DonkeyCigars

I'm not mad at it.

I think that laws/culture is either a very, very lagging indicator (meaning we won't feel these negative effects for a long time after they are put into place) or they are very, very overstated (meaning they aren't all that important except for buzzy headlines like the OP to clickbait for bloomburg because at the end of the day, taxes and profits are what drives behaviors for businesses and business people). Because when you look at the sheer amount of businesses relocating HQ's to Texas, and the volume of people coming here from other states (states with more taxes and more liberal laws, to boot), it tells a story of economic growth with or without dumb policies. And economic growth is good for all residents, tax-payers and homeowners, in my opinion, so I'm all for it. Mostly I thought it was funny that OP started a thread and then literally same day one of the richest men in the world relocates one of the richest companies in America to Texas.

I love the way you put things sometimes and this is all very well stated. Your last paragraph and point is what I was trying to say when I said the following:

True. The frog eyes give away his amphibious alien origins.

We aren’t really talking about the subject, that’s what I keep trying and failing to get you to see. The subject is an amalgamation of many different anxieties and issues and fears. It’s not a prescriptive, defined subject that is drawing the ire and fear of these people even though these vague emotions and projections have been boiled down to the term “CRT” which we all agree is an erroneous application based upon the academic definition (which again, I argue, does not matter). At the end of the day we are posting on a discussion about a people who want to neuter a movement whose end result is to chisel away at their privilege and resources. I don’t know, maybe if these people could get into a writers room and workshop a better term or slogan to rail against “TRC” maybe, then perhaps we could get people to get past the mental hang up of the word and drive to the root analysis of what’s driving their perspectives and thinking. Otherwise you will have people like yourself who will say, “nope, not true! Words have meanings and you are using that one wrong, thus you can’t have legitimate perspectives based upon a mix of lived experience and emotional response if you continue to appropriate academic culture!“ Being rigid in your moral code is good, but it’s also being in opposition to change which is someone’s progress. Maybe not yours or even mine, but It’s all relative. That’s what I believe, at least.

This was posted and then Elon Musk announces Tesla HQ to Texas (on top of all the many people and companies moving to Texas the past few years). Oops.

Biden keeping Chinese tariffs and taking a stern approach with China has been surprising to me. What are your thoughts there?

Let’s work backwards here: 1) not sure you can deem “anti-crt” crowd a collective fail, depending of course on how you define success and failure. The fact that this contingent of people are still in the news and in the ears of legislators and educators and influencing strategy seems to open up the argument otherwise. 2) Pointing at a truth you think has been sufficiently demonstrated and yelling down these people and putting their nose in their pee and hitting them with the newspaper while saying “see! Demonstrated truth! It’s true! Look at it!” might make you feel good, but it doesn’t do much for those whose perspective and worldviews don’t allow them to see the same things the same way as you. You can be “right” but it doesn’t make them wrong, and it doesn’t make a bit of difference in reality because it really doesn’t matter in the world we live in. You sound like an intelligent guy who has spent a considerable amount of time contemplating things and determining what guidelines and philosophy will dictate your life and it sounds like you’ve beaten a rigid path with this idea of a universal truth as your North Star. That is awesome. I love that. But that is you (and people like you) and to fail to realize that you can’t control how other people perceive and choose to interact and make sense of the world (and accept or reject their attempts as they align or differ from how you have determined to make sense of your life) and, worse yet, expect others to defer to your ideas then I think you will always be at odds and war with other people. Especially when we consider our society has shifted from something that looks a lot like how you think things should be, to something much more disparate and chaotic and different. Failing to allow for that or accept that feels like it could make for a noble, emotionally and spiritually satisfying fight, at least, so you got that going for you. Anyways I wholly disagree with you, but agree that disagreement will feel hollow and shallow because the reasons for disagreement fall outside your rigid lines of what’s acceptable and truth but I appreciate your considerations and the effort you’ve put into constructing your worldview and would like to hear more about other facets of what you believe, at the appropriate time and place on here.

I think we've reduced to the problem. You are coming from a place of universal truth and that your truth, whether it's intelligent design or evolution it doesn't matter in this context, just by choosing one as the bastion of what is right, is the way. Further, you are thinking of right and wrong as an egalitarian force which seems rigid and inconsistent with the reality in which we live in, which is right and wrong is relative in a flexible, dynamic society, (and to the victors go the spoils and they are the ones who write the history books and rules). Your universal right or wrongs don't mean much in a utilitarian society where practical matters such as influence and power, built upon different perspectives of things like truth, right and wrong, dictate the action. IMO, at least, but this opinion also I think serves to explain the rationale for why these "CRT but not the real CRT" haters act they way they do, and the experiences and perspectives that inform their mindsets and subsequent actions. And for the record, I agree with you and think more like you and don't appreciate things that I view as a wrong position. I believe one ought to be inflexible in the face of what is not right and good. I bristle at the idea of relative morality and the idea that one thing can be true and right for some and wrong for others based on perspectives. But as is said, perception is reality, I guess. @Mrs Whiggins thanks for the recommendation, I'll add that to the list as well.

I get that they are wrong. I agree with that. But it's one of those things were being right or wrong is academic; it's just not what matters when you are talking about an emotional and irrational perspective, point of view and response which is what I'm arguing is the likely case and cause. In their own minds, a goodly number of these folks at least, are justified in their fears and concerns. I haven't even read Hillbilly Elegy, though it's on my list, which I understand is a better treatment of this specific angle and topic.

Amen sister. You are one of the good ones-- don't let this town take that away from you!

Not sure why you are always so crotchety, but does it get old or exhausting being so offended and aggrieved (over nothing and everything all at once, while never being addressed or spoken to) 24/7?

Is string theory still a thing? I thought it was debunked as flawed and out of favor. Or is that the joke (because Roethlisberger points out the obvious)?

I'm using the term "CRT" to mean it how the basket of deplorables are meaning it-- there is still that disconnect. I think if you reread my responses through that prism, it would be easier to follow the case I'm trying to make, IMO.

It does challenge people to think critically (sometimes the answer is in the name) about historical facts and truths that have been whitewashed. In my opinion at least, and that is the minimum of what CRT is, or "CRT" as people are using it. The worldview of some being challenged is one that sees the world as it is, as a place that is inherently fair and meritocratic because we live in a winner-take-all, zero-sum, finite pie world. Resources are scarce and that scarcity means that, at the end of the day, self-interest to yourself and your family-- from baseline needs to mild creature comforts to luxuries-- is the only worthwhile pursuit. That is the American way, which is why we are in the situation we are. "Naturally this has short term costs and pain". Such as, any actions and efforts to compensate or make-up for inequality and historic crimes will come at the expense of those who trust and bank upon that inequality (i.e. privilege) as part of their life plans-- and in a lot of ways this can be unconscious for a lot of folks. And some of these pains and costs aren't necessarily hard costs-- maybe they are indirect and little Johnny doesn't get a scholarship because of affirmative action or some other indirect effect. "and a material and noticeable net negative for those who it would argue had nothing to do with setting up the rules." How so? If the mindset is one of a fixed mindset which isn't about the growth of the pie but of the finite, scarcity of resources pie, then anything that aims to support and uplift those who are systematically put down will naturally have to come from the store of power and resources of those that have. It's a push and pull, no new energy is created just redistributed situation. "in which the game was played and now are being punished for the sins of their father. These are the people who have glommed on to the anti-CRT movement and are fighting tooth and nail because they see it, reasonably from that perspective, as a threat." A threat to what? A threat to their current idea and trust in entitled comfort and privilege, which is being disrupted and generally people don't like being disrupted. Hope this helps?

Not good. But from their perspective, they probably feel like anything other than fighting to the death even if there is a 1 in 100 chance they can win, is better than a 100% of surrender and subjugation as a loser, to pay for hundreds of years of crime against other fellow humans. Especially when you consider that people are people and power and privilege corrupt absolutely, across demographics and race. Especially when you consider that even the best laid plans of mice and men, when push comes to shove, nasty human instinct is the only thing that is true about people. You seem to think there is an "underrepresented minority exceptionalism" aspect that would be more peaceful and loving and gracious than the evil anglos. I'm not sure what we can base that belief upon and that in itself feels problematic if not racist. For people like you and I and others on here, we don't worry about such things and so it feels wild-eyed and crazy to see CRT, and life, through such a lens. But the vast majority of Americans who are mildly comfortable due ONLY to privilege of being born into the right caste...well they have something to fight for and it makes sense why they do it.

Could do what you say, but it seems to be a high-risk, low-probability plan. It's easier for a group of people to engage in base tribalism because that's probably the default at this level of scale and likely that is what will happen when the other demographics take the power and influence and any work to diplomatically co-exist without pain will likely fail anyways. I'm actually surprised you, the guy who always throws his hands up in exasperation that we are doomed to be slaves of our own slavish human nature and tribalism and nasty instinct, fail to grasp this. How can you not see from a different perspective, whether you agree or disagree, how fighting CRT tooth and nail could be considered existential for a group who has historically been in power and treated themselves to privilege at the expense of others?

EXACTLY! And how is that perspective and point of view not anything but actually very rational when you consider the cake is baked, it's too late to change the hundreds of years of how you have treated people. It only makes sense to fight tooth and nail to maintain power and influence, right? I'm reminded of Louis CK at the 1:23 second mark.

Got it; I am flippant because I didn't care to put the effort to googling it and because I don't care about this guy or buy-in to his outrage but I see you are at least googling terms (assuming you weren't already familiar as it's a bit esoteric) and so I should match that effort.

1) I was saying that what once took 12 years to take hold etc., can happen overnight. Digital speed of connectedness, etc. 2) Jimmy actually summed it up pretty good below, inadvertently, when he said, "Well, the conservative wing of white America is terrified of losing their majority status. It is inevitable, and estimated to happen ~ 2040. So, to them, there is only so much pie, and in order for them to feel good about themselves, they must cast someone else in an equally negative light. It's virtually zero-sum in their twisted world, and wholly un-Christian, but here we are." CRT at a very minimum challenges the American, white, male and the patriarchal hegemony that has cascaded from him from 1600 to now, and all the inherent privilege and comfort that the general population that identifies as such trusts and banks on for future comfort, and at worst, it is a tool to educate, enable and affect and disrupt this, in effort to make the pie more equitable by making the pie grabbing exercise fairer. Naturally this has short term costs and pain-- and a material and noticeable net negative for those who it would argue had nothing to do with setting up the rules in which the game was played and now are being punished for the sins of their father. These are the people who have glommed on to the anti-CRT movement and are fighting tooth and nail because they see it, reasonably from that perspective, as a threat. Personally I don't care one way or another, we teach our children the oft-ugly, historic truths which would make us "CRT" parents, I guess.

I think it's because there is no real way to lead or be accountable. America has no shared ethic or aesthetic anymore (just look at the Met Gala when the theme is Americana-- it's an eclectic mess. j/k, kinda). It was a sheet of glass in the 1700's that is now 300mm broken shards of glass that could never be put back together-- the internet has and will forever see to that. There is not a way, in a two party system, to unite people with such different values and goals and beliefs. So what is left? Fundraising and salesmanship and performative nonsense to justify your day rate.

Thanks for the post and write up. I think in your analogy, the people using "CRT" incorrectly (at least in my previous posts, like referencing Jimmy's aunt) are not the Dwight Jaynes who have strategically manipulated the word to mean something different. These people are those who ingest the term because as you said "over the years, that...become doctrine and dogma and that's why you have the false association." But because we live in a world where "over the years" can be replaced with "virtually overnight" you have a guy like Rufi or whatever his name is acting the part of Dwight Jaynes to market a term to people because it's easy/pithy and vague enough to be everything to everyone, as a gripe. Otherwise, the only other thing I would mention from your post is to raise the point again (which has been raised, acknowledged as true and accurate on this thread many pages back) that CRT challenges identity, worldview and social capital because it's aim is not to just educate in a vacuum, but it is to educate in order to attempt to inspire change and conflict because that change necessarily comes from a reshuffling of some rules and some cards that end up looking like, in the short term, a net negative for the hegemonic group in power and a gain for the minority (again, at the visible and material expense of others). That is why it's a contentious subject and one that is being fought. If power and money weren't at stake you'd never hear anyone talk about it except for in the weird conspiracy theory corners of the internet next to gay frogs and pizza parlours. If just teaching accurate history (which I am all for like the previous poster said) was all this was about, you'd not hear much from it. Nobody is ever interested in paying for the sins of their father as it feels very unfair and people will naturally fight that.

I'll buy you a cheeseburger next time I'm in the Energy Corridor

Exactly my point. It happens that words morph into something quite different than the origin. Words mean something, of course and as you say, but only because of a social contract that we all engage in to determine that to be the case. Words are not like numbers, which have a definite meaning no matter what (the number 100 is always 100, etc.). If your point is that you are not willing to allow that CRT has been re-defined/morphed to mean something completely different to the basket of deplorables that use it, then I think there should be some introspection as to why that is. Is it because you want to ridicule and then disqualify those people by calling out a technicality (pedantry)? Is it because of something else? Should there be an alternative word created to better express what these people mean when they say CRT to differentiate from what the academics mean when they say CRT?

Imagine being so eaten up with bulverism that you think my response to Roma was hate derived or a misapplication of words.