Like you've got this ides that because I questioned whether anti-CRT rhetoric is due to "brown menace" that I'm somehow in some deep denial.
Which is great. But explain what I'm duped by please?
Also please recall that pretty much most of what I've posted here in regards to CRT as been from the left, so what does right wing CRT rhetoric have to do with me? I'm curious.

I thought your main reference was McWhorter

McWhorter was my main introduction to the topic which really started whenever Booker posted that link in pog, and then this thread went up shortly after that and since then I discovered people like Walter Benn Michaels and Adolph Reed.

But my overall take on CRT/wokeism/identity politics in general-- has always been the class > race one-- and McWhorter hasn't gone down that route at all which is a bit unfortunate given his reach and because he doesn't strike me as a right-wing shill.

His main thesis is two-fold: 1) that 'wokeism' is a bona-fide religion and that 2) it's actually harmful to the people that it's ostensibly there to support.

And those can both be valid arguments but it's not really attacking CRT from the left the way more Marxist inclined thinkers do, and I don't think his points have the same impact or import as that more Left-perspective.

Well clearly you are still duped as you honestly believe what side of the aisle the rhetoric comes from matters.

Well done GOP you got one.

You are duped because you believe you come by this topic honestly. You are duped because you believe the rhetoric matters to my point which is exactly what the GOP and Right media wants you to believe.

Neither the GOP or the Right media give two sh*ts about any of this content any more than they did the "Caravans Brown Menace" or the "Antifa Brown Menace", which they largely moved on from immediately post elections.

They just want you to engage with it. Russian bots want you to engage with it. Enflame it and the 'side' you are on matters ZERO.

But I am not sure you have the ability to understand that so I expect you to go in to spin mode about the above.

Just know when they go fishing for the suckers/fish it is exactly you, the type to act on low information but offer strong opinions, is the exact target.

I think I might just put you on ignore and you can carry on in whatever fantasy land you want to carry on about.
As I just said in my previous post, I learned about this topic first from McWhorter, and then started learning more once this thread was created but my perspective has always been the Marxist one (c.f. my 2nd post in this thread).
So lol.

How did I come by this topic dishonestly?
Let's start there I guess.
This I don't know to interpret at all.

Given that a lot of it is nonsense jibberish it's hard to understand fwiw.

I think you're substituting some sort of right-wing caricature though in for me as an actual person while ignoring basically everything I've said in this thead.

That does not change the FACT that you did not know that this topic is being whipped up and the talk driven by the GOP and Right Media.

No one is saying there are not a tiny percent of people who might have engaged in this discussion earnestly.

The point is you had ZERO knowledge of how you were being manipulated.
An aware person would know and say 'despite this topic being ginned up for political purposed I think it is important enough, so here is my view'.

People with white supremacist leanings ALSO had those feelings prior to the GOP and Right media ginning them up. They, EXACTLY AS YOU ARE, are also mostly oblivious to how you all are being manipulated.

That you were entirely oblivious (just as most W.Supremacist are) to the manipulation behind it so much so you suggested it was laughable to think that is, in fact, so laughable that you outed yourself as exactly the type of useful idiot they target.

Of course I know that this topic is all in the news and is in the news for a reason.

But as I've said repeatedly, people like WBM and Adolph Reed were taking shots at this stuff back in like 2010.

How have I specifically been manipulated though? Which of my attitudes show that?

lol at Lucky trying to say 'if a white supremist came by his bigotry honestly that means he cannot be being manipulated to act upon it now by the GOP and Right media'.

Imagine being Lucky and thinking that is a logical defense.

there's literally no point in trying to have a discussion with you.
Just the constant stream of dishonest hyperbole and sometimes outright lying makes you pretty absurd.

Like how is your post logically connected to what I said?

Lucky: But, but I came upon my interest in this topic naturally before the GOP ad right media took it up thus I cannot be manipulated by the GOP and Right media' who are trying to enflame the topic and are looking for dupes.

Also Lucky : recognizing that a white supremist who came by their biases naturally and before the GOP and right media took it up, CAN BE being manipulated by the GOP and Right media who are trying to enflame the topic and looking for will dupes is fine but how does that parallel my position?


(as Lucky waves his hands in the air saying 'what' I cannot see any connection in their M.O) FLOL.

Can you explain how I've been duped though?
I get that discussion is hard but that was your claim so can you support it?

Can you elaborate on this? I'm actually pretty torn on this point. It both shouldn't and should matter-- so I definitely don't "honestly believe" that-- but I'm not sure if it did how that would make me duped.

So basically the right thinks it's too far left and the left thinks it's too far right

I don't really think you could characterize McWhorter's arguments as coming "from the right"-- although maybe in some respects. And yes, basically.

You're cluelessness that you did not know the discussions on this are being pushed by guys looking for useful idiots to make the arguments for them.

Can you not see how the the white supremist are also being duped? They have a real grievance (whether you or I agree with it or not) and these guys (GOP and Right Media) have targeted that grievance to weaponize. There goal is to get them to engage in this culture war issue while not realizing they are being manipulated into doing do. Their goal is to keep them as naive as you were to the manipulation such that you would laugh at the very idea this was a manipulation.

Look back at almost every one of your posts with ecriture d'adulte where he is basically telling you the same thing that this is all just a big manipulation and not a legit issue.

Do you have some sort of citation for the bolded, as I don't ever recall making any sort of statement like that.
Obviously racial issues are used to divide and pushed done by those with an agenda-- I've said that countless times.
Lol @ citing ecriture as some authority.

Nothing pleases me more than you now pretending you knew all along right wing media and the republicans were using this issue as the next 'racial bogeyman' (brown menace) with your post history upthread showing you were absolutely clueless, and the dupe they were looking for, prior.

Thank you for that. Sincerely.

DiAngelo is getting thrown off the bus...





White Fragility Is Everywhere. But Does Antiracism Training Work?

Your issue is that you're being completely disingenuous here.
My entire issue with what you before was your use of the term "brown menace" to describe the anti-CRT rhetoric. I wanted some examples of it as opposed to the numerous examples that I was previously aware of vis-a-vis CRT and education.
I even told you that the migrant caravan stuff and the rhetoric surrounding it would certainly qualify as "brown menace".
And fortunate Wookie provided me with exactly what I was asking for and I thanked him for it. And you know all of this because I said as much multiple times.
What you're trying to do is shift the your term "brown menace" to apply to any and all criticism of CRT-- this is as a result of your tendency towards race-baiting hyperbole.

Now do the analysis on mainstream media's coverage, which has been dishonest, uninformed, and completely idiotic.