate picture. Does this divide people? Possibly. Some people are averse to learning unpleasant truths. I've always thought that true patriotism wasn't blindly loving ones country, right or wrong but rather wanting the best for and out of ones country, realizing when ones country was wrong or doing wrong and changing it for the better even if that involves discomfort and hard work.

America isn't perfect and never was. It gets better over time, despite occasional backsliding. I hope it continues to get better and better in the future. Pretending we are and have been perfect won't help us get there.

But that's just my opinion.

[retiredguy123]

History should be based on factual information. Critical race theory is not history. Apples and oranges.

[stanley]

They don't call it a "theory" for nothing ya know

[manaboutown]

It is an asinine false premise, not actually a theory in the scientific sense. It is an attempt to brainwash young impressionable minds. Mao and other totalitarian dictators and governments have used this type tactic to control their citizens.

[Nanlob]

Well put.

Originally Posted by JerryLBell

From what I've read, critical race theory is really two ideas.

The first is that the very idea of race is not based on biology or science of any kind. There's nothing about the physiology of humans that neatly divides humanity into categories like "white", "black", "Asian", etc. The attempts to divide people into these categories were done societally, not scientifically.

The second idea is that American history shows us that governments put in place in the Americas by European settlers were and continue to be racist in nature. To steal land away from the indigenous people, governments put into place laws that made those peoples have fewer or any rights and encouraged the suppression of those peoples. Prior to the industrial revolution, manual labor was vital and slave labor was cheaper than paid labor, so laws were put into place to allow kidnapping, torturing and enslaving peoples from other countries, especially Africa. Laws were put into place over time to exclude Asians. During World War II, people of Japanese heritage were robbed of their properties and imprisoned while people of German heritage were not. Even after the emancipation of enslaved people in America, voting rights were suppressed and continue to be so to this day.

Critical race theory doesn't paint an artificially pretty picture of American history or governance. If you read history deeply, however, it is probably a more accurate picture. Does this divide people? Possibly. Some people are averse to learning unpleasant truths. I've always thought that true patriotism wasn't blindly loving ones country, right or wrong but rather wanting the best for and out of ones country, realizing when ones country was wrong or doing wrong and changing it for the better even if that involves discomfort and hard work.

America isn't perfect and never was. It gets better over time, despite occasional backsliding. I hope it continues to get better and better in the future. Pretending we are and have been perfect won't help us get there.

But that's just my opinion.

[Taltarzac725]

A Lesson on Critical Race Theory

Looks very complicated. Teachers should be able to decide which students could handle this. Beltway bigwigs should not determine it. Leave it to the educators.

[manaboutown]

"Critical race theory is an academic discipline, formulated in the 1990s and built on the intellectual framework of identity-based Marxism. Relegated for many years to universities and obscure academic journals, it has increasingly become the default ideology in our public institutions over the past decade. It has been injected into government agencies, public school systems, teacher training programs and corporate human resources departments in the form of diversity training programs, human resources modules, public policy frameworks and school curricula.

Its supporters deploy a series of euphemisms to describe critical race theory, including “equity,” “social justice,” “diversity and inclusion” and “culturally responsive teaching.”
Critical race theorists, masters of language construction, realize that “neo-Marxism” would be a hard sell. Equity, on the other hand, sounds nonthreatening and is easily confused with the American principle of equality. But the distinction is vast and important. Indeed, critical race theorists explicitly reject equality — the principle proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, defended in the Civil War and codified into law with the 14th and 15th Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. To them, equality represents “mere nondiscrimination” and provides “camouflage” for white supremacy, patriarchy and oppression.

In contrast to equality, equity as defined and promoted by critical race theorists is little more than reformulated Marxism. In the name of equity, UCLA law professor and critical race theorist Cheryl Harris has proposed suspending private property rights, seizing land and wealth and redistributing them along racial lines.

Critical race guru Ibram X. Kendi, who directs the Center for Antiracist Research at Boston University, has proposed the creation of a federal Department of Antiracism. This department would be independent of (i.e., unaccountable to) the elected branches of government and would have the power to nullify, veto or abolish any law at any level of government and curtail the speech of political leaders and others deemed insufficiently “antiracist.”

One practical result of the creation of such a department would be the overthrow of capitalism, since, according to Kendi, “in order to truly be antiracist, you also have to truly be anticapitalist.”

In other words, identity is the means; Marxism is the end."

From: What critical race theory is really about

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

History should be based on factual information. Critical race theory is not history. Apples and oranges.

Perhaps you could enlighten us on the NON factual information ?

[GrumpyOldMan]

Originally Posted by JerryLBell

From what I've read, critical race theory is really two ideas.

The first is that the very idea of race is not based on biology or science of any kind. There's nothing about the physiology of humans that neatly divides humanity into categories like "white", "black", "Asian", etc. The attempts to divide people into these categories were done societally, not scientifically.

The second idea is that American history shows us that governments put in place in the Americas by European settlers were and continue to be racist in nature. To steal land away from the indigenous people, governments put into place laws that made those peoples have fewer or any rights and encouraged the suppression of those peoples. Prior to the industrial revolution, manual labor was vital and slave labor was cheaper than paid labor, so laws were put into place to allow kidnapping, torturing and enslaving peoples from other countries, especially Africa. Laws were put into place over time to exclude Asians. During World War II, people of Japanese heritage were robbed of their properties and imprisoned while people of German heritage were not. Even after the emancipation of enslaved people in America, voting rights were suppressed and continue to be so to this day.

Critical race theory doesn't paint an artificially pretty picture of American history or governance. If you read history deeply, however, it is probably a more accurate picture. Does this divide people? Possibly. Some people are averse to learning unpleasant truths. I've always thought that true patriotism wasn't blindly loving ones country, right or wrong but rather wanting the best for and out of ones country, realizing when ones country was wrong or doing wrong and changing it for the better even if that involves discomfort and hard work.

America isn't perfect and never was. It gets better over time, despite occasional backsliding. I hope it continues to get better and better in the future. Pretending we are and have been perfect won't help us get there.

But that's just my opinion.

Very well put. Too many would like to sweep the uglier parts of American history under the rug. Understanding our past is important. It obviously should be as accurate as possible, but two quotes come to mind:

Those who do not learn about history are doomed to repeat it (paraphrased)
And History is written by the winners. (There is NO such thing as "accurate" history).

[Taltarzac725]

This looks like advanced college level stuff. Some high school students would get it. Others probably not. The quote is from an America Bar Association link. A Lesson on Critical Race Theory

CRT grew from Critical Legal Studies (CLS), which argued that the law was not objective or apolitical. CLS was a significant departure from earlier conceptions of the law (and other fields of scholarship) as objective, neutral, principled, and dissociated from social or political considerations. Like proponents of CLS, critical race theorists recognized that the law could be complicit in maintaining an unjust social order. Where critical race theorists departed from CLS was in the recognition of how race and racial inequality were reproduced through the law. Further, CRT scholars did not share the approach of destabilizing social injustice by destabilizing the law. Many CRT scholars had witnessed how the law could be used to help secure and protect civil rights. Therefore, critical race theorists recognized that, while the law could be used to deepen racial inequality, it also held potential as a tool for emancipation and for securing racial equality.