View Poll Results: Did you take a class in Critical Race Theory?

Voters
32. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    1 3.13%
  • No

    31 96.88%
Page 27 of 36 FirstFirst ... 172526272829 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 270 of 352

Thread: Did you take a class in critical race theory?

  1. Top | #261
    Contributor Trausti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    8,621
    Archived
    372
    Total Posts
    8,993
    Rep Power
    69
    CRT is total crap. From 1997:

    For Black Scholars Wedded to Prism of Race, New and Separate Goals

    Critical race theorists, who are on the faculty at almost every major law school and are producing an ever-growing body of scholarly work, have drawn from an idea made popular by postmodernist scholars of all races, that there is no objective reality.
    Anti-enlightenment, indeed. The Age of Reason is dead.

    Professor Butler, a former Federal prosecutor, has also suggested that black jurors should assess whether black Americans would be helped or harmed by acquitting black defendants accused of stealing the property of whites. He has portrayed his suggestions as a kind of black self-help, a direct way of adjusting the score after decades of racial oppression.
    What could go wrong?

    Some theorists go so far as to say that what really happened in a particular incident may be no more important than what people feel or say happened. For example, some argue that even though Tawana Brawley, then a teen-ager, made up her account that a gang of white men, one with a badge, raped and defiled her in New York in 1987, her story is still valid because it offers truths about the oppression of black women.
    The race hoax as noble.

    ”Surely the most striking example of the influence of the critical race theorists on the American legal system is the O. J. Simpson case, in which Johnnie L. Cochran dramatically enacted each of the most controversial postulates of the movement before a transfixed and racially divided nation,” Professor Rosen wrote. ”Indeed, Cochran’s strategy in the courtroom might be best described as applied critical race theory.”

    He added that Mr. Cochran ”set out, through storytelling and the manipulation of racial iconography, to create a narrative that transformed O. J. from a coddled celebrity into the civil rights martyr of a racist police force.”
    Why would anyone protest removing objectivity from schools and replacing it with this?

  2. Top | #262
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    32,633
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    75,106
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by blastula View Post
    Of course, the right is overly hysterical about it, they are mainly using it as a political tactic. But that it is used for a tactic, doesn't mean there is nothing bad going on in schools related to crt. That the right hates something doesn't automatically make it good, even if mostly.
    Agreed. The issue at hand is the noise to content ratio. We're hearing about how radical CRT is and it is indoctrinating children, but the examples provided of this actually happening is much like the "liberal indoctrination" at school. There are scattered articles about some teacher doing something dumb, then getting in trouble for it.

    The hyperbole used against CRT and its alleged indoctrination in schools is very familiar. Everything from same sex marriage slippery slopes to sex education in classrooms, there is so much noise and so little back up that their claims are legitimate.

    This isn't aimed at you specifically, but give me corroboration (significant corroboration! not just a scattering of isolated stories of teachers getting into trouble, showing the system is working) or I just don't bloody care. Life is too darn short for right-wing panty messing noise. The boy cried wolf too many damn times.

  3. Top | #263
    Veteran Member KeepTalking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    St. Louis Metro East
    Posts
    4,480
    Archived
    3,057
    Total Posts
    7,537
    Rep Power
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by blastula View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KeepTalking View Post

    That article does not mention Critical Race Theory.
    True, it doesn't use that term, but so what?
    You held it forth as evidence of CRT being taught in middle school.

    If it does not mention CRT, what criteria did you use to determine that it is an article about a course teaching CRT?

  4. Top | #264
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Burnsville, MN
    Posts
    6,477
    Archived
    2,911
    Total Posts
    9,388
    Rep Power
    51
    So, I'm in my late 30's, have been posting here for years and at no point in any of that time do not remember a single instance of someone who is on the side of racial justice actually utter the words "critical race theory". It has not, in fact, come a single time into my ears as an utterance from a human voice, in any of my memory, at least not for the discussion of any topic ostensibly under that banner.

    In fact, 100% of the usage of the term that I can actually remember and identify has come from the "woke right" who want to fight against this Boogeyman, and it happened here.

    Now there are plenty of phenomena that I would and do freely identify as problems within our society, such as the idea that most people don't even have a good grasp on the extent to which they participate in continued patterns of racism.

    But the fact is, when you put a formal box around it and call it a "theory", it has long been the practice of Liars for Jesus to attempt the odd well poisoning here and there.

    It is, in this way not unlike the problems that exist in the way most atheists frame against "religion". They point to it repeatedly as a font of ills, but the fact is that it's also a font of good starting points of philosophical investigation. They wish to throw the baby out with the bath water.

    And, never once has anyone on the right formally explained the "critical race theory", either -- especially not in any level of rigor. I assume mostly this is because they neither know nor understand it, especially not at any level of rigor.

    The most ironic part of all this is that the prescriptions offered for the racial injustice are themselves non-racial: make higher education readily and freely available to all; legalize/regulate personal use of mind altering substances; ban the box.

    Of course, other things, like structured unavailability of racial markers in evaluations, would also go a long way.

    The one thing that I would prescribe for education, in fact the only thing that in any way MIGHT be construed as "inegalitarian" is that I think educational and academic environments have a responsibility to seek out and pad their ranks with an ecclectic rather than cross-sectional spread of thinkers, and that has more to do with "the problem of perspective" moreso than anything else: the geometry of most people's mental models are going to be such that they cannot pivot or shift to a place that they can "always" be "right"; your perspective will inevitably lead you, and everyone who shares that perspective, to a wrong answer at some point.

    But that's not all. There is still the fact that individuals are not races or groups. I am exactly myself, and if you wish to know anything about that person, you can't learn it by looking at anyone else. So, if you wish to ethically evaluate someone for their ability in a situation, you have to evaluate them, not other people, and most certainly not other people in aggregate.

    So, what this really trikes me as is an objection to readily available education, an objection to letting people live down their pasts, an objection to letting people live their life on their own terms, and finally as an objection to the geometry of the universe itself.

  5. Top | #265
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    5,086
    Rep Power
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarhyn View Post
    So, I'm in my late 30's, have been posting here for years and at no point in any of that time do not remember a single instance of someone who is on the side of racial justice actually utter the words "critical race theory". It has not, in fact, come a single time into my ears as an utterance from a human voice, in any of my memory, at least not for the discussion of any topic ostensibly under that banner.

    In fact, 100% of the usage of the term that I can actually remember and identify has come from the "woke right" who want to fight against this Boogeyman, and it happened here.

    Now there are plenty of phenomena that I would and do freely identify as problems within our society, such as the idea that most people don't even have a good grasp on the extent to which they participate in continued patterns of racism.

    But the fact is, when you put a formal box around it and call it a "theory", it has long been the practice of Liars for Jesus to attempt the odd well poisoning here and there.

    It is, in this way not unlike the problems that exist in the way most atheists frame against "religion". They point to it repeatedly as a font of ills, but the fact is that it's also a font of good starting points of philosophical investigation. They wish to throw the baby out with the bath water.

    And, never once has anyone on the right formally explained the "critical race theory", either -- especially not in any level of rigor. I assume mostly this is because they neither know nor understand it, especially not at any level of rigor.

    The most ironic part of all this is that the prescriptions offered for the racial injustice are themselves non-racial: make higher education readily and freely available to all; legalize/regulate personal use of mind altering substances; ban the box.

    Of course, other things, like structured unavailability of racial markers in evaluations, would also go a long way.

    The one thing that I would prescribe for education, in fact the only thing that in any way MIGHT be construed as "inegalitarian" is that I think educational and academic environments have a responsibility to seek out and pad their ranks with an ecclectic rather than cross-sectional spread of thinkers, and that has more to do with "the problem of perspective" moreso than anything else: the geometry of most people's mental models are going to be such that they cannot pivot or shift to a place that they can "always" be "right"; your perspective will inevitably lead you, and everyone who shares that perspective, to a wrong answer at some point.

    But that's not all. There is still the fact that individuals are not races or groups. I am exactly myself, and if you wish to know anything about that person, you can't learn it by looking at anyone else. So, if you wish to ethically evaluate someone for their ability in a situation, you have to evaluate them, not other people, and most certainly not other people in aggregate.

    So, what this really trikes me as is an objection to readily available education, an objection to letting people live down their pasts, an objection to letting people live their life on their own terms, and finally as an objection to the geometry of the universe itself.
    Well, it's just political gold for the right. They want to scare and motivate their political base: disenfranchised white voters. What better way to motivate a voter than to make them think that the other side is out to get them.

  6. Top | #266
    Veteran Member WAB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, AZ
    Posts
    3,863
    Archived
    2,174
    Total Posts
    6,037
    Rep Power
    70
    Jarhyn: I am exactly myself, and if you wish to know anything about that person, you can't learn it by looking at anyone else.

    This is one of the most intelligent and true things I've ever seen written at TFT.

    We must see people as individuals, not as members of groups. Groups don't exist. Only individuals exist.

    A cool, simple link:

    https://simplyphilosophy.org/study/u...ly-philosophy/
    When one has no character one has to apply a method. - Albert Camus, The Fall

  7. Top | #267
    Veteran Member WAB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, AZ
    Posts
    3,863
    Archived
    2,174
    Total Posts
    6,037
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by WAB View Post
    Jarhyn: I am exactly myself, and if you wish to know anything about that person, you can't learn it by looking at anyone else.

    This is one of the most intelligent and true things I've ever seen written at TFT.

    We must see people as individuals, not as members of groups. Groups don't exist. Only individuals exist.

    A cool, simple link:

    https://simplyphilosophy.org/study/u...ly-philosophy/
    The first para:

    Universals are things that have a single name but many instances. There are many instances in universals in real life. Humanity, planets, stars, atoms and rocks are all universals. So is unity, redness and straightness. But while the existence of such universals is demonstrable, there is good reason to believe that they do not exist. A universal is contradictory and cannot exist.
    A bit deeper, and more in depth:

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/n...m-metaphysics/

    ETA: Egads, I didn't mean to quote my FREAKING self! Sorry....
    When one has no character one has to apply a method. - Albert Camus, The Fall

  8. Top | #268
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Burnsville, MN
    Posts
    6,477
    Archived
    2,911
    Total Posts
    9,388
    Rep Power
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by WAB View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by WAB View Post
    Jarhyn: I am exactly myself, and if you wish to know anything about that person, you can't learn it by looking at anyone else.

    This is one of the most intelligent and true things I've ever seen written at TFT.

    We must see people as individuals, not as members of groups. Groups don't exist. Only individuals exist.

    A cool, simple link:

    https://simplyphilosophy.org/study/u...ly-philosophy/
    The first para:

    Universals are things that have a single name but many instances. There are many instances in universals in real life. Humanity, planets, stars, atoms and rocks are all universals. So is unity, redness and straightness. But while the existence of such universals is demonstrable, there is good reason to believe that they do not exist. A universal is contradictory and cannot exist.
    A bit deeper, and more in depth:

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/n...m-metaphysics/

    ETA: Egads, I didn't mean to quote my FREAKING self! Sorry....
    Heh... No big. But it is interesting. I think you aren't entirely right. I mean, about THINGS not actually being universal, or fungible. That's actually pretty much spot fucking on.

    But there are, nonetheless, universal tendencies, not in the things themselves but in the way things may be.

    These are geometries of the universe itself, however, rather than a shared geometry of instantiations within it.

  9. Top | #269
    My Brane Hertz spikepipsqueak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Victoria
    Posts
    4,225
    Archived
    8,811
    Total Posts
    13,036
    Rep Power
    59
    I took one called Understanding Prejudice and Discrimination, if that counts. Around 1996.

    Note that from the poll, I am the only one.

  10. Top | #270
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Burnsville, MN
    Posts
    6,477
    Archived
    2,911
    Total Posts
    9,388
    Rep Power
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by spikepipsqueak View Post
    I took one called Understanding Prejudice and Discrimination, if that counts. Around 1996.

    Note that from the poll, I am the only one.
    Personally, I really don't think it should. The topic is "critical race theory", which as I mentioned seems to be something that exists to the same extent as Antifa terrorists and MS-13.

    Now, I can say for a fact I took a class on "diversity" in college. The class did a lot of discussions on topics like what racism is, how prejudice happens, and the systems and structures of disparity and privilege that have been echoing and feeding each other since our nation's beginnings.

    But we didn't talk about anything that wasn't real, there. It was, ultimately, a class studying actual phenomena and talking about them.

    Never once did "CRT" get brought up.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •