Critical Race Theory policy in hiring at UT

[Johnny Sack 8397]

3 hours ago, Pancho said:

It really is something to see radical republicans who basically want to brainwash and indoctrinize future generations into believing slavery never existed and that everything was hunky dory from Day 1 in 1776 as that's the 1st day of America and everyone regardless or race, gender, or class lived in big mansions with lots of flowers, rainbows, and they all ate dinner together every 3rd thursday!

That is a straw man.

[Catdaddyhorn 3447]

34 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

That is a straw man.

@52-80 Keeps harkening back to 400 years in nearly every post he's made on this thread as though nothing else has happened since then

[UncleSonny 6573]

33 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

That is a straw man.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/17/us/politics/trump-patriotic-education.html

Quote

“Nothing could be further from the truth,” Mr. Trump continued, saying that the United States’ founding “set in motion the unstoppable chain of events that abolished slavery, secured civil rights, defeated communism and fascism, and built the most fair, equal and prosperous nation in human history.”

Quote

He said the commission would promote a “patriotic education” and “encourage our educators to teach our children about the miracle of American history and make plans to honor the 250th anniversary of our founding.”

It's not a straw man at all but he probably shouldn't have said "radical" Republicans. Just Republicans works fine.

[Wulaw Horn 19145]

4 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm fully in agreement.  I'm just saying we should start with fixing the inequities in our current system of laws and policies and then work our way backwards in time to address prior behaviors.

What inequity is there in law right now?  I’m not saying things are equal in fact for blacks, but I can’t think of any law that is discriminatory. If there is it obviously ought to be changed. 
This is asked in good faith. If you want to get mad about the question get mad at ignorance not maliciousness. 

Edited May 25, 2021 by Wulaw Horn

[Johnny Sack 8397]

11 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/17/us/politics/trump-patriotic-education.html

It's not a straw man at all but he probably shouldn't have said "radical" Republicans. Just Republicans works fine.

What countries that actually allow a significant amount of blacks to move and live there are more equitable for blacks?

Weird how we don’t have some mass exodus to all these more equitable countries.   

Edited May 26, 2021 by Johnny Sack

[UncleSonny 6573]

5 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

What countries that actually allow a significant amount of blacks to move and live there are more equitable for blacks?

Weird how we don’t have some mass exodus to all these more equitable countries.   

I guess we can talk about that if you want to but that has fuck-all to do with what you called a strawman or my response. Mind closing the loop on what was actually being discussed or are you content just slinging shit against the wall in every direction? 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 minute ago, UncleSonny said:

I guess we can talk about that if you want to but that has fuck-all to do with what you called a strawman or my response. Mind closing the loop on what was actually being discussed or are you content just slinging shit against the wall in every direction? 

I disagreed with your response.  And responded why.  You haven’t said what in my response you disagree with. 
 

America is a great country.  For racial equality and for opportunity. Compared to others.  The others that actually have diversity.  Not Norway that might allow a black with a phd to immigrate.  Maybe. 

[Pancho 44903]

25 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/17/us/politics/trump-patriotic-education.html

It's not a straw man at all but he probably shouldn't have said "radical" Republicans. Just Republicans works fine.

Today’s Republican Party is radical so it was the correct and appropriate adjective. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

6 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Today’s Republican Party is radical so it was the correct and appropriate adjective. 

That is textbook gas lighting.  The democrat party has shifted so much further from the center of 30 years ago than the GOP has.  
 

[elguapo 4586]

6 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

That is textbook gas lighting.  The democrat party has shifted so much further from the center of 30 years ago than the GOP has.  
 

[Captainant 27713]

21 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

That is a straw man.

15 red state legislatures are currently working on legislation to CANCEL(!!!) the teaching of CRT or any topics that cover "divisive topics". Literally outlawing any version of history that covers our nations actions when we were a less perfect union. 

[UncleSonny 6573]

12 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I disagreed with your response.  And responded why.  You haven’t said what in my response you disagree with. 
 

America is a great country.  For racial equality and for opportunity. Compared to others.  The others that actually have diversity.  Not Norway that might allow a black with a phd to immigrate.  Maybe. 

I disagree with your response because a thread about teaching CRT in schools, when the R alternative seems to be to gloss over our history with race and its impact in favor of a “patriotic education” curriculum, bringing up the fact that Norway may not allow the same number of POC to immigrate there now isn’t a relevant or good argument. In fact it’s pretty dumb and beside the point. 

I really don’t care about if we are a good or great country relative to other countries. Some things are wrong no matter if other people also do the the wrong thing worse. 
 

27 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Today’s Republican Party is radical so it was the correct and appropriate adjective. 

Yeah, if you’re not in to the whole brevity thing. 

[wildcat09 29361]

1 hour ago, Wulaw Horn said:

What inequity is there in law right now?  I’m not saying things are equal in fact for blacks, but I can’t think of any law that is discriminatory. If there is it obviously ought to be changed. 
This is asked in good faith. If you want to get mad about the question get mad at ignorance not maliciousness. 

Black people are awarded less in damage awards specifically because they’re black.

[fattyflattie 4638]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

specifically because they’re black.

Specifically because they are black?  

[F250 28806]

1 hour ago, Wulaw Horn said:

What inequity is there in law right now?  I’m not saying things are equal in fact for blacks, but I can’t think of any law that is discriminatory. If there is it obviously ought to be changed. 
This is asked in good faith. If you want to get mad about the question get mad at ignorance not maliciousness. 

Qualified immunity.

[Wulaw Horn 19145]

6 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Black people are awarded less in damage awards specifically because they’re black.

You talking about court harm where the jury does a whole based upon actuarial tables this  life is worth x?  Or you talking about racial bias leading to lower awards?  
mid the second that’s not law (which was my ask). If the first how do you fix that?  

[Johnny Sack 8397]

5 minutes ago, F250 said:

Qualified immunity.

How is it discriminatory?

[Wulaw Horn 19145]

6 minutes ago, F250 said:

Qualified immunity.

How so?  What does that mean in this context?  

[jimmyjazz 46006]

7 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Specifically because they are black?  

Well, most legal scholars think it's related to an abundance of fast-twitch muscle fibers, but . . .

[UncleSonny 6573]

1 hour ago, Wulaw Horn said:

What inequity is there in law right now?  I’m not saying things are equal in fact for blacks, but I can’t think of any law that is discriminatory. If there is it obviously ought to be changed. 
This is asked in good faith. If you want to get mad about the question get mad at ignorance not maliciousness. 

Mandatory minimum sentencing. 

[F250 28806]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

How is it discriminatory?

[jimmyjazz 46006]

1 minute ago, Wulaw Horn said:

You talking about court harm where the jury does a whole based upon actuarial tables this  life is worth x?  Or you talking about racial bias leading to lower awards?  
mid the second that’s not law (which was my ask). If the first how do you fix that?  

I didn't carve out law as the only inequality.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

51 minutes ago, elguapo said:

That’s a good response.  You got me.  And proved the GOP has moved more from the center 30 years ago than the Democrats.  

[FOXHOUND 1034]

1 hour ago, Wulaw Horn said:

What inequity is there in law right now?  I’m not saying things are equal in fact for blacks, but I can’t think of any law that is discriminatory. If there is it obviously ought to be changed. 
This is asked in good faith. If you want to get mad about the question get mad at ignorance not maliciousness. 

Voter ID laws, AKA the "Too many blacks are voting" laws

[F250 28806]

1 minute ago, Wulaw Horn said:

How so?  What does that mean in this context?  

Don't be dense. You asked a stupid question you damn well knew the answer to but were already ready to reject any answer to the question.

 

[F250 28806]

Just now, FOXHOUND said:

Voter ID laws, AKA the "Too many blacks are voting" laws

But does it "specifically" say this is targeted at blacks? lulz

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 minute ago, UncleSonny said:

Mandatory minimum sentencing. 

I clerked for a federal judge. I missed the race component in the sentencing guidelines.  
 

The biggest sentencing disparity, by far, is gender.  Much bigger factor than race.  But it’s against males and in favor of women so no one on the left cares.  

[UncleSonny 6573]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

I clerked for a federal judge. I missed the race component in the sentencing guidelines.  
 

The biggest sentencing disparity, by far, is gender.  Much bigger factor than race.  But it’s against males and in favor of women so no one on the left cares.  

Plus if a black person committed drug offense in the Philippines, he would just be executed! American is a relative utopia!

[Johnny Sack 8397]

6 minutes ago, FOXHOUND said:

Voter ID laws, AKA the "Too many blacks are voting" laws

 

[workswithseed 2109]

15 minutes ago, FOXHOUND said:

Voter ID laws, AKA the "Too many blacks are voting" laws

Are you saying blacks are too dumb to get IDs?

[FOXHOUND 1034]

13 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

 

 

Now post a video that talks about closed polling locations and voter purges, or why Brian Kemp's Seceratary of State office purged 53,000 voter registrations in Georgia in 2018 (70 percent being African American). I find it odd that these tactics always just happens to hit black people more.  

Edited May 26, 2021 by FOXHOUND

[immamac 42882]

and we are moving this shit to cloak room. Holy fuck you guys can't make anything not political. 

[fattyflattie 4638]

20 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Well, most legal scholars think it's related to an abundance of fast-twitch muscle fibers, but . . .

Just crazy we have a law stating that blacks will receive less in settlements than they would otherwise.  Oh wait. Nothing actually states that? 

[elguapo 4586]

20 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

That’s a good response.  You got me.  And proved the GOP has moved more from the center 30 years ago than the Democrats.  

[FOXHOUND 1034]

Just now, immamac said:

and we are moving this shit to cloak room. Holy fuck you guys can't make anything not political. 

This was a political topic from the beginning TBH. 

[elguapo 4586]

3 minutes ago, immamac said:

and we are moving this shit to cloak room. Holy fuck you guys can't make anything not political. 

Imagine thinking that a discussion on CRT in 2021 can be not political 

[David Dennison 18941]

1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

I disagreed with your response.  And responded why.  You haven’t said what in my response you disagree with. 
 

America is a great country.  For racial equality and for opportunity. Compared to others.  The others that actually have diversity.  Not Norway that might allow a black with a phd to immigrate.  Maybe. 

America is also a racist country.

[F250 28806]

The one thing that I have learned from Surly is that lawyers are dumb as fuck.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

On some level, the beef with CRT is it challenges some of the assumptions our society is based on, things like “the law doesn’t see race.”  But what if many of the laws and structures were built by openly racist whites with the preservation of white supremacy in mind?  How do we go about undoing the institutionalized bad policy practices to form a more perfect union?  
 

CRT challenges the established power structure and it’s making whitey nervous.  

Edited May 26, 2021 by Hugo Stiglitz

[TwiceHorn 31516]

18 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

America is also a racist country.

Name one that isn't.

[HornOnTheBayou 8943]

5 hours ago, Pancho said:

It really is something to see radical republicans who basically want to brainwash and indoctrinize future generations into believing slavery never existed and that everything was hunky dory from Day 1 in 1776 as that's the 1st day of America and everyone regardless or race, gender, or class lived in big mansions with lots of flowers, rainbows, and they all ate dinner together every 3rd thursday!

No, no, no. You've got it all wrong. Slavery was bad, but everything was magically solved in 1965. Sure there were a "few" racists in some backwood areas after that, but it all stopped when Obama was elected in 2008. So everything is good now. Nothing to worry about.

[HornOnTheBayou 8943]

2 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

What inequity is there in law right now?  I’m not saying things are equal in fact for blacks, but I can’t think of any law that is discriminatory. If there is it obviously ought to be changed. 
This is asked in good faith. If you want to get mad about the question get mad at ignorance not maliciousness. 

[GW Hayduke 1953]

2 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

What inequity is there in law right now?  I’m not saying things are equal in fact for blacks, but I can’t think of any law that is discriminatory. If there is it obviously ought to be changed. 
This is asked in good faith. If you want to get mad about the question get mad at ignorance not maliciousness. 

The Texas GOP bill currently being pushed that would decrease the number of polling places in areas with a far higher share of nonwhite eligible voters while increasing the number of polling locations in areas with a higher share of white eligible voters.  Those requirements in the bill would only affect urban counties.

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/23/texas-voting-polling-restrictions/

[David Dennison 18941]

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Name one that isn't.

That's irrelevant.

[Satchel 6939]

The creators of CRT acknowledge that it is an offshoot of critical theory and differs from it in that it seeks not only to understand and study the relationship between race, racism and power, but to transform those relationships as well.

I ask. What’s wrong with that?

Black people overrepresented in marijuana-related misdemeanors in Dallas County, SMU study says

The report says that Black people were grossly overrepresented among those who were accused of low-level drug offenses.

https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/crime/black-people-overrepresented-marijuana-misdemeanors-dallas-county-smu-study-texas/287-b4b8e345-1bd2-4a39-91de-b4efcd4c6a30

 

Edited May 26, 2021 by Satchel

[TwiceHorn 31516]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

That's irrelevant.

It's not when all you're trying to do is rustle jimmies.

It exists here, and everywhere else.  Whether it's worse here or not is irrelevant.  It exists, and should be reduced or eradicated.

[Wulaw Horn 19145]

45 minutes ago, F250 said:

Don't be dense. You asked a stupid question you damn well knew the answer to but were already ready to reject any answer to the question.

 

 

52 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I didn't carve out law as the only inequality.

I didn’t say you carved out law as the only inequality. You said law and policy. I get the policy argument I was asking about law. 
In other words, When talking about laws on the books thats de jure discrimination which is how I read someone making an argument against “laws”. That’s not to say there isn’t de facto discrimination- I recognize and acknowledge that thus why I would not ask that question. I would say that fits under “policy” which was why I didn’t ask about that. 

[Wulaw Horn 19145]

50 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:

Plus if a black person committed drug offense in the Philippines, he would just be executed! American is a relative utopia!

See, if I had to guess I would guess minimum sentencing laws would tend to equalize the sentences different races are given and I think that was the rationale for them existing. 
IOW scholarship showed black people were being punished more severely for similar crimes than white people- so a band of punishments was out in place for each crime so that sentencing outcomes would be pre-determined. 
If whites were more likely to get leniency now that leniency is not allowed what’s the argument that minimum sentencing hurts blacks more than whites?  I’m well aware of the arguments against minimum sentencing from a fairness or logical perspective (similar to the arguments against zero tolerance policies at schools as a for example) and would tend to favor that argument as taking away common sense of people we should trust doesn’t seem like a big win. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

7 minutes ago, Satchel said:

The report says that Black people were grossly overrepresented among those who were accused of low-level drug offenses

This is one of the better examples, especially when you investigate how drugs like cannabis and cocaine became illegal.  They did not outlaw these drugs because there was some legitimate threat to public health. 
 

They even changed the name to marijuana in the law because they wanted it to sound more Mexican, as if this drug represented some kind of evil foreign invasion. 

[Wulaw Horn 19145]

32 minutes ago, F250 said:

The one thing that I have learned from Surly is that lawyers are dumb as fuck.

That’s not really what’s going on here. When you go to law school you do lots of shit like parsing words that are actually said- in an attempt to distill the argument being made. People, especially in a message board context, aren’t always super precise with their words (god knows I’m guilty of that all the time on here). If someone wants to have a conversation or discussion a good starting point is- what is that person I’m responding to actually saying. That’s what I was asking.