Fair

Keep lying:

Critical race theories oppose King's teachings. It's not a coincidence his teachings were excluded.

That's literally what I said. He made a comment on the first draft. You don't find it a bit suspicious that no one has an article providing context to the situation? No one's out there writing up an article connecting the authors of the draft to critical race theory, any of their proported statements of any kind showing their intention to exclude King for any particular reason, then show the guy's comment and the reaction to it?

Or how the situation turned out? Is MLK excluded from the curriculum they just released, if so why?

None of that is even asked in any of the web sites I read that mention that letter. It's all guy writes letter claiming ethnic studies doesn't study king ergo critical race theoriest are erasing history and brainwashing kids

Nothing exclusive to CRT and absent from liberalism comes to mind.

Short answer:
There shouldn't be an issue in discussing/analyzing/teaching the various ways in the system is racist and how black people in particular have been targeted by the system. To the extent that CRT does these things then no one should take issue with it.
The issues with CRT, and related subfields like whiteness studies is is when they push identity based views that treat people based on superficialites like the color of the skin instead of as individuals.

So you disagree that white people as a group don't understand that they enjoy a certain status over people of color in the vast majority of situations in America ?

You think that's just a myth put forth by the communist people over at CRT ?

I'm fairly certain that the racial problems in the US predate CRT but I'm sure you can find an African American on youtube to tell me different.

They left out MLK for a reason. You can downplay that fact...but his message is too prominent when it comes to civil rights and racism for it to be an oversight, especially when the curriculum is filled with critical race theory, which explicitly rejects the teachings of MLK's color blind society.

Isn't one of the primary components--individual story telling/relating individual experiences etc?

Race is -already- deeply ingrained in the whole situation. How do you propose going about trying to unwind all of this stuff w/o having race be some part of it(at least for some period of time/certain aspects)? One of the first criticisms of stuff like reparations is calling it racist lol

I think a much more interesting question would be for you to explain in a paragraph or two why you oppose the teachings of the most prominent, and influential civil rights leader in American history. Nevermind his teachings and legacy is revered by an overwhelming majority of Americans, white, black, Hispanic, or Asian.

Then we can compare that paragraph(s) to what MLK's opposition was saying when he was alive, and see if there any similarities. My guess is, they both are going to argue race matters and there are characteristics associated with a persons race that should be considered.

At first glance I thought that why they left out MLK and a lot of well known African Americans is because the course is supplemental and MLK and other well known African Americans are already taught in the required main history course and the ethnic studies course didn't want to double dip which to me made rational sense, at least more rational sense than the conspiracy theory.

but here's the important part, I couldn't find anything to substantiate that so I didn't want to say that's what happened, but even more importantly I couldn't find anything to say that's not what happened, and could find even less information on what really happened was conspiracy theory of a secret cabal of critical theorists conspiring to replace Martin Luther King with I don't know? Someone?

I did find information about how the draft left some minorities out and they pushed to get added in and other more radical references were pushed out, basically leaving no one completely happy which, I'd guess by inference, means it's a pretty ok compromise between all the different groups. In other words, pretty standard.

I think his teachings should be integral to any discussion when it comes to equality, and has been for several decades. This curriculum is pretty much centered on social justice. How do you talk about race in America and not talk about MLK? I don't find your reasoning for it's absence to be that plausible.

Keep making excuses for something that should be inexcusable, even to a lefty.

It's so bizarre for you to argue that he wasn't included because he he takes up too much space, or has too much emphasis in other area, while ignoring that he was discussed when it comes to these types of classes previously. So, it's not just that he was excluded, he was removed.

Juxtaposition this with what Dr. Walker said:

Was just googling crt and mlk too Apparently some of the conservative detractors are also highly offended the leftists are herding kids into an unsafe covid environment to commie them up too Sure they are

Assuming every one doesn't have basically the same ultimate goals is probably a mistake. I Have a Dream also comes with a built in recognition that that's not where we are/were on the ground in the present/at the time. Many people believe racism was 'cured' from a legal perspective with the civilrights act and that's pretty much all we can do. Other people realize that it hasn't fully delivered and there's still work to do. And this is about where the crt thing comes in from what I can tell.

The simple reality is--if MLK was around today pretty much the same group of people would be lined up against whatever he was doing today as well. And that's just reality. I'm sure all the people who make the snide remarks every mlk day would've been real big supporters

The people who opposed MLK's legacy aren't the same people. Do you not understand hundreds of millions of Americans were indoctrinated and embraced King's legacy and teachings over the last several decades. That makes up a large percentage of the people who reject CRT today. In some bizarre way you would have to actually deny the significant influence King had on American society, in order to discount the criticism critical race theory gets.

You still haven't contended with the fact that CRT is diametrically opposed to King's teachings, and people who oppose CRT are folks who embrace individualism, which is a bedrock of Kings legacy.

I have no doubt that you're convinced of of what you say, but it's not logically coherent given the context.

You've created this dichotomy where the people who actually oppose Kings legacy are critical race theorist but you're trying to state that people who oppose critical race theory are/were opposed to King teachings. It's an incongruent position.

I don't think Dr Walker is emblematic of the type of person who opposed King.

I'd be interested in seeing examples of MLK attacked from the left.

Vegas in this thread--these commies are trying to put people in different groups that's racist!

Vegas in another thread--well that's just 'their' culture

---

I do see some critique that basically calls crt socialist while saying that's a great departure from mlk--but largely the same detractors called mlk a commie too. Like in the article vegas just linked.

Actually it's pretty important that we agree to the simple fact that there is systemic racism and that white people are at least generally aware of it.

LOL

So no one is allowed to disagree with MLK ?

You better tell Malcom.

That's the amusing part.

King was heavily involved in unionizing workers as he (rightly) understood that the uneducated whites were being pitted against the blacks by the aristocracy.

And now we have an armchair conservative implying that King wasn't a dirty socialist like these CRT creeps.

It's as if they don't even try. JFC. lol

Sigh, I'm not arguing that he wasn't included because he took up too much space. That was my first baseline assumption. I then set out to find out if it were true. I explicitly said I couldn't find any evidence that it was true. I couldn't find any evidence that it was false either. I didn't find any reporting on the whole situation about prominent African Americans being left out at all.

The only thing I could find mentioning it were all sites saying the same thing. A guy wrote a letter saying prominent African Americans were left out and all of them have the same 'jump to conclusions' game were they all angle shoot that it's because Critical Race Theorists are purposefully excluding them. But no reporting following up asking the committee (is there even a committee? I don't know none of the reporting even says how the curriculum is created) to explain themselves or even giving a more comprehensive look at how the sausage is being made that would explain that there actually were critical race theorist on the committee

When I looked into the history of how the curriculum got made myself, I didn't find any talk about African Americans being excluded by anyone else but websites just reporting the original story. I did find different stories talking about how some minorities felt like they were being left out (but none of them were African American) and how some of the material was taken out because it was deemed anti Semitic ( a rap lyric apparently), or some of the material was watered down and some of the authors of the first draft quit.

My conclusion of the process was that the radicals thought it was too moderate, the conservatives thought it was too radical which by my lights of just splitting the baby in half, means the ethnic studies program was put together by committee that arrived in the middle.

Even after all that I decided to go to the actual website to look at the curriculum and in the Example lessons that is some 600 pages King is only name checked once, but in the curriculum outline that's only a few pages he's name checked dozens of times.

Ok so was King always in the curriculum outline and and not in the lesson examples and the lesson examples are what that King guy got upset about? Or was MLK not in anything and got added in at a latter date? Or does the lesson plan mention King in other ways that I can't find through a Find in the document? None of this I know and neither do you.

Not nec. an attack but some stuff off in this direction maybe?

https://theconversation.com/what-act...militant-90058

Party leaders worked out a compromise that allowed the Mississippi delegation to remain. King accepted this compromise, but many advocates condemned it as an illegitimate accommodation to racism.

King did not disagree, but he argued that this face-saving gesture would help to ensure that the South would not abandon then-candidate Lyndon Johnson. One year later, President Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act, which ensured voting rights for all African-Americans, and brought federal control over elections in the South.

See, your inability to contend with the nuances of what's being discussed leaves you to these sort of attacks based on myths.


I have no issues saying that some white people are racist and that some black people are violent, and their environment largely plays a role in those dispositions. That's a stark difference from saying white people are racist and black people are homicidal, and that individualism is symptomatic of white supremacy. I don't deny that racism negatively influence individuals, nor do I deny gang violence negatively influence individuals that grow up around it.

I also refute that CRT is some noble endeavor to combat racism, similar to the Civil Rights Movement. I once again emphatically state that is despicable that you're conflating the two. It is simply a red herring to deflect from the criticism critical race theory receives, and a further use of the association fallacy the left uses to paint anybody who disagrees with them as racist. I also see that none of you can contend with what Dr Walker said about it, yet invoke criticism of King as some sort of shield. CRT can't hold King's jock when it comes to Civil Rights.

Then if conservatives care so much about civil rights for minorities--then why aren't they on the ground supporting it instead of just sitting on the sidelines throwing stones?

So tell us how we get to that colorblind world. By magic? Having the vision(which acknowledges the divisions are there btw) is one thing--how you actually go about getting there is another. And just like the old days--the racists just don't like being confronted lol

Dr. Walker is a conservative? I'm rather sure many people, including himself, will put him on the left side of the political spectrum. This is just another ad hominem, i.e character-based refutation of criticism. I'll fully acknowledge conservatives haven't really done a real good job of selling their perspective. However, there are some that do:

https://mobile.twitter.com/NewEmergingKing

But more to the point, this thread is about criticism of critical race theory, and isn't a thread about solving racism. Again the implicit premise is critical race theory is some noble endeavor against racism and it simply isn't. I think if I was a proponent of critical race theory I would demonstrate how it can progress society better than western liberalism.

Everything you've used to try to discredit the criticism doesn't actually contend with the criticism. At some point you're going to have to defend the intellectual validity of critical race theory if you want to promote it as valid. That means dealing with the rigorous criticism that's levied against it, whether it's from a conservative, or from a beacon of the Civil Rights Movement.

The idea that it's only conservative are criticizing it is just a way to scapegoat criticism.

While many of you'll refute it, we are largely already there. What we have in society is the ashes that spawned from the fire of racism. This is why systemic racism definition has changed from actual demonstratable evidence of racial discrimination to to simply pointing to disparate outcomes, and blaming racism as the reason they persist.

But again, none of what you say contends with what Dr. Walker or any of the criticism levied against critical race theory.

So you don't agree that systemic racism exists ?