Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
The teaching of our history: critical race theory and The 1619 Project (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Nugget
Footballguy
Sorry to not understand this topic exactly, but is there a post that shows some sort of assignment or worksheet from the last 6 months that show why parents in Loudon county are upset? What are their kids being exposed to? I’ve seen the idea that 2nd graders were made to feel bad, but how? With all the cameras and videos, I feel this should be all over the internet.
The Commish
Footballguy
Outside of that element of separation, did you find anything meaningfully problematic with the rest of what they did?
For those that didn't read the article, these kids were separated by race because the teachers thought doing so would help them to speak more freely. In my view, they are third graders and they're going to speak freely regardless, but that was the motive for separation. They are then brought back together as a large group and each group gets to speak what they learned and what their group answers were to some questions speaking from the perspective of their race.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
TBH, @IvanKaramazov has posted a few links stating the case but why bother anymore? It's clear that there is no amount of data will change your minds.
Nugget
Footballguy
I read the links. They talked about having discussions among teachers. And a piece from 2015 at a private school in NYC.TBH, @IvanKaramazov has posted a few links stating the case but why bother anymore? It's clear that there is no amount of data will change your minds.
Every kid at the middle school in Lawrence KS has an iPad - they would take pictures of the assignments. Im surprised we have seen more screen shots or photos of the CRT worksheets and curriculum in Loudon county.
dozer
Footballguy
It’s not disingenuous in the least.
I was a traditional Industrial Arts teacher during the first few years of my teaching career, and then our entire specialty area of teaching changed to a more Applied Technology, Applied Math, Applied Science form of hands-on learning.
This change was gradual and took years of research, not only at colleges, but at the local level where administrators and teachers had to convince school board members and the community that all the sudden shop class isn’t just for the kids who were behavior problems, or struggle academically. Now those classes can support the overall goals of the school to produce kids who are prepared…
So, curriculum is a tangible thing that can be written, or purchased. It can be looked at, reviewed, changed, etc. upon the approval of the school board. A teacher changing curriculum on the fly should be reprimanded.
I feel that if you are going to say “pushing this vile racist propaganda”, you should be able to be specific, and I should be able to asses if “vile racist propaganda” applies.
You seem really angry over the whole things, so I’ll seek answers elsewhere.
But teachers aren’t cowboys going rogue in the old west. Mavericks often get disciplined or even fired. (Though it is a giant pain in the rump to fire a teacher.)
BladeRunner
Footballguy
That was the whole point: you guys keep moving the goal posts. When someone DOES show you this, inevitably the excuse will be "Does anyone have any assignments that were done in pencil instead in pen? I would think that if it were CRT it would have been done in pencil".
That's how absurd this is getting.
First it didn't exist. Then we showed you that it did.
Then they said it wasn't the real definition of CRT. Then we disected that and said it had elements of CRT in it so calling it "CRT" is not wrong.
Then they said there was no evidence. Then we showed evidence.
Then they said the evidence was anecdotal. Then we showed you more evidence.
Now you're saying you need screen shots and photos of actual assignments.
See, we know how this is going to go. I'm going to show you this from a presentation pulled directly from the Virginia Department of Education website. Take a look at slide 22 for starters:
https://www.doe.virginia.gov/support/virginia_tiered_system_supports/resources/2015_fall_institute/Legal_implications_of_discipline.pdf
Further details: https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1454467134067642377
And now we wait for the goalposts to be moved again.
the moops
Footballguy
It actually was never really a good thing. Society is not colorblind. Pretending that it is doesn't make it so
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Nugget
Footballguy
Thank you for getting warmer. I appreciate the deck. According to the twitter link, it appears to be from 2015 as well. I hope they are still having those types of conversations in more schools. I'd still love to see what it looks like in practice at a school. I'll try to find some more on my own - I thought it would be easily available. Do they not use a syllabus in school anymore?
dozer
Footballguy
First of all, I joked up-thread about the San Francisco Hippies, and then you post this article about the San Francisco Unified School district. Kind of funny…
I also posted about changing curriculum, and how you’ve got to get all that approved be the school board.
I superimposed a line from this San Franciscan, Principal’s research with what mine might have been.
SF- Therefore, it was necessary to create shared understandings and subsequent commitments, which was facilitated by exploring a framework of White Supremacy Culture.
Doz- Therefore, it was necessary to create shared understandings and subsequent commitments, which was facilitated by exploring a framework of Industrial Technology Education.
This article reads to me like he is on board with, and has been tasked by his school board. Principals (at least in the two states I worked in, MO, CO) don’t just go making these big sweeping changes on their own.
My point is that in American school districts, the school board is elected and it is representative of the community they serve. And in this community, which I don’t know how you get more liberal than San Francisco, want this to be a priority. If you don’t like it, run for school board in SF.
I certainly don’t see anything “vile or racist” in this article.
It’s from 2019. I wonder if there is some follow up…
Nugget
Footballguy
Navigating EdEquityVA: Virginia's Road Map to Equity
This is closer - in the appendix they show checklists and goals - starting on page 30 they offer an audit for schools to look at how their policies are affecting students and outcomes.
I'll keep looking for more and edit as I go.
dozer
Footballguy
the moops
Footballguy
Not what I said at all. Geez.
Who we are as people is influenced by what we look like and what culture we are part of. Recognizing that doesn't mean that we are making everything about color.
In an ideal, perfect world, where everyone starts on an equal playing field, color-blindness would be wonderful
Imagine a different, hypothetical world where the law for many years was that White people can own property and Black people cannot. Then that law is changed to say anyone of any race can own property...but only so long as your parents owned property. Well, the new law is not racist at all, it is color-blind, right? But is it really?
Our real world is somewhere in between those two extremes. Believing we are at either of those two extremes, that there are no elements of the other at all, seems silly.
So I don't know the solution, but I am pretty sure the right answer isn't to ignore race entirely.
On this whole topic of CRT, I think if there were specific examples of "should a lesson teaching specifically XYZ be taught to children in grade X" and it was presented clearly without all the rhetoric, there would probably be general agreement across many people, spanning both parties. I wish we could get there.
dozer
Footballguy
I reject your notion of indoctrination, and the Nazi stuff is irrelevant, and weird to use in this context.
Also, your source, The Daily Wire is extremely right-wing biased.
So, I went to the Fairfax County Public Schools home page, and clicked on the Equity and Cultural Responsiveness link, and eventually found a link to the Letter sent to parents/community , that also had a link to a survey which is no longer active.
Again, this Superintendant appears to be performing the work his school board, and thus his community have asked him to do. There is nothing whatsoever in these links that is even close to being vile and racist.
dozer
Footballguy
Not to pic nits, but It didn't say that Worship of the Written Word, and Individulisam are examples of white supremacy. Wow...
It said this:
15 Characteristics of White Supremacy Culture
Perfectionism
Sense of Urgency
Defensiveness
Quantity Over Quality
Worship of the Written Word
Only One Right Way
Paternalism
Either/Or thinking
Power Hoarding
Fear of Open Conflict
Individualism
I’m the Only One
Progress is Bigger, More
Objectivity
Right to Comfort
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Welcome to the swirl of ideas and thresholds of ideas of race and if/how to teach it that is the CRT thread.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Honestly, I get where IK and others are coming from. I am guilty of it, and I think a lot has to do with not slowing down and picking words well.I think you're mischaracterizing the discussion more than those you claim are mischaracterizing the discussion.
A: X exists.
B: X doesn't exist. Can you show even one example of X in the real world?
Sure, I imagine there's a bad teacher or two somewhere. Is X really being taught as part of curriculum in any broad way?
A: Sure, here you go. [Links to a single example of X by a single teacher in east Bumbletown]
B: But that's just one anecdote. It doesn't prove anything.
A: See, you guys said it doesn't exist and I showed proof of one anecdote!
While B may be arguing in bad faith, A is just as guilty with respect to lumping B and C together.
Personally, when I say something like "come on, it's not in the schools!" where I am coming from is pushing back against the notion that I believe is out there that CRT and it's ideas are widespread in schools and/or invading the curriculum. So, I understand 100% when somebody would come in with an example like IK and others have presented, and then would say that I moved the goalposts if I say that's not what I meant or it's only one example. That's on me for not being clear to begin with, and it's a learning lesson for sure. It's really made me try think about what is my threshold or line for this topic.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Is another part of the problem that even these types of slides and presentation putting non-CRT stuff in under the CRT umbrella.
On slide 27 it reads "Embrace CRT" followed underneath by:
- Engage in race-conscious teaching and learning
To me that descriptor is pretty benign, and I would guess similar phrasing would show up elsewhere, but it's under CRT here. Just one part of the slideshow that got my wheels turning.
ETA: also, do you understand how most of this traces back to Rufo and his open desire to put as much under the CRT umbrella as possible?
Last edited by a moderator:
dozer
Footballguy
Long story, short…
House built in the 60’s, under heavy remodel.
A very recent eviction situation. Former tenant fought eviction for almost a year. Last three months, no utilities… including water.
Many 5-gallon buckets with water around… to flush toilet, I supposed.
Contractor buddy asks me to remove some drywall and demo the kitchen…
Noticed a foul smell when I got there. Not unusual in this situation.
Took down Kitchen cabinets, found massive termite damage.
Other side of the wall was a screened in porch.
Opened the sliding glass and the smell knocked me over….
Former tenant had a pet alligator in a stock tank. About 3 feet long. Poor guy didn’t make it.
I basically told them “This is going to be the @Zow rate.”
They agreed to pay the extra with no qualms.
Buried him on my property.
urbanhack
Fight The Power!
There is nothing specific to VA or our school systems as a whole. Only dotted line random, outlier examples.
white fragility is the bigger issue it seems.
Zow
Footballguy
Regarding color-blindness...
I believe that any good law or policy will be color-blind. I differ with CRT adherents about that.
But that doesn't mean that any color-blind law will constitute good law or policy. I agree with CRT adherents that some policies that are color-blind on their face can be pretty racist.
Consider, hypothetically, legislation specifically designed to reduce turnout among African-American voters by making it less convenient to vote in areas with large black populations. Suppose that the legislation would "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision." The law doesn't say anything about race. It is facially neutral -- i.e., color-blind -- in its text.
I think most of us would agree that such legislation should be considered kind of racist despite its facial color-blindness.
Where I differ with CRT adherents is that, in my view, the solution should always (or nearly always) be to enact color-blind policies that aren't racist. CRT adherents would counter that, realistically, law is about power, not fairness, and entrenched interests will not give up their power willingly. So whenever you see a color-blind law, it's fair to suspect that it was enacted by entrenched, powerful interests (almost always white) in order to preserve their power, and is therefore likely to perpetuate the status quo (in which minorities will remain disadvantaged). The evidence for this view is that a lot of color-blind policies have failed to close the gap in standards of living between white people and black people. A color-blind law can forbid segregating schools by race, but as long as there are predominantly white neighborhoods and black neighborhoods, each with their own schools, the law doesn't effectively end segregation as a practical matter. An effective solution must explicitly take race into account.
The CRT rejoinder to my view isn't crazy, and it may be right in some cases. I just don't think it's right as a general philosophy. In the long run, I think racial equity is going to depend on color-blind policies, not race-conscious policies. I suppose it's possible that I'm wrong about that...
I believe that any good law or policy will be color-blind. I differ with CRT adherents about that.
But that doesn't mean that any color-blind law will constitute good law or policy. I agree with CRT adherents that some policies that are color-blind on their face can be pretty racist.
Consider, hypothetically, legislation specifically designed to reduce turnout among African-American voters by making it less convenient to vote in areas with large black populations. Suppose that the legislation would "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision." The law doesn't say anything about race. It is facially neutral -- i.e., color-blind -- in its text.
I think most of us would agree that such legislation should be considered kind of racist despite its facial color-blindness.
Where I differ with CRT adherents is that, in my view, the solution should always (or nearly always) be to enact color-blind policies that aren't racist. CRT adherents would counter that, realistically, law is about power, not fairness, and entrenched interests will not give up their power willingly. So whenever you see a color-blind law, it's fair to suspect that it was enacted by entrenched, powerful interests (almost always white) in order to preserve their power, and is therefore likely to perpetuate the status quo (in which minorities will remain disadvantaged). The evidence for this view is that a lot of color-blind policies have failed to close the gap in standards of living between white people and black people. A color-blind law can forbid segregating schools by race, but as long as there are predominantly white neighborhoods and black neighborhoods, each with their own schools, the law doesn't effectively end segregation as a practical matter. An effective solution must explicitly take race into account.
The CRT rejoinder to my view isn't crazy, and it may be right in some cases. I just don't think it's right as a general philosophy. In the long run, I think racial equity is going to depend on color-blind policies, not race-conscious policies. I suppose it's possible that I'm wrong about that...
Last edited by a moderator:
dozer
Footballguy
Yeah, as I was reading, I kept trying to relate it to my experience teaching high school. I kept thinking, how awkward for the teacher. Also, I use to have these conversations with my students all the time, occurring naturally.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Actually, the bigger issue appears to be people sticking their head in the sand or pretending what they're seeing isn't real.
djmich
Footballguy
I'd first just say that they are free to do what they want since in this example it is a private institution, have at it.
To your question specifically its hard to look at it that way as they are intertwined unless you are talking about things they did that were not separated by race. There's not much detail in the article on "the rest" of what they did other than talking about experiences. If they taught history lessons that included slavery and other facts around laws to support equality, as an example, I'd support that.
Overall I have reservations about using the public education classroom as a place for group counseling.
Those elements combined (group counseling/discussion + segmenting populations based on race or other identify traits + public education)...I just don't think it belongs there. It has an element of bringing twitter to the classroom for me. I'm not sure what the hell 3rd graders are talking about but I could image high school conversations having a lot of downsides, there would be benefits as well but this is public education not venture capital where you're looking for net positive EV as the basis of a decision knowing you'll win some and lose some.
I'd also be extremely suspect of the ability of the teachers to navigate these well, or without bias and I'd be suspect that any formal curriculum/facilitator guide would not start to incorporate more controversial concepts.
Exactly, if the conversations are awkward for the teachers (the adult)...how is it for all of the participants?
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Per wiki:
DiAngelo coined the term "white fragility" in 2011 to describe any defensive instincts or reactions that a white person experiences when questioned about race or made to consider their own race. In White Fragility, DiAngelo views racism in the United States as systemic and often perpetuated unconsciously by individuals. She recommends against viewing racism as committed intentionally by "bad people".
dozer
Footballguy
High School is one giant exercise in navigating akwardness for the students. I think they would manage just fine.
The Big Donkey
Footballguy
her book Nice Racism in 2021, DiAngelo also made a provocative claim: white progressives cause the most daily harm to people of color.
link
Last edited by a moderator:
GordonGekko
Footballguy
It's a political dog whistle to try and convince low information voters that the Sunk Cost Fallacy simply does not exist at all.
The real problem with the "messaging" from the fringe woke cancel culture radical left is actually not the messaging at all. It's that most of their base is tactically incompetent.
Most of them could actually stand to watch three random episodes of Mad Men to up their woke game. That's how far down the rabbit hole they've gone with ineptness, that television themes and plotlines could probably help their cause.
The modern "woke" movement is one of the worst sales jobs I've ever seen in my entire life. It's the political version of New Coke. The more purity tests are laid down and the more this country falls apart based on ideological psychopathy, the more the average citizen has an incentive to no longer be a low information voter.
High information voters have no incentive nor desire to walk home with an inferior product. Shouting "white fragility" at you is taking the bet that you are too naive to recognize the sheer contempt and utter condescension laid at you for not being pure enough.
You are a racist because you won't sell your integrity to guzzle down New Coke.
But you and I see the long con here. After you and I get wiped out, and then there is no one left to cancel, it will be their children lined up against a wall for not being pure enough. Let them ask about what "fragility" means then.
Do you prefer Sprite? I prefer Sprite myself.
Nugget
Footballguy
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
I haven't read the book. I wonder if poor attempts at humor are one of those defensive reactions she writes about.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
rockaction
Footballguy
Enough to know that it's stupid and deserves no quarter. In fact, left-leaning magazines and newspapers have pretty much thoroughly trashed her arguments. The Atlantic did and the NYT did, I believe.
Nobody is buying this garbage. It's over for all but the corporate and stupid.
Gekko is right on this. The more this #### is in people's faces, the less incentive they have to be low-information voters. Once they get a hold of the source material and what it is saying, then this #### might be over.
I doubt it, because it has the media and the special interests, but the people might just rebel and elect Trump as a second #### you to this crap.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Every post from Bladrunner is us vs them. You guys. You. We.
we aren’t enemies here guy. We all have to live together. You seem so intent on framing everything as a fight. I’m amazed you get away with a lot of what you post to be honest.
You are in every thread in here with your in group / out group mentality. That’s simply not being excellent to each other.
we aren’t enemies here guy. We all have to live together. You seem so intent on framing everything as a fight. I’m amazed you get away with a lot of what you post to be honest.
You are in every thread in here with your in group / out group mentality. That’s simply not being excellent to each other.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
I am just asking because some of these books that get popular like this one and Kendi's it seems like nobody I come in contact with have read. I haven't read it either, I just thought it was interesting when kody posted what her 2nd book was about, and I made an assumption what he was getting at. Then your post that her idea's are #### and only stupid people buy it, gets the same reaction from the same poster that Kody's did.
It just got me thinking about these bestselling books about race. Did they just come out at the right time - I remember seeing them a bunch in bookstores after the Floyd incident. People buying them, but not really reading them? Like you said is it a lot of corporate/school sales? Are we mostly getting our ideas about these books through SM and other people, but rarely know what is actually in the book and don't take the time to digest them fully? The phenomenon is interesting to me is all.
There's a bit of a difference, though, in that you already know what Donald Trump is all about. The posters clicking the Love emoji at "her book is trash" has never read it, never heard of her, and likely never read an excerpt from the book. That's fine, I haven't done any of those things either.
djmich
Footballguy
If Matt Gaetz wrote a book tomorrow it would have a ton of sales (ok maybe in his case not a ton), I wouldn’t buy it, excerpts would be all over social media…and I’d be completely at peace with trashing the stupid excerpts.
I don't know #### about Matt Gaetz other than I see his name frequently here.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
I read Kendi's book (How to be an Anti-Racist) a year or so ago. Admittedly not cover-to-cover, but about 75% of it. Unlike most fiction, I don't think you need every single page of a non-fiction book to give it a fair hearing.
It's every bit as bad as the most negative reviews make it out to be. Most chapters are divided up into half autobiography (those parts are fine but not very interesting) and half essay about some particular flavor of racism that Kendi wants to highlight. The "essay" parts are brutal. They're not so much arguments as just a string of raw assertions that a normal person would simply dismiss out of hand. Kendi's view of racism is undiluted Manichaenism -- literally everything is either racist or anti-racist and if you're not on the anti-racist side then you're on the racist side. When I say "literally," I mean literally. Kendi intentionally does not leave any room for nuance here. Stoplights, capital gains taxes, space exploration, etc. are all either racist or anti-racist in his view. I guess it would be possible to steelman this position by appealing to a slightly more sophisticated version of Manichaenism, but I don't know that very many people over the age of 12 would ever find this kind of thing persuasive.
I've never read anything by DiAngelo. I've just read reviews here and there, and I've come to the conclusion that her stuff probably isn't worth my time. I would welcome the opportunity to read something engaging as a bubble-burster -- Delgado's book on CRT scratched that itch -- but I haven't seen any reason to think that DiAngelo would provide that.
I read the 1619 project when it came out as a NYT feature. Parts of it were really interesting, and parts were pretty bad. I happen to be familiar enough with capitalism to know that the essay by Matthew Desmond is really, really bad, which makes me suspect that the essays that I thought were pretty good may be bad for reasons that I'm not well-informed enough to appreciate. It was definitely worth a read. I doubt I'll bother with the book-length treatment.
Out of these three works, the 1619 Project is the one that has some real merit to it. I don't have any problem with parts of this being taught in schools as a supplemental reading or something like that. I would have a problem with the 1619 Project being the primary lens through which US history and slavery are viewed, but I think it's a pretty reasonable complement to a more traditional curriculum.
It's every bit as bad as the most negative reviews make it out to be. Most chapters are divided up into half autobiography (those parts are fine but not very interesting) and half essay about some particular flavor of racism that Kendi wants to highlight. The "essay" parts are brutal. They're not so much arguments as just a string of raw assertions that a normal person would simply dismiss out of hand. Kendi's view of racism is undiluted Manichaenism -- literally everything is either racist or anti-racist and if you're not on the anti-racist side then you're on the racist side. When I say "literally," I mean literally. Kendi intentionally does not leave any room for nuance here. Stoplights, capital gains taxes, space exploration, etc. are all either racist or anti-racist in his view. I guess it would be possible to steelman this position by appealing to a slightly more sophisticated version of Manichaenism, but I don't know that very many people over the age of 12 would ever find this kind of thing persuasive.
I've never read anything by DiAngelo. I've just read reviews here and there, and I've come to the conclusion that her stuff probably isn't worth my time. I would welcome the opportunity to read something engaging as a bubble-burster -- Delgado's book on CRT scratched that itch -- but I haven't seen any reason to think that DiAngelo would provide that.
I read the 1619 project when it came out as a NYT feature. Parts of it were really interesting, and parts were pretty bad. I happen to be familiar enough with capitalism to know that the essay by Matthew Desmond is really, really bad, which makes me suspect that the essays that I thought were pretty good may be bad for reasons that I'm not well-informed enough to appreciate. It was definitely worth a read. I doubt I'll bother with the book-length treatment.
Out of these three works, the 1619 Project is the one that has some real merit to it. I don't have any problem with parts of this being taught in schools as a supplemental reading or something like that. I would have a problem with the 1619 Project being the primary lens through which US history and slavery are viewed, but I think it's a pretty reasonable complement to a more traditional curriculum.
Not humor - making a point. She acknowledges that whites don’t commit acts of racism because they are bad people - a sentiment I wholeheartedly agree with - yet she uses insulting language to describe them. And the Left keeps wondering why they are losing voters.
The Commish
Footballguy
I was asking for all the things we are told in that article, was the separation the only part that bothered you? Personally, when I read it, I had an immediate reaction that it wasn't a good idea. Not because there was something nefarious, but because it really wasn't necessary AND it would likely be perceived by some of the adults in a negative way based on their world view etc. I think it was said this separation was for 45 minute sessions out of the day and the rest of the time they were brought together to interact with everyone in a larger group?
Hadn't considered that someone may view this is counseling. Can you expand? To the bold, I'm not really sure who's qualified to navigate these sorts of discussions, especially if we expect them to keep their biases out of the equation. This kind of topic really feels like a "marketplace of ideas" solution is in order where all angles are discussed and individuals decide for themselves. Again, that's a tough ask for 3rd graders though.
Uwe Blab
Footballguy
Need to pop in every once in a while on topics to say: Good discussion gang. 
I myself can't stand the far-left woke-ism, but also am extremely perturbed that every school board race here in suburban Ohio was some sort of referendum on CRT...which is nonsense fear-mongering here. So a number of loons with Mike Lindell profile pics or "I Don't Care About Your Vaccine" rings are now having a hand in my kids school cirriculum and funding.
I hate everyone...but this has all been a good read from this thread!
I myself can't stand the far-left woke-ism, but also am extremely perturbed that every school board race here in suburban Ohio was some sort of referendum on CRT...which is nonsense fear-mongering here. So a number of loons with Mike Lindell profile pics or "I Don't Care About Your Vaccine" rings are now having a hand in my kids school cirriculum and funding.
I hate everyone...but this has all been a good read from this thread!
So, from your perspective and understanding there in Ohio, the CRT isn't really in the curriculum; its just the fear mongering?Need to pop in every once in a while on topics to say: Good discussion gang.
I myself can't stand the far-left woke-ism, but also am extremely perturbed that every school board race here in suburban Ohio was some sort of referendum on CRT...which is nonsense fear-mongering here. So a number of loons with Mike Lindell profile pics or "I Don't Care About Your Vaccine" rings are now having a hand in my kids school cirriculum and funding.
I hate everyone...but this has all been a good read from this thread!
Similar threads
