5 ms·
If the people who were attempting to ban "critical race theory" could define it precisely, and ban it equally precisely, I would not have an issue. That it is
by deanCommie 5y ago
If the people who were attempting to ban "critical race theory" could define it precisely, and ban it equally precisely, I would not have an issue.
That it is banned in public schools is proof that they do not and cannot define it. CRT is a Graduate-level subject that had no allocated curriculum in elementary or high schools.
Rather, it's being used as a dog whistle for all debate regarding privilege, SYSTEMIC racism, the acknowledgement of US history as racist, or work still to be done today.
The bans of "critical race theory" are not actually banning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory but openly suppressing discussion of civil rights and racism.
- yucky 5y agoCRT is defined precisely though. It is the application of collective guilt based on skin color for the actions of individuals with the same color skin. It is similar to the Stormfront crowd blaming all black people for violent crime. It's inherently racist. Critical theory in general (not just CRT) is an attempt to use a marxist lens to view <insert social issue here>. This is why collectivism is central to CRT. This is why we read nothing but race-based assumptions from proponents of CRT. It's a framework that requires us to not consider the content of ones character, but rather the color of their skin.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- cloudfifty 5y agoJust like the old days huh? The "It's Marxism!" signs are still not that far away are they now?
- yucky 5y agoSadly, it's true - https://www.thoughtco.com/critical-theory-3026623 https://www.thoughtco.com/critical-theory-3026623