13 Questions for Those Who Want to Ban "Critical Race Theory"

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

Tweet text:

Tim Wise
@timjacobwise
Those attacking anti-racist education under the guise of opposing "critical race theory" have some explaining to do. The media should ask them these questions, because so far, they're getting away with lies and distortions pretty much unscathed

timjwise.medium.com
13 Questions for Those Who Want to Ban “Critical Race Theory”
They won’t answer them though. Because if they did, they would sound ridiculous.
8:35 AM · Feb 15, 2022

https://timjwise.medium.com/13-questions-for-those-who-want-to-ban-critical-race-theory-485afc77cf47

For the past year, conservatives have been waging war on what they call “critical race theory” in schools, but which often amounts to nothing more than an honest accounting of racism in American history.

From attempts at book banning to shutting down teacher trainings on the Civil Rights Movement to complaining about Black History Month, white conservatives are insisting that schools stop making their kids feel bad by talking about racial injustice.

The goal, it appears, is to prohibit any analysis of our country’s history that might detract from an entirely uncritical nationalism.

Dozens of states have introduced or passed legislation restricting how racial subjects can be addressed in classrooms. Already, books are being yanked from school libraries to be reviewed by lawmakers and parents’ groups for any “inappropriate” content.

These efforts raise several questions. And in the interest of transparency — the buzzword conservatives use to justify opening curriculum to parental scrutiny — it seems only fair that they should be expected to respond to them.

*snip*

[SharonClark]

1. Excellent. I'll use this article when discussing the teaching of history with state legislators and

school board members.

[RobinA]

2. I Find These Questions

somewhat disingenuous. It is certainly possible, and the author I'm sure knows this, to teach American history without impugning America in general. It's the difference between teaching that Americans did racist things throughout history and saying that America is inherently racist. Telling people they are horrible people just makes them defensive. Telling people things could be better, here's how, will get much more buy-in.

Assuming the point is to actually get people to change and not just to call people names. If I were a winger, I would want critical race theory in school. It's a great recruiting tool for them. It pisses off the previously unpissed.

[Nevilledog]

3. What's your definition of inherent racism?

Critical Race Theory teaches about SYSTEMIC racism.

[RobinA]

5. I Quoted The Article

Merriam Webster, "belonging by nature or habit : intrinsic risks inherent in the venture." "Systemic," as used with "racism," seems to mean whatever anyone wants it to mean. It probably isn't the best usage to win hearts and minds of whoever is being accused of it.

[Nevilledog]

8. I think it's important to present CRT as its founders intended.

What the founders of critical race theory have to say about the conservative attacks

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/07/22/critical-race-theory-founders/

No paywall
https://archive.fo/4mqEG


For decades, the founders of critical race theory hashed out their differences at academic conferences and in journals.

The “crits,” as they are known, disagreed over whether their framework for examining systemic racism was too far removed from activists, and if their approach focused enough on the struggles of the poor.

“This was before the internet, before email. If you wanted exchange of ideas, you met face-to-face,” Mari Matsuda, a law professor at the University of Hawaii at Mānoa, said in an email. “This allowed for expressions of difference, questioning, arguing, while forging solidarity.”

But in recent months, critical race theory has leaped from the classroom to conservative news networks, where it has been attacked as divisive. Conservative activists and politicians have seized on the issue, often redefining the academic term to encompass nearly any examination of systemic racism. Several state legislatures are considering whether to ban teaching critical race theory in schools.

In interviews, the scholars who helped create this academic framework said they’re angry about the way the current debate distorts their ideas. They worry about chilling effect this backlash could have on teaching about race and racism in America.

*snip*

[Caliman73]

6. I did not find the questions disingenuous at all..

They force White people to understand and defend their positions rather than just say them and try to legislate against discomfort.

I agree that using words like "inherent" tend to so bias. Thing is, inherent is being used by the people against teaching historical facts not by the people teaching actual history.

The United States is not Inherently racist, but racism and White Supremacy were CODIFIED within the Constitution, State and local laws. They were built into the social fabric. They still exist today, within our media, within economic structures, and within the culture of law enforcement.

The point is to teach the ACCURATE history of the United States, which includes teaching the fact that White Supremacy was a driving force in building this country and that this legacy continues to have harmful effects on people today.

Saying that "some racist people" exist, basically allows people to focus on individual acts and not on the systemic effects of racism and White Supremacy. That is a common argument from the right. People like Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson try to sow doubt on the "systemic" nature of racism and White Supremacy and focus on how "it is just some bad individuals".

How do you think that decade after decade the "Doll Test" keeps coming up with similar results? Black and Brown kids indicating that the "bad" "ugly", and "naughty" doll is the one that looks like them. Do you think that stems from "Americans doing racist things throughout history? Or perhaps there are ubiquitous messages in the society, through media, that are reinforcing these attitudes?

No one legitimate is teaching telling people that they are "horrible". They are teaching that in history, people with White skin created laws, economic, and social systems that have conferred advantages to some and disadvantages to others. They are telling people that this idea of America being the land of "colorblindness" where you succeed or fail solely on your own efforts, is a myth and that groups of people have been disadvantaged by the rules, traditions, and social values that stemmed from the attitudes of some of those who founded the Country and who set up the system.

If people choose to take that personally and think that they are being personally attacked by the teaching of real, ugly history, then perhaps the look should be inward rather than outward. We all hate it when our myths are shown to be myths. When we learn the Easter Bunny isn't real. If we truly want to be the "shining city on a hill" then we need to acknowledge where we all have failed to be that and go about fixing those problems.

[LAS14]

7. I'm not sure I find them as problematic as you do, but I do, for sure, agree...

... that there is justification for wanting schools to give students a good understanding of the ideals behind the founding of this country, along with the many ways in which it did not live up to its ideals. And also to give them an appreciation for how the ideals have evolved in a good way. I have seen educational stances which I think justify parents taking offense. Not a lot, but it needs to be OK to call them out.

[keithbvadu2]

4. First question: What is CRT?

First question: What is CRT?

(Can you define it?)