4 ms·

> There are a large number of bills in US state legislatures aimed at suppressing honest and uncensored discussion of the Tulsa race massacre. Bullshit. There

by zepto 5y ago

> There are a large number of bills in US state legislatures aimed at suppressing honest and uncensored discussion of the Tulsa race massacre. Bullshit. There is not one.

guipsp 5y ago
Quick google search: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/2346/text https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/234...
- zepto 5y ago
  Ahh, so in other words complete bulkshit, That bill has nothing to do with preventing teaching about Tulsa.
  - guipsp 5y ago
    It does, for example, the provision regarding >(B) the United States is a fundamentally racist country; Could be interpreted as preventing proper discussion about what caused the Tulsa massacre
    - zepto 5y ago
      Ok, so you just proved the point. These bills do not prevent teaching about Tulsa. That claim has always been a lie. As for what you call “proper” discussion about what caused the Tulsa massacre. Nothing in the bill prevents people talking about how the massacre was caused by racism. Nothing in the bill even prevents discussion of the idea that the US is fundamentally racist, or why people might believe that to be true. The only thing the bill prevents is teaching that the US is fundamentally racist as if it were an absolute truth or fact, rather than an idea that some people hold. So no. You are simply wrong about what the bill means.
      - geofft 5y ago
        My claim (upthread) was "honest and uncensored discussion." You can talk in censored ways about it, yes. If you think it's okay to censor particular views because they're obviously wrong or misguided... you're totally free to hols that view, but that's still censorship.
        zepto 5y ago
        Your claim I was responding to is this: “Could be interpreted as preventing proper discussion about what caused the Tulsa massacre” > If you think it's okay to censor particular views because they're obviously wrong or misguided... you're totally free to hols that view, but that's still censorship. It’s a false claim to say that these bills ‘censor’ particular views. That is the lie. They seek to prevent certain views being taught as fact that can’t be debated. I.e. the bills do the opposite of what you assert.
- twofornone 5y ago
  >RACE-BASED THEORY.—The term “race-based theory” means a theory that— >(A) any race is inherently superior or inferior to any other race; >(B) the United States is a fundamentally racist country; >(C) the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution of the United States is a fundamentally racist document; >(D) an individual's moral worth is determined by the race of the individual; >(E) an individual, by virtue of the race of the individual, is inherently racist or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; or >(F) an individual, because of the race of the individual, bears responsibility for the actions committed by members of the race of the individual. Have you actually read and thought about these bills, beyond the anti-anti-CRT hysteria? There's a difference between teaching about the history of racism/slavery in the US and doing so in a way that singles out and blames modern white people and white culture. These bills are effectively a response to the overt demonization of "whiteness" that has been increasingly en vogue in our academic (and other) institutions over the last few years. They absolutely do not prevent teaching of history, and are anti-discriminatory - because people have suddenly decided that belonging to an arbitrarily defined majority or "dominant" culture somehow makes you immune from discrimination. No one should be made to feel guilty for the color of their skin, for the sins of others who looked like them in the past, and that includes white people. The hysteria over these bills is ironically steeped in anti-white racism. It comes from the same place as the diversity seminars where whites are explicitly being asked to apologize for their whiteness.
WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
Many isn't one so I guess you're right there https://duckduckgo.com/?q=legislature+bill+crt&t=h_&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=legislature+bill+crt&t=h_&ia=web
- zepto 5y ago
  As I already said - this just proves you don’t know what CRT is. CRT is not a history curriculum and has nothing to do with the Tulsa Massacre. If you can find a bill which would outlaw teaching about Tulsa, try presenting it. I don’t think you can.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

by zepto 5y ago

> There are a large number of bills in US state legislatures aimed at suppressing honest and uncensored discussion of the Tulsa race massacre. Bullshit. There is not one.

guipsp 5y ago

Quick google search: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/2346/text https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/234...

zepto 5y ago
Ahh, so in other words complete bulkshit, That bill has nothing to do with preventing teaching about Tulsa.
- guipsp 5y ago
  It does, for example, the provision regarding >(B) the United States is a fundamentally racist country; Could be interpreted as preventing proper discussion about what caused the Tulsa massacre
  - zepto 5y ago
    Ok, so you just proved the point. These bills do not prevent teaching about Tulsa. That claim has always been a lie. As for what you call “proper” discussion about what caused the Tulsa massacre. Nothing in the bill prevents people talking about how the massacre was caused by racism. Nothing in the bill even prevents discussion of the idea that the US is fundamentally racist, or why people might believe that to be true. The only thing the bill prevents is teaching that the US is fundamentally racist as if it were an absolute truth or fact, rather than an idea that some people hold. So no. You are simply wrong about what the bill means.
    - geofft 5y ago
      My claim (upthread) was "honest and uncensored discussion." You can talk in censored ways about it, yes. If you think it's okay to censor particular views because they're obviously wrong or misguided... you're totally free to hols that view, but that's still censorship.
      - zepto 5y ago
        Your claim I was responding to is this: “Could be interpreted as preventing proper discussion about what caused the Tulsa massacre” > If you think it's okay to censor particular views because they're obviously wrong or misguided... you're totally free to hols that view, but that's still censorship. It’s a false claim to say that these bills ‘censor’ particular views. That is the lie. They seek to prevent certain views being taught as fact that can’t be debated. I.e. the bills do the opposite of what you assert.
twofornone 5y ago
>RACE-BASED THEORY.—The term “race-based theory” means a theory that— >(A) any race is inherently superior or inferior to any other race; >(B) the United States is a fundamentally racist country; >(C) the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution of the United States is a fundamentally racist document; >(D) an individual's moral worth is determined by the race of the individual; >(E) an individual, by virtue of the race of the individual, is inherently racist or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; or >(F) an individual, because of the race of the individual, bears responsibility for the actions committed by members of the race of the individual. Have you actually read and thought about these bills, beyond the anti-anti-CRT hysteria? There's a difference between teaching about the history of racism/slavery in the US and doing so in a way that singles out and blames modern white people and white culture. These bills are effectively a response to the overt demonization of "whiteness" that has been increasingly en vogue in our academic (and other) institutions over the last few years. They absolutely do not prevent teaching of history, and are anti-discriminatory - because people have suddenly decided that belonging to an arbitrarily defined majority or "dominant" culture somehow makes you immune from discrimination. No one should be made to feel guilty for the color of their skin, for the sins of others who looked like them in the past, and that includes white people. The hysteria over these bills is ironically steeped in anti-white racism. It comes from the same place as the diversity seminars where whites are explicitly being asked to apologize for their whiteness.

WarOnPrivacy 5y ago

Many isn't one so I guess you're right there https://duckduckgo.com/?q=legislature+bill+crt&t=h_&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=legislature+bill+crt&t=h_&ia=web

zepto 5y ago
As I already said - this just proves you don’t know what CRT is. CRT is not a history curriculum and has nothing to do with the Tulsa Massacre. If you can find a bill which would outlaw teaching about Tulsa, try presenting it. I don’t think you can.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]