White Privilege

@zahlanzi said
"If racism is so prevalent then you should have no problem going to court and proving it. "
Americans do that all the time. sometimes it's even so obvious that one actually wins.

That's not what critical race theory deals with however. It's meant to educate on the subtle and not so subtle ways communities are affected today by the the racist actions of the past.
A slav ...[text shortened]... et, information that your racist ass will ignore and you will go back to being an ignorant dickhead.

Critical Race Theory wants to ignore the most important part of any compensation case. It assumes that certain people are the victims of discrimination and that others owe them compensation when a person must prove they (not someone with same skin color) was the victim of discrimination by an actual person (again not someone with the same skin color).
Simply, I never owed a slave so you certainly can't prove I discriminated against any one. Similarly, I never denied someone an opportunity to move into any neighborhood. In fact I wasn't even born during the Civil War so this should be the end of the discussion.
But I'll humor your moronic theory and point our that my ancestors didn't even come to this country until nearly later. So I certainly object to teaching that I somehow am responsible for anything related to the Civil War and the century afterwards.
In fact my ancestors were the victims of 20th century systematic extermination by the Nazis and came to this county with nothing and had to learn a new language and face all the barriers that new immigrants face. No one helped my ancestors (including bigots like FDR who turns back boats of immigrants who were fleeing our WW II enemies) . Even though it is far easier to trace how I am denied opportunities, due to recent governmental policies, it is a joke to say that everyone in the world who looks like a Nazi should feel responsible and compensate me and people who look like me for wrong that people who look like them committed.

@zahlanzi said
"If racism is so prevalent then you should have no problem going to court and proving it. "
Americans do that all the time. sometimes it's even so obvious that one actually wins.

That's not what critical race theory deals with however. It's meant to educate on the subtle and not so subtle ways communities are affected today by the the racist actions of the past.
A slav ...[text shortened]... et, information that your racist ass will ignore and you will go back to being an ignorant dickhead.

Hey, I've got a great idea. Use that 'teaching time' to teach all of the kids in the classroom how to better themselves. Socially, financially, the whole works. They, including non-white kids of course, will leave the room with positive feelings and goals. This is simply constructive, and will make for a strong America, stronger than Romania, New Zealand, New Guinea, China, Russia and just about everywhere else in the world.
Get the word out. Or, just languish with the poison for those little minds.

@Duchess64 my statement did NOT identify a specific racial color. As usual, you have dismal reading abilities. So sad.

@zahlanzi said
"Define the reform and we can talk. If I like the reform, I'll vote for it. You need to define the reform first."
Higher emphasis on de escalation. Remove social services duties from cops. Actually punish excessive force. Training in non-lethal methods of policing. Protect whistleblowers. You know, obvious stuff.

"Right now, the district pays for budget."
It shouldn't ...[text shortened]... ional. I am sure all those funny district shapes are made with completely different reasons in mind.

"Define the reform and we can talk. If I like the reform, I'll vote for it. You need to define the reform first."
Higher emphasis on de escalation. Remove social services duties from cops. Actually punish excessive force. Training in non-lethal methods of policing. Protect whistleblowers. You know, obvious stuff.

==== I have no problem with any of that, though they're still generalities. Policies would need to be more specific.


"Right now, the district pays for budget."
It shouldn't. Certain districts are poorer than others. Education should be equal for all, regardless where you're born.
"I don't know how you want budgets to be distinct from taxes paid by the district, unless you mean the federal government should pay for all education everywhere.:"
Obviously i mean the federal government. Same education for all american children.

==== As long as the federal government is somehow kept from using its purse power to tell each locality how to run it's schools, perhaps. The federal government is incapable of running each district on a level appropriate for that area.


"As for gerrymandering, racial gerrymandering is already unconstitutional."
Oh then it's ok. Republicans wouldn't do anything unconstitutional. I am sure all those funny district shapes are made with completely different reasons in mind.

==== Both parties gerrymander and courts can and do reverse gerrymandering that has racial intent. The funny district shapes are for political advantage and both parties do it, roughly equally (where they have power).

@quackquack said
Critical Race Theory wants to ignore the most important part of any compensation case. It assumes that certain people are the victims of discrimination and that others owe them compensation when a person must prove they (not someone with same skin color) was the victim of discrimination by an actual person (again not someone with the same skin color).
Simply, I never owe ...[text shortened]... le and compensate me and people who look like me for wrong that people who look like them committed.

Critical race theory; Critical theory in general, isn’t about compensation questions.

What it theorizes is that racism isn’t just the local chapter of the KKK. Or that poverty is just down to an individual being lazy.

It suggests that everything is part of a larger mechanic. So the situation a person finds themself in is only partly due to choice. It has also a lot to do with environment, culture, structure and previous political choices.

So, a kid who’s parents are rich and both went to Eton had a far higher chance of getting into a good university and becoming prime minister of England, than a kid who’s mum was a cleaner and who’s dad worked down a coal pit.
Education, contacts, environment all interact with political structures and culture to create this clove.

Now, CRT suggests exactly the same, but focusses on skin colour. You could have critical religious theory and let it loose on Jews. So, instead of Israelis being nasty folk with a total hatred of Palestinians, you see that there is victimhood over generations, fear, political and social structures, etc. driving the choices that are made.

Which sounds more plausible? Israelis are gits? Or that it’s a complicated mess of interacting structures and choices which have led to the current situation in Israel?

Oh yes. One sounds easy and enables lazy finger pointing. The other creates a messy entanglement.
But which do you think is more likely?

@sh76 said
"Define the reform and we can talk. If I like the reform, I'll vote for it. You need to define the reform first."
Higher emphasis on de escalation. Remove social services duties from cops. Actually punish excessive force. Training in non-lethal methods of policing. Protect whistleblowers. You know, obvious stuff.

==== I have no problem with any of that, though they're still ...[text shortened]... shapes are for political advantage and both parties do it, roughly equally (where they have power).

"I have no problem with any of that, though they're still generalities. Policies would need to be more specific."
There you go, something we can agree on.

How specific? Would you like a detailed lesson plan for the academy? Are you picking nits?

"As long as the federal government is somehow kept from using its purse power to tell each locality how to run it's schools, perhaps. ."
Better paid teachers and better equiped schools is universal.

"The federal government is incapable of running each district on a level appropriate for that area"
What do you mean by "level appropriate for that area". Like allowing states to teach creationism in schools on government dollars?

One curriculum, one country. Children should be thaught how to be american citizens, not texan republicans


"The funny district shapes are for political advantage and both parties do it, roughly equally (where they have power)."
Doubt, but whatever. Get rid of it.

@Zahlanzi

If we compare Obama to me, who has more power?

@zahlanzi said
"I have no problem with any of that, though they're still generalities. Policies would need to be more specific."
There you go, something we can agree on.

How specific? Would you like a detailed lesson plan for the academy? Are you picking nits?

"As long as the federal government is somehow kept from using its purse power to tell each locality how to run it's schools ...[text shortened]... d both parties do it, roughly equally (where they have power)."
Doubt, but whatever. Get rid of it.

===One curriculum, one country.===

This summarizes the fallacy of your thinking in one four-word phrase.

The vast majority of the American people would never settle for one central agency setting school curricula for every school in the country. The people in Provo, Utah, don't want to have their curriculum set by the people in Boston, Massachusetts, and vice versa.

Yes, the US is one country, but it's also built on the principle of federalism, wherein states are given the ability to choose for themselves how their day-to-day lives are governed. The federal government was never built to be that intrusive and the people would not tolerate an attempt to do so.

The issue of teaching creationism is whether a public school doing so violates the First Amendment's ban on establishment of religion. This is an interesting and complex issue. But it's certainly not about some central committee thinking it's a bad idea.

@sh76

Seems to me that teaching any theory of creation as if it were true is teaching a religion.

@eladar said
@sh76

Seems to me that teaching any theory of creation as if it were true is teaching a religion.

What about teaching it as one possibility?

@sh76 said
What about teaching it as one possibility?

Ground rule: If this conversation goes anywhere, first person to mention the Flying Spaghetti Monster (after this one) loses.

@sh76 said
What about teaching it as one possibility?

I would say that it should simply be the result of a theory.

Saying that it is possible opens up the need to give other possibilities.

@Eladar
OF COURSE THERE WILL BE ALTERNATE THEORIES OF LIFE ORIGIN.

ALSO of course, no matter what science comes up with you will poo poo any of it since you are permanently inthralled with JC, it stops you from actually doing your own thinking but instead just refer to some ancient biblical tale as if THEY knew ANYTHING about real gods or god.

@sonhouse said
@Eladar
OF COURSE THERE WILL BE ALTERNATE THEORIES OF LIFE ORIGIN.

ALSO of course, no matter what science comes up with you will poo poo any of it since you are permanently inthralled with JC, it stops you from actually doing your own thinking but instead just refer to some ancient biblical tale as if THEY knew ANYTHING about real gods or god.

Would you say that to a Muslim who believes in Mohammed?
I doubt you would.

@sonhouse said
@Eladar
OF COURSE THERE WILL BE ALTERNATE THEORIES OF LIFE ORIGIN.

ALSO of course, no matter what science comes up with you will poo poo any of it since you are permanently inthralled with JC, it stops you from actually doing your own thinking but instead just refer to some ancient biblical tale as if THEY knew ANYTHING about real gods or god.

Ooohhh, edge-lordy! Well teenaged, boy.