Bad News Thread

[Desert Hound]

I don't defend the pile of swamp muck that you seem to believe is CRT.

It isn't my belief, I simply repost what supporters write. Try reading sometime. Look up Kendi. One of the main figures pushing this divisiveness. Read what he believes and what he preaches.


Espola. You my friend are a troll. I don't usually call people names on this board. But you truly are. You never engage. You never take a stance other than saying LINK? You never actually contribute a thought or an opinion.

I disagree with @dad4 A LOT. But at least he is more than willing to give his perspective on things. And have an actual back and forth. You don't.

Here is another example from a proponent of CRT. Their focus is on teaching that whites are oppressors whether they know it or not. And thus they are teaching kids that their skin color if white means they are an oppressor. So you are teaching white kids to feel some guilt about something they have nothing to do with...while at the same time teaching others that their issues arise from whites. That isn't in any sense a unifying and uplifting model to follow or be teaching people.

“I have come to see white privilege as an invisible package of unearned assets that I can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was “meant” to remain oblivious… My schooling gave me no training in seeing myself as an oppressor, as an unfairly advantaged person, or as a participant in a damaged culture. I was taught to see myself as an individual whose moral state depended on her individual moral will.”
– Dr. Peggy McIntosh, White Privilege, Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack

Here is more of this "englightened" thinking they want to advance in schools.

"Not acknowledging the effects of historic and current racism sends a message that these issues are not white people’s problem — when in fact, the hateful violence we have witnessed and the inequities that exist today in our schools and communities are directly tied to our shared history as white people. "

So no @espola this is not something that I believe and the right made up. One simply needs to read what the proponents of this theory say in their own writings. If you were ever so inclined to find out you could find source material.

 

[whatithink]

I sure as hell hope not. While there are admirable traits in the poster that aren't inherent to any race there are some blatant stereotypes. Skinny blond girls? Even if it were remotely true its irrelevant to the conversation. The poster clearly presents whiteness in the pejorative. The idea that there are other race counter-points to these traits based on stereotyping to be put on a poster is disturbing.

I can only hope that the poster was done in the name of really bad satire.

My read of the poster is that the context is that American traits or traits that are encouraged and admired in the US are white in origin. I could have that all wrong, but if you took out all the white-speak and just headed it with "Traits admired in the USA", people may have a different take on it.

I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing with the content, but you can take the various categories and correlate

• Rugged Individualism - liberty, freedom, personal rights
• Family structure - isn't every pol generally a good family man/woman (slowly changing) ... infidelity being a near (public) mortal blow
• Emphasis on scientific method - yeah, so that's obviously bunk as everyone has their own facts these days
• History - more true than not, history is always biased to the victor, nothing different in the US
• Protestant Work Ethic - very American outlook, but less Protestant and more just work ethic
• Religion - for sure (God Bless America, In God we Trust, the prior heading saying "Protestant" etc.)
• Status, Power & Authority - for many, nationally we're the richest country & have the best military so we must be the best country in the world, right?
• Future Orientation - check
• Time - meh
• Aesthetics - BS
• Holidays - sure
• Justice - yes
• Competition - yes
• Communication - not so much so on most of this (anymore)

 

[espola]

My read of the poster is that the context is that American traits or traits that are encouraged and admired in the US are white in origin. I could have that all wrong, but if you took out all the white-speak and just headed it with "Traits admired in the USA", people may have a different take on it.

I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing with the content, but you can take the various categories and correlate

• Rugged Individualism - liberty, freedom, personal rights
• Family structure - isn't every pol generally a good family man/woman (slowly changing) ... infidelity being a near (public) mortal blow
• Emphasis on scientific method - yeah, so that's obviously bunk as everyone has their own facts these days
• History - more true than not, history is always biased to the victor, nothing different in the US
• Protestant Work Ethic - very American outlook, but less Protestant and more just work ethic
• Religion - for sure (God Bless America, In God we Trust, the prior heading saying "Protestant" etc.)
• Status, Power & Authority - for many, nationally we're the richest country & have the best military so we must be the best country in the world, right?
• Future Orientation - check
• Time - meh
• Aesthetics - BS
• Holidays - sure
• Justice - yes
• Competition - yes
• Communication - not so much so on most of this (anymore)

View attachment 11051

Nice response. I don't agree with everything, for example, your comment on politician's marital fidelity. At least they used to keep it quiet until historians wrote posthumous tell-all books.

 

[whatithink]

Nice response. I don't agree with everything, for example, your comment on politician's marital fidelity. At least they used to keep it quiet until historians wrote posthumous tell-all books.

My point is the different viewpoint on marital fidelity in the US versus elsewhere, e.g. look at Johnson in the UK, the Prime Minister and a serial adulterer, never mind the French where having affairs is just what you do etc. Pols in the US have to be seen to be family people, roll out the spouse and kids for the campaign etc. I don't agree that it is prevalent anymore on the spousal roles, but then again misogyny and mansplaining are not exactly rare occurrences in public life these days either.

 

[watfly]

My read of the poster is that the context is that American traits or traits that are encouraged and admired in the US are white in origin. I could have that all wrong, but if you took out all the white-speak and just headed it with "Traits admired in the USA", people may have a different take on it.

I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing with the content, but you can take the various categories and correlate

• Rugged Individualism - liberty, freedom, personal rights
• Family structure - isn't every pol generally a good family man/woman (slowly changing) ... infidelity being a near (public) mortal blow
• Emphasis on scientific method - yeah, so that's obviously bunk as everyone has their own facts these days
• History - more true than not, history is always biased to the victor, nothing different in the US
• Protestant Work Ethic - very American outlook, but less Protestant and more just work ethic
• Religion - for sure (God Bless America, In God we Trust, the prior heading saying "Protestant" etc.)
• Status, Power & Authority - for many, nationally we're the richest country & have the best military so we must be the best country in the world, right?
• Future Orientation - check
• Time - meh
• Aesthetics - BS
• Holidays - sure
• Justice - yes
• Competition - yes
• Communication - not so much so on most of this (anymore)

View attachment 11051

I hear what your saying but it's obvious that the poster is trying to convey that American values are white values. With the implication that American values aren't black, Hispanic, Asian, etc values, as a result, American values and America are inherently racist (i.e. the narrative that America is systematically racist). I believe there are a lot of values that all races share that make us American and we should focus on this common ground.

Again I have an issue with assuming races are monolithic, which is what is being said when you summarize a race's attributes on a single poster. This is the epitome of stereotyping which is what got us into trouble in the first place.

IDK, lately its just seems to me that were trying to fight racism with racism. We should always remember our history, but let's not repeat it.

 

[espola]

It isn't my belief, I simply repost what supporters write. Try reading sometime. Look up Kendi. One of the main figures pushing this divisiveness. Read what he believes and what he preaches.


Espola. You my friend are a troll. I don't usually call people names on this board. But you truly are. You never engage. You never take a stance other than saying LINK? You never actually contribute a thought or an opinion.

I disagree with @dad4 A LOT. But at least he is more than willing to give his perspective on things. And have an actual back and forth. You don't.

Here is another example from a proponent of CRT. Their focus is on teaching that whites are oppressors whether they know it or not. And thus they are teaching kids that their skin color if white means they are an oppressor. So you are teaching white kids to feel some guilt about something they have nothing to do with...while at the same time teaching others that their issues arise from whites. That isn't in any sense a unifying and uplifting model to follow or be teaching people.

“I have come to see white privilege as an invisible package of unearned assets that I can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was “meant” to remain oblivious… My schooling gave me no training in seeing myself as an oppressor, as an unfairly advantaged person, or as a participant in a damaged culture. I was taught to see myself as an individual whose moral state depended on her individual moral will.”
– Dr. Peggy McIntosh, White Privilege, Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack

Here is more of this "englightened" thinking they want to advance in schools.

"Not acknowledging the effects of historic and current racism sends a message that these issues are not white people’s problem — when in fact, the hateful violence we have witnessed and the inequities that exist today in our schools and communities are directly tied to our shared history as white people. "

So no @espola this is not something that I believe and the right made up. One simply needs to read what the proponents of this theory say in their own writings. If you were ever so inclined to find out you could find source material.

Dr. McIntosh's paper is over 30 years old. Is that what you mean by CRT, in the current time frame?

Who is the "they" that wants to advance the "what" in which schools?

 

[Hüsker Dü]

Dr. McIntosh's paper is over 30 years old. Is that what you mean by CRT, in the current time frame?

Who is the "they" that wants to advance the "what" in which schools?

Their sources haven’t figured the angle on that yet so for now they will just continue working the theoretical possibility of “if” without quite admitting that.

 

[what-happened]

Dr. McIntosh's paper is over 30 years old. Is that what you mean by CRT, in the current time frame?

Who is the "they" that wants to advance the "what" in which schools?

That foxhole is now about 3 inches deep and the E-tool can no longer lock in place.

 

[whatithink]

I hear what your saying but it's obvious that the poster is trying to convey that American values are white values. With the implication that American values aren't black, Hispanic, Asian, etc values, as a result, American values and America are inherently racist (i.e. the narrative that America is systematically racist). I believe there are a lot of values that all races share that make us American and we should focus on this common ground.

Again I have an issue with assuming races are monolithic, which is what is being said when you summarize a race's attributes on a single poster. This is the epitome of stereotyping which is what got us into trouble in the first place.

IDK, lately its just seems to me that were trying to fight racism with racism. We should always remember our history, but let's not repeat it.

Its a very complex subject. I don't read the poster as saying that the values are racist, just that American traits or values predominantly originated from whites, as whites had the power. Even in that, you could say that it was a subset of whites, with the "Protestant Work Ethic" as stated being the most obvious example (and one could take that as a slur against non-Protestants whites without even getting into the "No Irish, Blacks or Dogs" signs etc.). TBH, I don't think white in this context is even a race thing, but more of a class thing, whereby Protestant whites (WASPs) have "ruled the US and imbued its resultants prevalent "values".

I think values & traits are environmentally driven. In that context I think most Americans would look at most of the traits/values and think "yeah". IDK if they all originated as white mind, or if that was an assumption of the person/panel who compiled it or just sloppy work.

The "remember our history, but let's not repeat it" is often quoted, but the problem with that is whose history are you remembering. Education is biased. States can "teach" different version of history by omission or interpretation. That's actually a pretty horrendous thing if you think about it. Its a disservice to the future, and you "reap what you sow" to quote something else much used.

 

[watfly]

The "remember our history, but let's not repeat it" is often quoted, but the problem with that is whose history are you remembering. Education is biased. States can "teach" different version of history by omission or interpretation. That's actually a pretty horrendous thing if you think about it. Its a disservice to the future, and you "reap what you sow" to quote something else much used.

Maybe I was asleep in history class 40 years ago, but I have no memory of learning about Japanese internment, Juneteenth (at least that term) and the Tulsa Massacre, to name a few. 100% we should be teaching our unvarnished history. My concern is that with things like CRT is that we are teaching a narrative with a reparational intent. We are not responsible for the sins of our forefathers unless we repeat those same mistakes. We can never fully compensate for what has happened in the past, but dwelling on it into perpetuity is not productive and making uninvolved parties bear the burden only increases the divide. I just can't comprehend how further division solves the problem. Now that's not to say that we should ignore current problems, we should address those head on.

 

[whatithink]

Maybe I was asleep in history class 40 years ago, but I have no memory of learning about Japanese internment, Juneteenth (at least that term) and the Tulsa Massacre, to name a few. 100% we should be teaching our unvarnished history. My concern is that with things like CRT is that we are teaching a narrative with a reparational intent. We are not responsible for the sins of our forefathers unless we repeat those same mistakes. We can never fully compensate for what has happened in the past, but dwelling on it into perpetuity is not productive and making uninvolved parties bear the burden only increases the divide. I just can't comprehend how further division solves the problem. Now that's not to say that we should ignore current problems, we should address those head on.

Agree. There are plenty of inequalities in society to address and inequality has no color bias. Spending time, effort and money on raising everyone based on need should be a societal goal. Everyone in society reaps the benefit longer term.

The fundamental problem, I think, is that politicians get votes based on divisions and appealing to emotions. It is in their interest to foster division and to incite culture wars. That way people vote against their own self interest. The 2 party system won't resolve it and actually exacerbates it.

And as an aside, my forefathers were not here way back when, so count me out of the reparations fund, thanks very much.

 

[crush]

Maybe I was asleep in history class 40 years ago, but I have no memory of learning about Japanese internment, Juneteenth (at least that term) and the Tulsa Massacre, to name a few. 100% we should be teaching our unvarnished history. My concern is that with things like CRT is that we are teaching a narrative with a reparational intent. We are not responsible for the sins of our forefathers unless we repeat those same mistakes. We can never fully compensate for what has happened in the past, but dwelling on it into perpetuity is not productive and making uninvolved parties bear the burden only increases the divide. I just can't comprehend how further division solves the problem. Now that's not to say that we should ignore current problems, we should address those head on.

Brother Ezekiel said something similar back in the day. My dad's mistakes and sins are his alone. If I happen to choose the same mistake he did when he was a youngster, that should be separate, not held against me, no? That's harsh to say I can;t repeat my old man's mistakes. Not fair bro at all!!! Each human or soul is responsible for their own actions. Actions come from our own thoughts. We all have been brainwashed from TV, movies, books and even from our parents at times. I was adopted so I have no real parents or bloodline to be worried about. One of my best friends is a trust fund kid. He has to obey his old man or he will get zero each month.

"The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them." Ezk 18:20

 

[espola]

My point is the different viewpoint on marital fidelity in the US versus elsewhere, e.g. look at Johnson in the UK, the Prime Minister and a serial adulterer, never mind the French where having affairs is just what you do etc. Pols in the US have to be seen to be family people, roll out the spouse and kids for the campaign etc. I don't agree that it is prevalent anymore on the spousal roles, but then again misogyny and mansplaining are not exactly rare occurrences in public life these days either.

I’ll let the General enlighten the class

 

[Emma]

Maybe I was asleep in history class 40 years ago, but I have no memory of learning about Japanese internment, Juneteenth (at least that term) and the Tulsa Massacre, to name a few. 100% we should be teaching our unvarnished history. My concern is that with things like CRT is that we are teaching a narrative with a reparational intent. We are not responsible for the sins of our forefathers unless we repeat those same mistakes. We can never fully compensate for what has happened in the past, but dwelling on it into perpetuity is not productive and making uninvolved parties bear the burden only increases the divide. I just can't comprehend how further division solves the problem. Now that's not to say that we should ignore current problems, we should address those head on.

You studied about WWII in history without learning about the Japanese Internment Camps? I would imagine that should have been taught in response to how the US reacted to Pearl Harbor bombing. You were probably asleep during the beginning of the WWII period. Juneteenth is based out of Texas and history classes in Texas should have taught it since it's a Texas holiday. Tulsa Massacre should be taught to residents of Oklahoma. Regardless of political leanings by teachers or state assemblies, Slavery and it's history in the US should be taught as it was the basis of growth in the US and major part of our history, including the Civil War. Whether or not an individual supports reparations due to their education on slavery and it's history in the USA, should not be the basis of an educator's/politician's decision to teach history. We should let people decide on their own, through learning of all historical events, whether the individual supports reparation or not.

I don't support reparations but I don't agree with hiding history in order to prevent people from deciding whether they support or not support reparations.

Rewriting history to a country's favor is a communist/dictatorship ideology, not a democratic one. We should allow free thought based on real facts and not make facts political, an ideology a democratic society is based on. Politics should be how we each want to solve an issue through use of our government, not the facts we use to come to that decision.

 

[Grace T.]

You studied about WWII in history without learning about the Japanese Internment Camps? I would imagine that should have been taught in response to how the US reacted to Pearl Harbor bombing. You were probably asleep during the beginning of the WWII period. Juneteenth is based out of Texas and history classes in Texas should have taught it since it's a Texas holiday. Tulsa Massacre should be taught to residents of Oklahoma. Regardless of political leanings by teachers or state assemblies, Slavery and it's history in the US should be taught as it was the basis of growth in the US and major part of our history, including the Civil War. Whether or not an individual supports reparations due to their education on slavery and it's history in the USA, should not be the basis of an educator's/politician's decision to teach history. We should let people decide on their own, through learning of all historical events, whether the individual supports reparation or not.

I don't support reparations but I don't agree with hiding history in order to prevent people from deciding whether they support or not support reparations.

Rewriting history to a country's favor is a communist/dictatorship ideology, not a democratic one. We should allow free thought based on real facts and not make facts political, an ideology a democratic society is based on. Politics should be how we each want to solve an issue through use of our government, not the facts we use to come to that decision.

The problem with teaching history is that within a subject matter there are too many microsubjects to teach, so some discretion needs to be used, and how you utilize that discretion might be dictated by ideology: do I make my students read Adam Smith or Karl Marx; do I include the Lincoln-Douglas debates or make them read F. Douglas too (I was actually on a committee that had this argument in college); in study WWI do I include just the English perspective or also the German? Then there are the credits. My son's elementary school 2 years ago discovered that when they made a black history week. We Latinos then insisted on a Hispanic Cultural heritage week. Then those of Armenian, Persian, Asian and Jewish descent came out too to claim their heritage weeks, not to mention that we now need to include women (even though the sad reality is that most history was created for the longest time by men). Then there's what takes and interpretations to include: was the civil war purely about slavery or was it about holding the union together or was it about states rights?; was the Revolution about liberty or was it a bunch of less rich white men complaining about very rich white men imposing taxes on them?; was the Russian revolution a heroic struggle of the workers or an experiment doomed to failure that would end in totalitarianism? So history is not as easy as "just the facts".

 

[crush]

The problem with teaching history is that within a subject matter there are too many microsubjects to teach, so some discretion needs to be used, and how you utilize that discretion might be dictated by ideology: do I make my students read Adam Smith or Karl Marx; do I include the Lincoln-Douglas debates or make them read F. Douglas too (I was actually on a committee that had this argument in college); in study WWI do I include just the English perspective or also the German? Then there are the credits. My son's elementary school 2 years ago discovered that when they made a black history week. We Latinos then insisted on a Hispanic Cultural heritage week. Then those of Armenian, Persian, Asian and Jewish descent came out too to claim their heritage weeks, not to mention that we now need to include women (even though the sad reality is that most history was created for the longest time by men). Then there's what takes and interpretations to include: was the civil war purely about slavery or was it about holding the union together or was it about states rights?; was the Revolution about liberty or was it a bunch of less rich white men complaining about very rich white men imposing taxes on them?; was the Russian revolution a heroic struggle of the workers or an experiment doomed to failure that would end in totalitarianism? So history is not as easy as "just the facts".

History is history to one's own experience. I celebrate "National Adoption Day." What is National Adoption Day you ask?
History of National Adoption Day
Started by a coalition of groups which include the Children’s Action Network, The Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption, The Alliance for Children’s Rights, and the Freddie Mac Foundation, National Adoption Day became a reality in November of 2000. Over the years, sponsors of this day have worked with various state foster care agencies, law firms, courts, and child advocates to complete foster care applications. By 2003, over 120 jurisdictions participated in adopting over 3,000 children. In 2011, over 300 events were organized. Overall, over 58,000 children, as of 2016, have been adopted on this holiday.

National Adoption Day
Observed every year on the Saturday before Thanksgiving, National Adoption Day is a holiday in which communities and courts all over the U.S come together to finalize the adoptions of thousands of children who are in foster care.

The 2022 National Adoption Day falls on my birthday, November 19th. How ironic

 

[Hüsker Dü]

You studied about WWII in history without learning about the Japanese Internment Camps? I would imagine that should have been taught in response to how the US reacted to Pearl Harbor bombing. You were probably asleep during the beginning of the WWII period. Juneteenth is based out of Texas and history classes in Texas should have taught it since it's a Texas holiday. Tulsa Massacre should be taught to residents of Oklahoma. Regardless of political leanings by teachers or state assemblies, Slavery and it's history in the US should be taught as it was the basis of growth in the US and major part of our history, including the Civil War. Whether or not an individual supports reparations due to their education on slavery and it's history in the USA, should not be the basis of an educator's/politician's decision to teach history. We should let people decide on their own, through learning of all historical events, whether the individual supports reparation or not.

I don't support reparations but I don't agree with hiding history in order to prevent people from deciding whether they support or not support reparations.

Rewriting history to a country's favor is a communist/dictatorship ideology, not a democratic one. We should allow free thought based on real facts and not make facts political, an ideology a democratic society is based on. Politics should be how we each want to solve an issue through use of our government, not the facts we use to come to that decision.

The truth will set you free.

 

[Desert Hound]

Dr. McIntosh's paper is over 30 years old. Is that what you mean by CRT, in the current time frame?

Who is the "they" that wants to advance the "what" in which schools?

You ever make an argument or actual point?

 

[Desert Hound]

The truth will set you free.

To bad you chose to the opposite

 

[watfly]

You studied about WWII in history without learning about the Japanese Internment Camps? I would imagine that should have been taught in response to how the US reacted to Pearl Harbor bombing. You were probably asleep during the beginning of the WWII period. Juneteenth is based out of Texas and history classes in Texas should have taught it since it's a Texas holiday. Tulsa Massacre should be taught to residents of Oklahoma. Regardless of political leanings by teachers or state assemblies, Slavery and it's history in the US should be taught as it was the basis of growth in the US and major part of our history, including the Civil War. Whether or not an individual supports reparations due to their education on slavery and it's history in the USA, should not be the basis of an educator's/politician's decision to teach history. We should let people decide on their own, through learning of all historical events, whether the individual supports reparation or not.

I don't support reparations but I don't agree with hiding history in order to prevent people from deciding whether they support or not support reparations.

Rewriting history to a country's favor is a communist/dictatorship ideology, not a democratic one. We should allow free thought based on real facts and not make facts political, an ideology a democratic society is based on. Politics should be how we each want to solve an issue through use of our government, not the facts we use to come to that decision.

You may be right about the internment camps, my recollection from nearly 40 years ago is very hazy. If youre ever on your way to Bishop or Mammoth, I highly recommend stopping at Manzanar. Its hard to believe that hapoened in our backyard. There is also a great documentary on the internees that snuck out of camp to fish the local creeks for trout.