They're competing with AA kids for spots in elite schools. Of course they're against CRT. lol

This is because at elite schools there's a certain minority allotment and all the rest of the slots have to go white kids?
Or do they compete with the white kids too?

CAGNY is an advocacy group, go take a look at what they advocate for.

(hint: it's not white or black kids)

hiv posted the tweet because he mindlessly tweets anything he thinks is against CRT. I was just giving a bit of context.

I don't think presenting it as Asians vs Blacks is the proper framing.
Asians are outperforming whites as well, and at places like Harvard/Yale I'm pretty sure it is the case that it's spots going to white kids that ought to be going to Asians-- and thus organizations like CAGNY are going to be against any forms of racial discrimination or quotas in the educational system.

Right, there are civil rights organization that opposes critical race theory so there has to be some ulterior motive rather than the valid criticism they have of CRT. As in no such thing as valid criticism of CRT.

So you don't know what advocacy means ?

That isn't really a critique of CRT as much as it is an expression of your own limited ability to evaluate evidence.

Yes, I think so too.

CACAGNY strongly objects to Mayor Bill de Blasio’s proposals on Sunday June 3 to change the admissions policy to the NYC Specialized High Schools.

His proposal to expand vastly the Discovery Program and set aside 20% of the seats for selected students who fail to meet the admission scores is unfair and unjust to the thousands of students who score higher than these favored students and would have otherwise been admitted.

His further proposal to undo the fair and objective Hecht-Calandra Act with secretive, inconsistent admission criteria reverse-engineered to achieve racial targets masks his devastating failure to provide even basic K-8 education to vast numbers of communities in NYC, let alone the highly competitive academics needed for the Specialized High Schools. In one of his middle schools, only two 8th graders demonstrated math proficiency in five years.

More than half the students in the Specialized High Schools qualify as poor. Many are immigrants who rely on the objectivity guaranteed by Hecht-Calandra to compete on a level playing field for educational opportunities. Despite his denials, Bill de Blasio's proposals target Asian American kids and callously toss out their hard-won achievements.

We call on Bill de Blasio to respect students who achieve, no matter their ethnicity, to stop pitting one disadvantaged minority against another, and to do something constructive instead: improve education for all communities, starting from the lowest grades!

​

But they are doing this in the context of advocating for Chinese Americans who are doing quite well in the current system.

Which is exactly the point I'm making. CRT proponents are advocating for AA's and CAGNY is advocating for Chinese Americans.

So the tweet needs to be evaluated in context.
Chinese Americans have many of the same motivations that white Americans have to oppose CRT when it comes to giving their children a competitive advantage (or at least not allowing for a disadvantage by losing a spot in a good cheap school).

This is to be expected by an advocacy group and imo proves absolutely nothing about CRT one way or the other.

Would you agree you haven't actually contended with any of the criticisms the "advocacy" group asserted in regards to CRT, and instead analyzed the motives of the group itself?

You want me to contend with the fact that an advocacy group is saying blacks are led to attack whites (by CRT) when I haven't seen any evidence of that happening ?

Nah, I think I'll wait for someone to say something rational before I bother to contend with criticism of an organization I don't actually care about to begin with.

SS seems to be on the job.

No worries hiv. You can actually hear a few comments from a guy who was taught CLT back in the 90's if you want some rational content.

When I think of white culture in a vacuum, aside from any of sort of extraneous baggage, it's mostly hipsters and lumber-sexuals that come to mind.

D86 is the school district for Hinsdale, IL. Did a little digging:

Hmmm...deliberately targeting people for phone calls on the basis of race. In case you did not know, this is actual and admitted racial profiling.


There are those words again...and father down we have "equity lens", which means race conscious, in case you did not know.

It's amuses me you cite Fox News. I'm not here parroting or citing Fox News. In fact, I have not used Fox News once.

Equity is a proverbial dog whistle to disillusioned or naïve marxist, communist and socialist (and anarchists', but they are just using this movement for their own ends). Essentially meaning equality of outcomes. I get the difference between economic critical theory and race critical theory. The basic premise, is take from the successful and give to the less successful. Now, some would probably argue you don't have to take from the successful, but create circumstances where you can empower the less successful. However, according to lefty rationale, people can't pull themselves up by the bootstraps, so, no amount of opportunity you give these folks, they are still going to struggle, so you have to give them resources.

So, what critical race theory does is analyze what's made "white people" successful, and POC unsuccessful (which is the the proletariat class). However, it starts with the premise that "white people's" (bourgeoisie class) success and continued success is on the back of racism (which is means of production, or means of social production that leads to social wealth, i.e. privilege, or you can use John21's insightful thoughts on of social dominance as defacto term for means of production to acquire cultural benefit). So, what it does is analyzes the values of "white people" and associates those values as racist based upon the aforementioned premise. In other words, anything white people have used to be successful, is built upon racist ideas because the creation of disparities can only be attributable to social dominance, i.e. racism (as an aside, this concept proven self-evidently false or invalid when applied to the domain of professional sports).

With that said, it really doesn't really change the defacto means of production, as much as it adopts and uses that means of production to bring about equity. It Uses social capital within positions of power (the privilege of being the head of the school board, as an example) to direct resources based on race, i.e. preferential selection for advanced cardiac care, preferential selection for extra support from a school system. In other words, take the privilege obtained through the means of production and reassign what it produces until equity is achieved, or focus resources on a particular identity group(s).


As RF pointed out, the right white identarian are going to selfishly see this as racist against them. Those identitarians would not necessarily be wrong, but their focus is on the wrong part. It's not that its racist against white people, but that it's racist. These identarians don't nessiarly view racism as bad either (as long as it's labeled something else), same as lefty identarian.

Critical theory adapted for identity groups operate on this idea unavoidable social dominance between identity groups, which is just another term for racism. An exploration of this social dominance and how it operates within the various identity groups is essentially intersectionality.

While this stuff may not be marxist, or socialist per se, it uses precisely the same analytical framework and applies it to stuff outside of economics.

The last two pages on white privilege should be required reading.

I completely agree. I love looking at works of fiction on the weekends. Great way to unplug for a few hours.

You think? How many students, you think, can honestly answer yes to number 2? Almost none of them will. How many students will have to defend their "no" answers?

Number 1, the answer would be no, as well, for most students....chances are they spend most of their time with their family and friends, and seeing how the vast majority of minorities live in metropolitan cites that are disproportionally POC....which could lead to an inverse and perverse result than what's desired by the racist teachers teaching this crap, i.e. disproportionately black schools chidden being identified as having "white privilege's" according to that document.

I'm obviously no fan of teaching privilege, but if it's going to be taught, they can do better than that ****. And yes, I'm calling Peggy McIntosh aristocratic Radcliffe and Harvard elitism as applied to race, ****.

You will notice how they turn "normal" into a white property themselves, while using "white privilege".

Your opinions just happen to be exactly those expressed by the flunkies on fox though.

What are the odds ?

I guess all you geniuses think alike.

CACAGNY sounds like Fox News?

Fox News picked up on a story that was being covered by others, and put their own oversimplified spin on it. I tried to get you all to check out more nuanced and articulated position using a variety of sources, but none of you could be bothered to interact with those things, so you went to Fox News, and started to defend CRT from the arguments Fox News and Tucker were making, then attributed those to me.

I mean, you all equate and oversimply all the criticisms I've made in regards to actual stuff that's been propagated (in which I've cited) in the name of diversity as "hating the fact systemic racism is being taught", but sure, I sound like Fox News, which I thought were just using scare words to rile people up, but I guess it's more than that if you are comparing it to what I've written about and cited in the last three months.

CAGANY does sound a lot like Fox News but that's not what I said.

You didn't like that I linked to a Sam Seder piece that was critiquing Fox News (you thought I was citing it) and said you never watch it.

For a guy who isn't reading from the same talking point sheet that they are, you do pretty good. I must say.

I did not even watch that clip. I don't watch Fox News. That's why it's amusing to me that you try to conflate me with Fox News.

You can't conflate the same idea.

I'm just pointing out that you are saying exactly what the hosts over at Fox are saying.

That clip wasn't even from Fox. It had a guy who learned CLT in law school commenting.

But don't watch it, you might learn something and then you'd be really dangerous.

According to you. You've demonstrated to me that you're unreliable analyst of information.

With that said I don't doubt there are some similarities, but I'm guessing there's some distinct differences between all the stuff I've cited from third parties that I've reviewed and assessed. I could watch that clip and point out some things that they probably oversimplified, but what's the point? Your goal is to associate my arguments with Fox News or Tucker, because those are seen as less credible or uncredible sources.

By sharing criticism of Fox News coverage you attempt to stick with that same criticism. I'm certain my criticism is much more nuanced and well thought out than Fox News, or any cable news show for that matter.