Critical Race Theory policy in hiring at UT

[Dahobbs 17625]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Ummm....I've been around this board for a LONG time, discussing things like ending the war on drugs, reforming community policing, investing in education in lower income/minority communities, supporting state-funded higher education (as opposed to gutting it), etc.  Seriously, there's a shitload we can do, much of which has been discussed on this board, including by me, many times.

But other than the numerous specific and workable ideas you've mentioned, it's just navel gazing and finger pointing, right? 

[smoky 840]

End the war on drugs and give parents the option where to send their kids for school?

I'm in.

[Dahobbs 17625]

37 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

I'm not sure that analogy actually works- b/c it's the alcoholic that needs to admit to the problem in AA, and it's not the person suffering from being born disadvantaged that is admitting to the problem.  

Let me fix the analogy for you: American Society is the alcoholic, black people are the spouse with two black eyes. So yes, we (the royal we) have to admit to having a problem. But we keep getting stuck at that step because it hurts some people's feelings.

[Wulaw Horn 19126]

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Ummm....I've been around this board for a LONG time, discussing things like ending the war on drugs, reforming community policing, investing in education in lower income/minority communities, supporting state-funded higher education (as opposed to gutting it), etc.  Seriously, there's a shitload we can do, much of which has been discussed on this board, including by me, many times.

Bingo.  We really can't even get to the point of a general admission of the problem.  

Yes and no.  Sure, the exceptional have a leg up.  But even the average of somewhat above average have different chances of ultimate success based on the available "bootstraps."  A somewhat above-average white guy from a relatively stable family life, with an owned home that they got through even modest inherited wealth and/or due to having college educated parents because his grandparents had the means to send them to college, is ahead of the above-average black guy who has neither of those things.

It's much easier to pull yourself up the mountain when you start higher up than the other guy.  Both have to climb to get there, but we all damned well know the guy starting at the bottom has a much harder slog.

Bingo.  So, let's invest in some things that can get them CLOSER to parity in terms of starting position.  Two key paths to that are reducing the path to minority incarceration and legal troubles, and increasing and enhancing educational opportunities.  It's not an overnight thing to be sure.  It will take generations to unfuck what took multiple generations to fuck.   Such is the way of things.

You misunderstood what I was saying about the hypothetical average black guy.  The hypothetical average black guy has the same modest inherited wealth and/or college educated parents (or skilled tradesmen or people who knock down $75k collectively in a stable job) that the average hypothetical white guy has.  If he doesn't have that then I would say he was born disadvantaged.  

If we just want to call 2 parent households "average" to above average (which this day and age I think is likely) then the scorecard breaks down as follows

Asian- 85%

White- 74%

Hispanic- 61%

Black- 36% 

Hey- what do you know- a really simple metric that traces and explains most of poverty in this country- and it's something the kid has absolutely zero control over.  Seems like we probably ought to try to do whatever the hell we can to make those numbers a lot closer to even.  

[TwiceHorn 31510]

I'm sure someone is going to come along and poop on my reference to the psychological.

I have a pet theory that psychological/psychiatric issues have a heretofore unknown role in "generational poverty."  But that's just me.

However, it occurred to me that the main reason people don't seem to want what's labeled "CRT" taught in their lower schools is that they don't want their kids being called "oppressors" or being exposed to that kind of negative thinking about themselves.

Stop for a second and think what kind of thoughts a poor black kid has about his or herself on the daily.  They were brought to this country on the premise that they were defective, subhuman.  And that basic thought has permeated their existence to this very day in various ways, shapes, and forms.

[Wulaw Horn 19126]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Let me fix the analogy for you: American Society is the alcoholic, black people are the spouse with two black eyes. So yes, we (the royal we) have to admit to having a problem. But we keep getting stuck at that step because it hurts some people's feelings.

So- if you are making the analogy that the black people are functionally in Al Anon in this situation isn't the first step of Al Anon saying essentially that I can't fix my spouse, I've just got to do what's right by me?  Which would mean- essentially- trying to pull yourself up by your bootstraps in this analogy?  And if the Alcoholic owns his shit that might not have anything to do with helping the Al Anon member succeed and thrive after they've done their part to damage them?  

Also- I think the point of the situation that's wrong is "I" didn't have anything to do with those black eyes.  "I" should do something to help that lady though- as a moral imperative according to the tenants of any faith tradition or a secular human definition of "don't be a selfish dick".  But that doesn't mean I have to say I'm an alcoholic, it just means I have to take some responsibility for being my brothers keeper.  

[DDD Dad 14344]

The only thing that's divisive about teaching CRT in schools is the argument against doing so.

Jesus this thread has aggy aids.

[TwiceHorn 31510]

9 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Let me fix the analogy for you: American Society is the alcoholic, black people are the spouse with two black eyes. So yes, we (the royal we) have to admit to having a problem. But we keep getting stuck at that step because it hurts some people's feelings.

It's not a super-great analogy.  Sorry I brought it up.

But acknowledging the problem and understanding it is a general-purpose precursor to solving a problem.

[gsoda3 3263]

california wants to restructure their math curriculum in middle school and there's an emotional debate both for and against the changes.  you can read about the specifics here.  the following caught my attention because of this thread from last week:

Quote

Some opponents argue the framework attempts to inject math with critical race theory, an academic approach that argues that the history of slavery and segregation lives on in current laws and social structures, perpetuating racism in the U.S.

While not explicitly mentioning critical race theory, the framework points to research that supports teaching math through a social justice lens. It also suggests using real-world examples to make math lessons more relevant to students’ lived experiences, encouraging multiple ways of showing an answer. And it calls out how race, class and gender play a role in the messages students receive about their place in the math class.

Several comments from the most recent public review push back, in particular, on a report cited in the framework titled “A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction,” which calls for dismantling racism and white supremacy that surfaces in mathematics through tracking, course selection and intervention rosters, as well as finding only one “right” answer.

The commission agreed to remove references to the study from the draft framework on Wednesday, stating it was inconsistent with teaching to the standards.

 

@Pancho is CRT referenced correctly as a framework here?  what's the line between a CRT and social justice as a framework?

 

[Wulaw Horn 19126]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm sure someone is going to come along and poop on my reference to the psychological.

I have a pet theory that psychological/psychiatric issues have a heretofore unknown role in "generational poverty."  But that's just me.

However, it occurred to me that the main reason people don't seem to want what's labeled "CRT" taught in their lower schools is that they don't want their kids being called "oppressors" or being exposed to that kind of negative thinking about themselves.

Stop for a second and think what kind of thoughts a poor black kid has about his or herself on the daily.  They were brought to this country on the premise that they were defective, subhuman.  And that basic thought has permeated their existence to this very day in various ways, shapes, and forms.

Ok.  But that will never make me allow you to do something to hurt my child.  Which is what being called an oppressor does, I suppose, by your logic. We need to find a way to build empathy in children that doesn't come from telling him that they are a worthless piece of shit that has their boot on the throat of the disadvantaged. Especially when most of the people who are most likely irritated by this thing are themselves disadvantaged.  

We work with our kids all the time, on having empathy and a heart of compassion for everyone out there, and teaching the idea that we are all God's children fearfully and wonderfully made by him, and that God had a plan to redeem all of us, and he loved us so much that he would have still sent his son to die on the cross for us even if it was just one of us, anywhere at any time, that needed redeeming.  Again, I say this not to take some sort of universal credit for what we are doing but in the supposition that many/most on this board do a similar thing with their children all the time (maybe less on the God and more on the secular humanism- but some version of this). It's probably not "our kids" that need to hear this from the school- and aiming this at poor white kids probably misses the mark.  

 

[Wulaw Horn 19126]

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

It's not a super-great analogy.  Sorry I brought it up.

But acknowledging the problem and understanding it is a general-purpose precursor to solving a problem.

Don't be sorry. I think it caused thought and advanced the discussion in an interesting way.  

[Wulaw Horn 19126]

5 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

california wants to restructure their math curriculum in middle school and there's an emotional debate both for and against the changes.  you can read about the specifics here.  the following caught my attention because of this thread from last week:

 

@Pancho is CRT referenced correctly as a framework here?  what's the line between a CRT and social justice as a framework?

 

More interesting than this was the idea that at a district in VA they were just going to stop teaching Math at a certain point so that nobody could attain more mastery than anyone else.  I think it was in VA.  Maybe it was NY.  

BTW- Math is set up for asians to succeed at and racially biased, b/c yall say numbers in less sylablles than English speaking, and that means you can remember more numbers and your better at it.  I think this was something I actually read somewhere from maybe Malcolm Gladwell. 

[TwiceHorn 31510]

1 minute ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Ok.  But that will never make me allow you to do something to hurt my child.  Which is what being called an oppressor does, I suppose, by your logic. We need to find a way to build empathy in children that doesn't come from telling him that they are a worthless piece of shit that has their boot on the throat of the disadvantaged. Especially when most of the people who are most likely irritated by this thing are themselves disadvantaged.  

We work with our kids all the time, on having empathy and a heart of compassion for everyone out there, and teaching the idea that we are all God's children fearfully and wonderfully made by him, and that God had a plan to redeem all of us, and he loved us so much that he would have still sent his son to die on the cross for us even if it was just one of us, anywhere at any time, that needed redeeming.  Again, I say this not to take some sort of universal credit for what we are doing but in the supposition that many/most on this board do a similar thing with their children all the time (maybe less on the God and more on the secular humanism- but some version of this). It's probably not "our kids" that need to hear this from the school- and aiming this at poor white kids probably misses the mark.  

 

I, too, disagree with teaching the blame-shifting and more extreme aspects of CRT at a lower school level.

I'm not trying to justify doing that by what happens to black kids.

What I am saying is that people of a certain mindset are going to come along and say "psychological issues, gimme a fucking break, fucking black snowflakes need to get over themselves" while at the same time saying "you can't teach CRT at my school because I don't want Johnny to feel guilty or be called an oppressor."

Think about the disconnect there.

[Wulaw Horn 19126]

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I, too, disagree with teaching the blame-shifting and more extreme aspects of CRT at a lower school level.

I'm not trying to justify doing that by what happens to black kids.

What I am saying is that people of a certain mindset are going to come along and say "psychological issues, gimme a fucking break, fucking black snowflakes need to get over themselves" while at the same time saying "you can't teach CRT at my school because I don't want Johnny to feel guilty or be called an oppressor."

Think about the disconnect there.

Sure.  I agree.  But, that makes the first part of their statement wrong, not the second part. So, I'm against the second part while fine with the idea of looking to fix the first part.  And, I think, other than sex drive, protecting out offspring is probably the most innate human drive we have- so anything that might hurt my kid is going to be a non-starter for me unless you do it at the point of a gun, and then I'm going to bide my time until I can go get a bigger gun and point it at you. I think that's probably more or less the baseline human response to something harmful to our kids.  

Edited May 24, 2021 by Wulaw Horn

[TwiceHorn 31510]

9 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

california wants to restructure their math curriculum in middle school and there's an emotional debate both for and against the changes.  you can read about the specifics here.  the following caught my attention because of this thread from last week:

 

@Pancho is CRT referenced correctly as a framework here?  what's the line between a CRT and social justice as a framework?

 

Here's one of the principle problems.  Whatever you consider to be CRT, or its proper definition, there is definitely CRT scholarship that is very toxic.  If you are so inclined, you can find numerous examples of toxic expressions like the existence of the white race poses a threat to people of color.

So, "CRT" has become a meaningless label to scare ignoramuses into thinking that is what will be taught in every elementary school in American under the guise of "diversity,"  "equity," or "inclusion," or "social consciousness" or whatever.

And that is, for the most part, a filthy lie.  Just like most of the other filthy lies the GQP seems to generate these days.

[TwiceHorn 31510]

1 minute ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Sure.  I agree.  But, that makes the first part of their statement wrong, not the second part. So, I'm against the second part while fine with the idea of looking to fix the first part.  And, I think, other than sex drive protecting out offspring is probably the most innate human drive we have- so anything that might hurt my kid is going to be a non-starter for me unless you do it at the point of a gun, and then I'm going to bide my time until I can go get a bigger gun and point it at you. I think that's probably more or less the baseline human response to something harmful to our kids.  

Hell, protection of ourselves, our children and "us" against "other" is the fundamental root of the whole problem.  That is the origin of racism.

[Wulaw Horn 19126]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Here's one of the principle problems.  Whatever you consider to be CRT, or its proper definition, there is definitely CRT scholarship that is very toxic.  If you are so inclined, you can find numerous examples of toxic expressions like the existence of the white race poses a threat to people of color.

So, "CRT" has become a meaningless label to scare ignoramuses into thinking that is what will be taught in every elementary school in American under the guise of "diversity,"  "equity," or "inclusion," or "social consciousness" or whatever.

And that is, for the most part, a filthy lie.  Just like most of the other filthy lies the GQP seems to generate these days.

My dad ran for the school board in 1993 or something like that because the local morons got all wound up about Outcome Based Education and were trying to overthrow the school district b/c they didn't want that CA crap taught.  OBE was like how you describe CRT in the second paragraph. None of that was happening in our school district. The whole thing was fake news.  Dad ran supporting the current school board who was doing what he thought was a good job.  He ran with 2 sitting board members. They lost 2 to 1. This was in Montgomery County and I can promise you what happened in our school was as GOP/Red as it gets before the overthrowing of that commie loving OBE board.

Side note- I think the real problem (and I didn't know this at the time but heard some news of this 10 years later) was the school superintendent was a cunt (pretty much universally agreed upon by everyone involved) and her daughter liked to fuck black boys.  So, OBE became a big problem in Montgomery ISD and then disappeared and went away.  Funny that. 

[wildcat09 29355]

30 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

You misunderstood what I was saying about the hypothetical average black guy.  The hypothetical average black guy has the same modest inherited wealth and/or college educated parents (or skilled tradesmen or people who knock down $75k collectively in a stable job) that the average hypothetical white guy has.  If he doesn't have that then I would say he was born disadvantaged.  

If we just want to call 2 parent households "average" to above average (which this day and age I think is likely) then the scorecard breaks down as follows

Asian- 85%

White- 74%

Hispanic- 61%

Black- 36% 

Hey- what do you know- a really simple metric that traces and explains most of poverty in this country- and it's something the kid has absolutely zero control over.  Seems like we probably ought to try to do whatever the hell we can to make those numbers a lot closer to even.  

How would you propose we do this without an understanding of why these percentages are what they are?

[BabaYaga 15302]

19 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

But acknowledging the problem and understanding it is a general-purpose precursor to solving a problem.

I don't think anyone is against this.  The discerning question is whether CRT, based up critical theory, with it's shades of Marxism that sees the world solely through the lenses of power dynamics is the best mechanism to accomplish this.  CRT, along with the misguided kafka-esq logic that in which someone doesn’t admit they are racist it proves they are racist and if they do it proves the person’s point, is absurd.  

Trying to conflate a discouragement from CRT with being anti-racial progress is also extremely disingenuous (not accusing you of this either, but it's pervasive through this thread)

[Wulaw Horn 19126]

3 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

How would you propose we do this without an understanding of why these percentages are what they are?

I have literally zero idea.  That's why I think it's sort of unfixable in the main.  But, maybe massive child tax credits for marriage below a certain income level? That probably isn't legal or constitutional, but maybe it would be a terrible idea.  I don't know.  I don't know how to fix that problem. I strongly suspect that if that problem was fixed that we'd have pretty equivalent outcomes across the races inside of a generation. 

[Pancho 44860]

28 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

california wants to restructure their math curriculum in middle school and there's an emotional debate both for and against the changes.  you can read about the specifics here.  the following caught my attention because of this thread from last week:

 

@Pancho is CRT referenced correctly as a framework here?  what's the line between a CRT and social justice as a framework?

 

Ehh, I could see how maybe one of the tenets of CRT (Storytelling) could help with understanding the experience PoC students have as it relates to math and being successful in math and STEM courses.  Other than that, I wouldn't apply any other tenets so it sounds like someone just threw in the words "critical race theory" without (once again) really knowing what it is. 

I don't consider social justice a framework rather I consider social justice an outcome. 

[wildcat09 29355]

Just now, Wulaw Horn said:

I have literally zero idea.  That's why I think it's sort of unfixable in the main.  But, maybe massive child tax credits for marriage below a certain income level? That probably isn't legal or constitutional, but maybe it would be a terrible idea.  I don't know.  I don't know how to fix that problem. I strongly suspect that if that problem was fixed that we'd have pretty equivalent outcomes across the races inside of a generation. 

My point is that critical race theory helps explain why these percentages are what they are. So if you want to help improve them, understanding the analysis that critical race theory provides is arguably necessary. And even if you don't think it is strictly necessary, certainly you can't deny that it could be helpful? 

[Wulaw Horn 19126]

2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

My point is that critical race theory helps explain why these percentages are what they are. So if you want to help improve them, understanding the analysis that critical race theory provides is arguably necessary. And even if you don't think it is strictly necessary, certainly you can't deny that it could be helpful? 

Read my post about OBE 4 or 5 posts up.  I strongly suspect this is what's going on with CRT.  I'm completely opposed to stupid shit like what Baba Yaga said- so to the extent that that kind of shit is going to be taught I couldn't be more out.  I'm in favor of teaching empathy to white kids while trying to empower blacks.  That's not an easy line to successfully straddle when making curriculum.  I will dodge by saying like the famous justice said on porn that I will know it when I see it (it being harmful nonsense).  

[Brisketexan 105161]

11 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

that sees the world solely through the lenses of power dynamics

You keep saying this, but repetition doesn't make it true.  Especially when the OPPOSITE extreme is the concern, here.  The fact that we want to brush aside ALL historical power dynamics and say "here, today, we're gonna make the rules of the race fair going forward," with no acknowledgment, accountability for, or amelioration of, the 400 years of inequality that heavily contributed to being where we are.  That's so much of the pushback we get, including on this thread -- "we've made things fair today, what do you want us to do?"  Nevermind that we HAVEN'T made things entirely fair today, that approach casts aside anything to do with 400 years of shit.

What 400 years of brutal oppression did to black people in America is not the ONLY force exerting itself on black Americans . . . but for fuck's sake, it's FOUR HUNDRED YEARS of brutal shit, denying them the most basic elements of humanity, much less major elements of economic opportunity, that's a LOT of force by an almost completely one-sided power dynamic.

Power dynamics are not the ONLY social force out there.  But goddamn, they're a big one.

[Nicole44 22068]

Lots of good ideas for SOLUTIONS in this thread.

My two cents (that no one wants): Blame without Change accomplishes very little. I am all for overhauling our education system. I am all for prison reform and changing our stance on the War on Drugs. These are all key things. I am all for teaching history. 
 

We also need the “buy in” and assistance of the communities we are trying to bring lasting help, hope and positive change to. We need the buy in of the people who have the wealth and resources and power to help make that change working with those communities. 
 

I get blame gives us the why in many cases. It makes people feel better to point their finger. It also has a detrimental impact as well. We need to DUMP failed policies and programs and tweak some others. We need to create new programs and policies. 
 

But blame without change on all of our parts accomplishes very little and can also be counterproductive. Pointing a finger without lifting a finger (to help) is bullshit. 

Edited May 24, 2021 by Nicole44

[52-80 19191]

23 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

I don't think anyone is against this.  The discerning question is whether CRT, based up critical theory, with it's shades of Marxism that sees the world solely through the lenses of power dynamics is the best mechanism to accomplish this.  CRT, along with the misguided kafka-esq logic that in which someone doesn’t admit they are racist it proves they are racist and if they do it proves the person’s point, is absurd.  

Trying to conflate a discouragement from CRT with being anti-racial progress is also extremely disingenuous (not accusing you of this either, but it's pervasive through this thread)

the pervasive thought on this thread is every person has to be a victim or an aggressor.  the alcoholic or battered spouse.  this is their lens. 

it's a pity party and everyone's invited.

[BabaYaga 15302]

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Power dynamics are not the ONLY social force out there.  But goddamn, they're a big one.

They are for CRT, which again is the point of why it is such a poor mechanism for the proposed racial and social changes.  People are trying to "rebrand" it to suit their needs, but it is what it is.  A race focused ideology.  Critical Race Theory is a worldview that interprets everything through the lens of social and political power dynamics.

[Brisketexan 105161]

Just now, BabaYaga said:

They are for CRT, which again is the point of why it is such a poor mechanism for the proposed racial and social changes.  People are trying to "rebrand" it to suit their needs, but it is what it is.  A race focused ideology.  Critical Race Theory is a worldview that interprets everything through the lens of social and political power dynamics.

And everything MUST be seen through that lens....among others.....because that lens applies to everything.  Society is a complex system.  Pretty much EVERY element of it is influenced by social and power dynamics.  Not only should that not be a shocking concept, it's perfectly common-sense.

Hell, my family is a mini society.  What my kids achieve, or fail to achieve, involves a significant component of the work they put in.  It also includes an element of their innate abilities and gifts/limitations (e.g., my daughter was never going to be much of an athlete, my 6'2" son had a decent athletic career).  And all of those things were affected to some degree by our familial social and power dynamic -- the influence we parents (the power in the family) had on them, the freedom we gave them, the support we gave them (shelter, stability, nutrition, education, etc.), the support we FAILED to give them (didn't spend enough time helping them learn to manage their calendar of responsibilities, for example).  The family social and power dynamic was an integral part of almost every facet of their lives.  In some cases, they had to overcome it, in others, it gave them a strong leg up (sometimes we were shitty parents, other times we were good parents).  But to speak of my children and their path WITHOUT acknowledging the huge role that the social and power dynamic of our family had would be pointless.

We can't look at the position of black America, in general, WITHOUT looking through the lens of 400 years of skewed social and power dynamics.  It's not the ONLY factor, but doing the exercise WITHOUT looking through that lens produces a picture that looks nothing like reality.

TLDR; 400 years of fuckery matters.  A lot.  It's insane to try to examine the current picture without factoring in the view through that lens.

[Brisketexan 105161]

18 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

the pervasive thought on this thread is every person has to be a victim or an aggressor.  the alcoholic or battered spouse.  this is their lens. 

it's a pity party and everyone's invited.

What the fucking fuck?  You just ignored AT LEAST the last page or so of posts.

Nobody here is saying that the current generation is "the aggressor."  By and large, they aren't (sure, there are racist shitheels in every generation).  What they ARE is beneficiaries of a system that for 400 years, gave everyone except black people a better path forward in society.  And likewise, what black people are is being heirs to a system that utterly shat on their families for 400 years, denying them basic humanity and economic opportunity.  We all INHERIT those things.  

A lot of this is about a broader picture of "we the people."  "WE" didn't mean all of us until pretty recently.  That is an issue.  And "we" SHOULD mean all of us, which also means that it is our COLLECTIVE responsibility (all of us, not just white people, are heirs of the American legacy) to do what we can to ameliorate the harm caused by 400 years of collective action taken on our behalf by our society and our institutions.

It's not about "aggressors" or "victims."  And I think most everyone here agrees that to the extent that there's verbiage out there that WOULD couch it this way (telling school kids they are part of the "oppressor" class), that's foolish and counterproductive.

There's something between "everyone is a victim or aggressor" and "we passed the Civil Rights Act, we're all good now."  That's where most of us are trying to have a conversation.  You should check it out.

Edited May 24, 2021 by Brisketexan

[Nicole44 22068]

The late George Carlin:

“New Hampshire's license plates say 'Live Free ... or DIE!!' I don't think I want to live in a state that actually mentions death right on their license plates. At the other end of the spectrum is Idaho's license plates - they say 'Famous Potatoes.'  I don't know, I think that somewhere between 'Famous Potatoes' and 'Live Free or Die' the truth lies. And I think it's closer to 'Famous Potatoes.'

 

[gsoda3 3263]

45 minutes ago, Pancho said:

I don't consider social justice a framework rather I consider social justice an outcome. 

can you give examples of frameworks?  i'm not familiar with this at all.  

 

here's another question for you, is there a difference between equality and equity?  i hear these terms thrown out all the time, sometimes interchangeably, but i feel like there's a distinguishing nuance being missed in those cases.

[Pancho 44860]

1 minute ago, gsoda3 said:

can you give examples of frameworks?  i'm not familiar with this at all.  

 

here's another question for you, is there a difference between equality and equity?  i hear these terms thrown out all the time, sometimes interchangeably, but i feel like there's a distinguishing nuance being missed in those cases.

Framework is just the model or theory you use to support your research. There's both theoretical framework and conceptual framework. (I don't bother with conceptual because I just don't personally like that form or research.) That's the definition in terms of research and writing.  

Equality - giving everyone the same resources across the board regardless if everyone needs them or not.

Equity - distributing resources based on need and taking into account a person's circumstance so that all persons are equal

[52-80 19191]

13 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

What the fucking fuck?  You just ignored AT LEAST the last page or so of posts.

Nobody here is saying that the current generation is "the aggressor."  By and large, they aren't (sure, there are racist shitheels in every generation).  What they ARE is beneficiaries of a system that for 400 years, gave everyone except black people a better path forward in society.  And likewise, what black people are is being heirs to a system that utterly shat on their families for 400 years, denying them basic humanity and economic opportunity.  We all INHERIT those things.  

A lot of this is about a broader picture of "we the people."  "WE" didn't mean all of us until pretty recently.  That is an issue.  And "we" SHOULD mean all of us, which also means that it is our COLLECTIVE responsibility (all of us, not just white people, are heirs of the American legacy) to do what we can to ameliorate the harm caused by 400 years of collective action taken on our behalf by our society and our institutions.

It's not about "aggressors" or "victims."  And I think most everyone here agrees that to the extent that there's verbiage out there that WOULD couch it this way (telling school kids they are part of the "oppressor" class), that's foolish and counterproductive.

There's something between "everyone is a victim or aggressor" and "we passed the Civil Rights Act, we're all good now."  That's where most of us are trying to have a conversation.  You should check it out.

There has never been a better time or place for upward mobility.  The model has been proven by people of ALL shades on the pantone scale for multiple decades now.  The conditions of discrimination has never been lower.   

I ask from page 1 to page 15 what examples anyone can show of a person today of real, substantial, and targeted discrimination today - and all I get back is 400 years of this and 400 years of that (and somehow thats a strawman construct of MINE!).  What can you/me/uncle sam do do to "ameliorate the harm"?  Haven't heard a goddamn thing yet.  Just same old regurgitative victim/savior complex.  Very productive. 

[BurntOrange&White 39934]

If you support CRT then you're part of the problem.

 

 

 

 

/s

[tantric superman 4667]

All the douchbag white kids I went to college with were hammered with CRT type shit for four years of undergrad and they all seemed to turn out to be upstanding wealthy douchbags white adults with nary a psychological scar related to CRT.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

1 hour ago, BabaYaga said:

I don't think anyone is against this. 

counterpoint: @52-80

[Wulaw Horn 19126]

5 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

All the douchbag white kids I went to college with were hammered with CRT type shit for four years of undergrad and they all seemed to turn out to be upstanding wealthy douchbags white adults with nary a psychological scar related to CRT.

Sure. Because it was college and they were more or less fully formed.  But what if you’d have hammered them that from K-4th grade when they are impressionable. Maybe you could have stamped out the desire to Succeed then   

[BabaYaga 15302]

40 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

And everything MUST be seen through that lens....among others.....because that lens applies to everything.  Society is a complex system.  Pretty much EVERY element of it is influenced by social and power dynamics.  Not only should that not be a shocking concept, it's perfectly common-sense.

So then just fully admit you are in favor of an ideology born from Marxist critical theory and conveniently applied to race.  An all-encompassing vision that views all cultural, political, and social institutions as oppressive and requires explicit and continuous anti-racism “work” to mete out its vision for a liberated humanity.  

“Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch’intrate.” There is no corner of the academy and no part of any cultural, political, or social institution that will be spared...

There is ho Heaven with CRT.  It offers no solutions.  Only a steady descent into concentric racialized circles of deconstruction.

[wildcat09 29355]

22 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

There has never been a better time or place for upward mobility.  The model has been proven by people of ALL shades on the pantone scale for multiple decades now.  The conditions of discrimination has never been lower.   

I ask from page 1 to page 15 what examples anyone can show of a person today of real, substantial, and targeted discrimination today - and all I get back is 400 years of this and 400 years of that (and somehow thats a strawman construct of MINE!).  What can you/me/uncle sam do do to "ameliorate the harm"?  Haven't heard a goddamn thing yet.  Just same old regurgitative victim/savior complex.  Very productive. 

The actual statistics on upward mobility beg to differ.

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

24 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

There has never been a better time or place for upward mobility.  The model has been proven by people of ALL shades on the pantone scale for multiple decades now.  The conditions of discrimination has never been lower.   

I ask from page 1 to page 15 what examples anyone can show of a person today of real, substantial, and targeted discrimination today - and all I get back is 400 years of this and 400 years of that (and somehow thats a strawman construct of MINE!).  What can you/me/uncle sam do do to "ameliorate the harm"?  Haven't heard a goddamn thing yet.  Just same old regurgitative victim/savior complex.  Very productive. 

The BLM movement comes from the recent discrimination from law enforcement. If you can't accept these types of acts as systematic discrimination then you are intentionally obtuse. 

[Brisketexan 105161]

26 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

What can you/me/uncle sam do do to "ameliorate the harm"? 

I mean.... I posted a list of policies we could support.  Others have posted similar things.

Your refusal to read them, and then go attacking the strawman of "NOBODY OFFERS ANY SOLUTIONS!", is on you.

[Nicole44 22068]

40 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Framework is just the model or theory you use to support your research. There's both theoretical framework and conceptual framework. (I don't bother with conceptual because I just don't personally like that form or research.) That's the definition in terms of research and writing.  

Equality - giving everyone the same resources across the board regardless if everyone needs them or not.

Equity - distributing resources based on need and taking into account a person's circumstance so that all persons are equal

I am all for helping the little guy be able to see over that fence.

I just think taking the box away from the tall guy is the WRONG way to do it.

It’s trying to normalize socialism IMO.

I’d rather all three people work together to make sure that all 3 people can all see over the fence.

If the little guy somehow gets another box or two on his own to stand taller than the other two I don’t think those boxes should be removed from him to be passed onto the people standing next to (not pictured) the little guy at the fence. 
 

Again, JMO. I am all for everyone being able to see over the fence. Equity would be great if it can be achieved. If some people have floating boxes or box seats to see over that fence those things don’t  need to be taken away from that person in order for everyone to see over the fence. 
 

You can find ways to help everyone see over the fence without taking indiscriminately from others. 

To borrow from the definition of equity quoted above:

Socialism: taking resources away from others indiscriminately without taking into account a person's circumstance so that all persons are “perceived” equal. With the unsaid result of making it so no one can rise higher above anyone else. 
 

That’s my take on it. Flawed though it may be. Y’all have my support in working on any solution or solutions to getting us to equity as long as you aren’t taking away from others indiscriminately in order to do so. 

[Horn of Gabriel 1643]

51 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Equity - distributing resources based on need and taking into account a person's circumstance so that all persons are equal

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" is a slogan popularized by Karl Marx in his 1875 Critique of the Gotha Program.

Nope, not Marxist at all.

[Pancho 44860]

5 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

I am all for helping the little guy be able to see over that fence.

I just think taking the box away from the tall guy is the WRONG way to do it.

It’s trying to normalize socialism IMO.

I’d rather all three people work together to make sure that all 3 people can all see over the fence.

If the little guy somehow gets another box or two on his own to stand taller than the other two I don’t think those boxes should be removed from him to be passed onto the people standing next to (not pictured) the little guy at the fence. 
 

Again, JMO. I am all for everyone being able to see over the fence. Equity would be great if it can be achieved. If some people have floating boxes or box seats to see over that fence those things don’t  need to be taken away from that person in order for everyone to see over the fence. 
 

You can find ways to help everyone see over the fence without taking indiscriminately from others. 

To borrow from the definition of equity quoted above:

Socialism: taking resources away from others indiscriminately without taking into account a person's circumstance so that all persons are “perceived” equal. With the unsaid result of making it so no one can rise higher above anyone else. 
 

That’s my take on it. Flawed though it may be. Y’all have my support in working on any solution or solutions to getting us to equity as long as you aren’t taking away from others indiscriminately in order to do so. 

I don't know that you can deduce the box was forcefully taken away from the tallest guy or if he willingly gave it up because he knew someone else couldn't see. I wouldn't make that assumption. 

[Nicole44 22068]

1 minute ago, Pancho said:

I don't know that you can deduce the box was forcefully taken away from the tallest guy or if he willingly gave it up because he knew someone else couldn't see. I wouldn't make that assumption. 

I don’t think you meant it in that way. I’m cool with the big guy giving the little guy a box. I am not okay with box being taken away from big guy. That’s all I meant. I’ve seen that example be used before so that’s why I made the comments I did. And we all talked about the “box.” It brought up some great discussions btw bc visuals are the most powerful educational tool. I learn better with visuals. My two cents.

[BurntOrange&White 39934]

I hate that America is nothing but victimhood now. 

Edited May 24, 2021 by BurntOrange&White

[Dahobbs 17625]

43 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

So then just fully admit you are in favor of an ideology born from Marxist critical theory and conveniently applied to race.  An all-encompassing vision that views all cultural, political, and social institutions as oppressive and requires explicit and continuous anti-racism “work” to mete out its vision for a liberated humanity.  

“Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch’intrate.” There is no corner of the academy and no part of any cultural, political, or social institution that will be spared...

There is ho Heaven with CRT.  It offers no solutions.  Only a steady descent into concentric racialized circles of deconstruction.

 

13 minutes ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" is a slogan popularized by Karl Marx in his 1875 Critique of the Gotha Program.

Nope, not Marxist at all.

If you're going to generalize everything, then I think it is fair to say Marxism is also really Jesusism. So, really, y'all demonize Jesus and teachings. 

[BabaYaga 15302]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

 

If you're going to generalize everything, then I think it is fair to say Marxism is also really Jesusism. So, really, y'all demonize Jesus and teachings. 

Right on queue....like I said:  Only a steady descent into concentric racialized circles of deconstruction.

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

Pardon my ignorance, but what is this connection between Marxism and CRT? When trying to find something to understand the correlation, all I get are articles on how to fight back against CRT from opinion blogs. 

[Dahobbs 17625]

Just now, BabaYaga said:

Right on queue....like I said:  Only a steady descent into concentric racialized circles of deconstruction.

Oh good, more faux-intellectual nonsense from the Russian grandmother.