Critical Race Theory policy in hiring at UT

[Bruno Sardine 147]

23 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

So,  this qoute is doing an enormous amount of work for a topic that literally still dominates our discourse today.  
 

What version are the students going to get?  That John Brown was seen as a martyr and hero at the time of his death and during the war by Union troops? Or the one where he was a deranged terrorist?
 

The real version of the Civil War that clearly teaches the lead up to and the war itself were all about slavery.   Or the Dunning school version that makes it about states rights and Gentle Bob Lee (are we going to get to learn about the man’s horse as well?).  Will it teach that Lee, while a solid general also made multiple tactical and strategic errors and quietly sat by as Jubal Early threw Longstreet under the bus and allowed his deification to begin?

Are we even going to learn about the rehistory of the war that made martyrs out of the south and its leaders.  A rehistory that justified all manner of future laws and policies?
 

Critical Race Theory is many things, but at its core it’s teaching history as it was, not the way the dominant race wants/wanted it to be.

I very much appreciate that, but it's like we're living in different countries. I think most teachers teach it the way you think they should teach it. Did you have a different experience? I attended DISD, and that's how all that stuff was taught to me. Or rather, both versions were presented. We had debates about stuff like that in American History class. I don't believe there's some giant white-washing of history going on in our public schools. Both my children are recent graduates of public schools. But as I say, your experience may have been very different from mine. 

[Bruno Sardine 147]

26 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

I also find your intense interest in North Africa to be curious since much racist ink has been spilt differentiating between lighter skinned North Africans and dark skinned West and Subsaharan Africans. 

Exactly!!! My point exactly, Bateshorn! And what does any of that have to do with CRT? What light does CRT shed on that history? 

[Neonmoon 38127]

1 hour ago, Bruno Sardine said:

Too much verbal diarrhea to copy all that. You are the Mr. Phlegm of the Cloak Room. 

“More common sense ignored by Troll.” No, the alleged troll, at whom you’re angry because you perceive that I pissed in your Cheerios by questioning the merits of a theory you’re working hard to champion here, didn’t ignore that at all. He doubled down on it and challenged someone to show how the experience of blacks in North Africa and the Middle East lends itself to CRT analysis. And no one, so far, has offered a rebuttal. They simply claimed that it could be done. The fact that you’re ignorant, and don’t think blacks experience racism in that part of the world in many of the same ways they experience it here, is an irrelevant side note except insofar as it highlights my initial observation that some of you are extremely provincial in your outlook 

 

https://www.media-diversity.org/egyptian-media-a-catalyst-for-racism-against-nubians/
 

https://peacefulsocieties.uncg.edu/2018/05/03/egyptian-discrimination-against-the-nubians/

https://www.pbs.org/wonders/Episodes/Epi1/1_retel1.htm

https://egyptianstreets.com/2020/06/25/the-complex-history-of-racism-in-egypt/

https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2013/7/19/black-egyptians-decry-daily-racism

All the above links discuss various angles with racism in Egypt, mostly against darker skinned Nubians and immigrant Sudanese and Eritrea. Obviously there are different reasons for why certain institutions were against blacks, from natives to immigrants, the articles discuss the European influence and other things. Feel free to read them and provide your own insights. Also, please feel free to provide any information other than your opinion that racism doesn’t exist in Muslim countries or refutes the above articles. 
 

h

Edited June 13, 2021 by Neonmoon

[Bateshorn 9898]

You’re a fool. And possibly a racist. There aren’t versions of the Civil Wat to teach.  There’s just the huge war about slavery and all the ways it continues to corrupt and debase our society over 150 years later. And then there’s a bunch of bullshit  the losers would rather you talked about to distract from this truth.

The War of States Rights and the Dunning School were SOP at Westlake in the 1980s. I mean, holy fuck, Ken Burns Civil War basically spouts that shit. And that’s the version everyone over 35 learned in this country. 
 

I’m not going to throw anymore food under this particular bridge. 

Edited June 13, 2021 by Bateshorn

[Bruno Sardine 147]

24 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I might be overstepping things here, but I don't think CRT presupposes all examples of racism in society are institutional in their derivation.  I think it argues that racism is "normal, common", and that if we examine how a society has evolved over time, we can better identify those aspects of racism that are baked in and which lead to continuing minority oppression.  Recognizing policy and law that originate in racial divide helps us figure out how to right those wrongs.  

I thought they were "baked in" via institutions. I though the concept of "systemic racism" was central to CRT.  So, systems. Institutions. Organs of the state. School systems. Legal systems. But I see what you mean in your first sentence, and tried to make that same point myself. The institutional aspect derives from something deeper. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

Tell me about the "something deeper", Bruno, it will be very helpful to know what your thinking is there.

[wildcat09 29237]

God I can't wait for the calipers. Let's skip to the good shit.

[Bruno Sardine 147]

31 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

32 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

It's hilarious how clever they think they are.

 

You are an obtuse person. You look around you, you don't see me anywhere on your political spectrum. "My God, it's because he's to the right of me! He's one of them! Another racist, fascist Trump supporter!" But I am to the left of you. Way, way out to the left of you. That's why you don't see me. You, in fact, are the centrist. You are the one who is only too happy to perpetuate the status quo. CRT is actually another tool for doing just that. It won't solve anything. To the extent that it has been embraced by elites in America, its purpose is to serve as a safety valve. A way of releasing pressure. The show must go on. It would be bad for business if it didn't.

[Bruno Sardine 147]

24 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Also, please feel free to provide any information other than your opinion that racism doesn’t exist in Muslim countries or refutes the above articles. 

I literally said the exact opposite of that. I said racism exists, but racism runs against the grain of Islam. But thanks for the links. 

[jimmyjazz 45554]

5 minutes ago, Bruno Sardine said:

I literally said the exact opposite of that. I said racism exists, but racism runs against the grain of Islam. But thanks for the links. 

I'm quite confident that your criticism of CRT is not that it is less-than-effective because (your implication) it "doesn't work globally", it's because you don't even think it works here.  In other words, you're trolling.

[Bruno Sardine 147]

26 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

You’re a fool. And possibly a racist. There aren’t versions of the Civil Wat to teach.  There’s just the huge war about slavery and all the ways it continues to corrupt and debase our society over 150 years later. And then there’s a bunch of bullshit  the losers would rather you talked about to distract from this truth.

The War of States Rights and the Dunning School were SOP at Westlake in the 1980s. I mean, holy fuck, Ken Burns Civil War basically spouts that shit. And that’s the version everyone over 35 learned in this country. 
 

I’m not going to throw anymore food under this particular bridge. 

You seem angry. There are most certainly people who disagree with your interpretation of the Civil War, as you well know. I agree with your interpretation. But don't you understand that if you want to gain a better understanding of the Civil War, the best way to do that is to begin with acknowledging the fact that there are differing interpretations? That's standard academic procedure. You discuss the various interpretations, you don't censor them. Then, an honest evaluation based on the facts will lead to the conclusion you desire. That's what happened in the classrooms I was in. 

[Bruno Sardine 147]

22 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Tell me about the "something deeper", Bruno, it will be very helpful to know what your thinking is there.

Look in the mirror.

[jimmyjazz 45554]

1 minute ago, Bruno Sardine said:

You seem angry. There are most certainly people who disagree with your interpretation of the Civil War, as you well know. I agree with your interpretation. But don't you understand that if you want to gain a better understanding of the Civil War, the best way to do that is to begin with acknowledging the fact that there are differing interpretations? That's standard academic procedure. You discuss the various interpretations, you don't censor them. Then, an honest evaluation based on the facts will lead to the conclusion you desire. That's what happened in the classrooms I was in. 

Or, you could read the letters of secession authored by the various Confederate states and get a very clear picture that it was about . . . slavery. 

[Bruno Sardine 147]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm quite confident that your criticism of CRT is not that it is less-than-effective because (your implication) it "doesn't work globally", it's because you don't even think it works here.  In other words, you're trolling.

I mean, maybe I am jimmyjazz. I don't like trolling, and I really don't think I'm doing that. I sincerely believe that CRT fails to capture or address the essence of the problem. But I will cease and desist, having placed my bet: I don't think this movement, this discipline, this science - whatever you want to call it - will succeed in the long run in its objectives.

[Bruno Sardine 147]

9 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Or, you could read the letters of secession authored by the various Confederate states and get a very clear picture that it was about . . . slavery. 

Yes, but there are dumbasses who feel otherwise. Don't you want to equip high school students with the ability to shoot down dumbasses? That's why you discuss all the views, so people become aware, by processing things using their own brains, of the dumbassery that's out there. Then they'll be more proficient at combating it. 

[jimmyjazz 45554]

Just now, Bruno Sardine said:

Yes, but there are dumbasses who feel otherwise. Don't you want to equip high school students with the ability to shoot down dumbasses? That's why you discuss all the views, so people become aware, by processing things using their own brains, of the dumbassery that's out there. Then they'll be more proficient at combating it. 

No, you point out that dumbasses think it was about states' rights, and you pull out the letters of secession, and you prove that assertion wrong.  Takes about one hour.  It doesn't require your squishy attempt to assess all viewpoints "fairly" or whatever it is you want to call it.

[wildcat09 29237]

20 minutes ago, Bruno Sardine said:

Yes, but there are dumbasses who feel otherwise. Don't you want to equip high school students with the ability to shoot down dumbasses? That's why you discuss all the views, so people become aware, by processing things using their own brains, of the dumbassery that's out there. Then they'll be more proficient at combating it. 

*Says "discuss all the views!"*

*Bans teaching critical race theory*

The aristocrats!

[bad_teammate 13132]

44 minutes ago, Bruno Sardine said:

You are an obtuse person. You look around you, you don't see me anywhere on your political spectrum. "My God, it's because he's to the right of me! He's one of them! Another racist, fascist Trump supporter!" But I am to the left of you. Way, way out to the left of you. That's why you don't see me. You, in fact, are the centrist. You are the one who is only too happy to perpetuate the status quo. CRT is actually another tool for doing just that. It won't solve anything. To the extent that it has been embraced by elites in America, its purpose is to serve as a safety valve. A way of releasing pressure. The show must go on. It would be bad for business if it didn't.

Hell yeah do you feel that thinking about race distracts us from focusing on class?

33 minutes ago, Bruno Sardine said:

Look in the mirror.

ok I did now what?

19 minutes ago, Bruno Sardine said:

Yes, but there are dumbasses who feel otherwise. Don't you want to equip high school students with the ability to shoot down dumbasses? That's why you discuss all the views, so people become aware, by processing things using their own brains, of the dumbassery that's out there. Then they'll be more proficient at combating it. 

The purpose of learning history shouldn't be figuring out all the wrong things so you can have cool arguments but to learn the most accurate and reasonable information given available evidence.

[bad_teammate 13132]

2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

*Says "discuss all the views!"*

*Bans teaching critical race theory*

The aristocrats!

That's not Bruno, dude, that's Republicans.

Bruno is a fucking back-to-the-soil anarcho-Communist.

[wildcat09 29237]

When do we get to talk about the heritability of IQ?

[Bruno Sardine 147]

24 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

No, you point out that dumbasses think it was about states' rights, and you pull out the letters of secession, and you prove that assertion wrong.  Takes about one hour.  It doesn't require your squishy attempt to assess all viewpoints "fairly" or whatever it is you want to call it.

I actually agree with that. Sorry I didn't phrase it better. 

[Bruno Sardine 147]

5 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

*Says "discuss all the views!"*

*Bans teaching critical race theory*

The aristocrats!

I didn't say to ban critical race theory. I didn't say that all all. You're not even attempting to be serious. Just poo flinging. 

[Bruno Sardine 147]

"ok I did now what?" 

Now you live with it. 

 

[bad_teammate 13132]

16 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

When do we get to talk about the heritability of IQ?

No shit, I'm fucking bored with these pages upon pages of oh-so-clever lead in.

6 minutes ago, Bruno Sardine said:

"ok I did now what?" 

Now you live with it. 

I do, it's very easy and cool 

But back to what I was asking.

You said: "The institutional aspect derives from something deeper."

You might not be able to perfectly name the "something deeper", but surely you can point us in the direction you're thinking.

Edited June 13, 2021 by bad_teammate

[Bruno Sardine 147]

12 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

When do we get to talk about the heritability of IQ?

I assume you're a person of good faith, and don't take any of the comments here too seriously, since it's not face and face and people are speaking anonymously.  I never said or even implied that intelligence varied by race. 

[jimmyjazz 45554]

9 minutes ago, Bruno Sardine said:

I never said or even implied that intelligence varied by race. 

Do you reject the idea that intelligence varies by race?

[Neonmoon 38127]

1 hour ago, Bruno Sardine said:

I literally said the exact opposite of that. I said racism exists, but racism runs against the grain of Islam. But thanks for the links. 

If racism runs “against the grain of Islam”

why is it a fundamental part of their worldview 

https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2013/7/19/black-egyptians-decry-daily-racism

Quote

Racism faced by black Africans can also be found in politics, he added. When meeting with their Egyptian counterparts, black African embassy officials are often “told that being black, they have to keep a distance”.

‘Egyptians are not African’ 

 

Since…

Critical race theory seeks to critically examine the law as it intersects with issues of race and to challenge mainstream liberal approaches to racial justice. Critical race theory examines social, cultural and legal issues as they relate to race and racism. Both critical race theory and critical legal studies are rooted in critical theory, which argues that social problems are influenced and created more by societal structures and cultural assumptions than by individual and psychological factors.

So I ask you, how could CRT not be used to study the issues of race in Egypt?

[Bruno Sardine 147]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

No shit, I'm fucking bored with these pages upon pages of oh-so-clever lead in.

I do, it's very easy and cool 

But back to what I was asking.

You said: "The institutional aspect derives from something deeper."

You might not be able to perfectly name the "something deeper", but surely you can point us in the direction you're thinking.

You're right. Too much lead-in. My bad. I apologize for that. I truly do. 

By all means, attempt to improve things via CRT. I support the objectives. I don't think it'll work, but I support the objectives. By deeper, I mean that racism is an expression of human nature. You're not going to solve the problems which you quite admirably desire to solve unless you change people's hearts. CRT is flawed in the sense it cannot be successfully applied to broad swaths of the planet (an assertion with which I realize some of you disagree). And it is flawed in the sense that it will not change people's hearts. There are quack historians who assert falsely that the successes of the Civil Rights Movement of the 60s’ were anything other than the result of convincing American voters that the goals of the Civil Rights Movement were fundamentally noble, peaceful, and spiritually beautiful. If we want to continue to advance racial justice,  we'll need a movement that replicates that. Something which appeals to and resonate with people the world over. (Maybe BLM will evolve into such a movement.) Something everyone everywhere will hail for its beauty, profundity and brilliance. Then you might actually have something. An idea that could change people’s hearts. I don't think CRT fits that bill. 

[Bruno Sardine 147]

9 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Do you reject the idea that intelligence varies by race?

I do. 

[Bruno Sardine 147]

5 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

If racism runs “against the grain of Islam”

why is it a fundamental part of their worldview 

 

It does run against the grain of Islam. But not everyone who identifies as Muslim is true to the faith. You sound like an Islamophobe.

[jimmyjazz 45554]

6 minutes ago, Bruno Sardine said:

By all means, attempt to improve things via CRT. I support the objectives. I don't think it'll work, but I support the objectives. By deeper, I mean that racism is an expression of human nature. You're not going to solve the problems which you quite admirably desire to solve unless you change people's hearts.

That's horseshit.  There is nothing wrong with putting in place law and policy which contradict human nature.  The idea of protected class stands as testament.  It is illegal for a public accommodation to discriminate on the basis of race, gender, religion, age, etc.  It's not illegal to be a bigot or a misogynist . . . it's illegal to act on those characteristics in a discriminatory manner.

Your argument that because CRT doesn't solve racism it has no value is fundamentally unAmerican.  Furthermore, your point of view delays improvement, which is disgusting.

[bad_teammate 13132]

27 minutes ago, Bruno Sardine said:

By deeper, I mean that racism is an expression of human nature. You're not going to solve the problems which you quite admirably desire to solve unless you change people's hearts.

Studying race critically and changing people's hearts are not mutually contradictory. In fact, the very civil rights movement you lionize now was demonized by the right-wing and jUsT aSkInG qUeStIoNs types in their day.

White Americans hated MLK. At the time of his deaths, he was extremely unpopular and a massive minority of people said he brought his assassination on himself.

[Bruno Sardine 147]

14 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

That's horseshit.  There is nothing wrong with putting in place law and policy which contradict human nature.  The idea of protected class stands as testament.  It is illegal for a public accommodation to discriminate on the basis of race, gender, religion, age, etc.  It's not illegal to be a bigot or a misogynist . . . it's illegal to act on those characteristics in a discriminatory manner.

Your argument that because CRT doesn't solve racism it has no value is fundamentally unAmerican.  Furthermore, your point of view delays improvement, which is disgusting.

That's just way overboard. And off topic. I'm all in favor of putting in place laws and polices that address systemic racism, including affirmative action. I never said I was against putting CRT in place. I said I didn't think it would have the desired effect. Now you're the one who is trolling. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

What does it mean to "put CRT in place"?

[Bruno Sardine 147]

"Studying race critically and changing people's hearts are not mutually contradictory."

No, they are not. Agreed. As I say, I am ceasing and desisting. Or trying to.  If there were some way to place a wager on this, some way to establish commonly agreed upon parameters, I would happily place a bet with you as to how this all turns out. Although its goals may be admirable, I'm betting CRT is destined for the dustbin of history. 

[Neonmoon 38127]

35 minutes ago, Bruno Sardine said:

It does run against the grain of Islam. But not everyone who identifies as Muslim is true to the faith. You sound like an Islamophobe.

Instead of addressing how CRT can’t be used to study racism in Egypt, you call me an Islamophobe.
 

Good talk 

[Bruno Sardine 147]

6 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

What does it mean to "put CRT in place"?

Not really sure. Just responding to another poster, who put things in such a way to indicate that he viewed CRT as a form of "law" and/or "policy." 

[Bruno Sardine 147]

11 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Instead of addressing how CRT can’t be used to study racism in Egypt, you call me an Islamophobe.
 

Good talk 

You're the person who displayed ignorance about the world's second largest religion, asserting, falsely, that racism is fundamental to Islam. So yeah, if the shoe fits...

And I never said it couldn't be used. I said you could try to apply it, but it would yield incoherent results. And furthermore, I explained why. Because the focus of CRT, as I understand it, is legal, institutional. And legally, institutionally, Egypt is fundamentally shaped by Islam, the scriptural tenets of which preclude racism. 

Edited June 13, 2021 by Bruno Sardine

[jimmyjazz 45554]

12 minutes ago, Bruno Sardine said:

Not really sure. Just responding to another poster, who put things in such a way to indicate that he viewed CRT as a form of "law" and/or "policy." 

Well, that's a fucking lie.  I didn't say anything of the sort.  My point is that there is value in exploring how racism is baked into current policy and law so that we can correct those flaws.  If CRT gets us there, great.  I've been abundantly clear that CRT is a tool, and nothing like "law".

The problem is that the American right does not see inherently racist law and policy as flaws.

[Neonmoon 38127]

Excuse me. Racism isn’t fundamental to Islam’s worldview. Correct. But if Egypt is over 90% Muslim and there are definitely racism issues in Egypt. How does CRT not help examine why that exists? 

[Bruno Sardine 147]

You wrote, in reference to CRT, "There is nothing wrong with putting in place law and policy which contradict human nature."

Are there two jimmyjazzes here or something? 

[jimmyjazz 45554]

Just now, Bruno Sardine said:

You wrote, in reference to CRT, "There is nothing wrong with putting in place law and policy which contradict human nature."

Are there two jimmyjazzes here or something? 

Alright, I'm done.  I didn't say CRT was "law" or "policy".  I was rebutting your idea that could be summarized as "CRT will not let us solve the root problem, which is racism, therefore CRT is not worth the effort."

Have a great week, and congrats on the successful fishing expedition.  Fuck off.

[Bruno Sardine 147]

5 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Excuse me. Racism isn’t fundamental to Islam’s worldview. Correct. But if Egypt is over 90% Muslim and there are definitely racism issues in Egypt. How does CRT not help examine why that exists? 

Because racism is not the result of a complex system of policies enacted over a protracted period of time by the government of Egypt to discriminate against blacks. That's why CRT would be of limited utility there.  How is that in the least bit controversial and why would anyone take exception to that?

[bad_teammate 13132]

45 minutes ago, Bruno Sardine said:

Not really sure.

Yeah this is a big problem with most of your posting. Stop saying shit you don't even understand.

[Bruno Sardine 147]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Yeah this is a big problem with most of your posting. Stop saying shit you don't even understand.

And that's fair. Though I doubt I'm particularly unique in this respect. Ceasing and desisting. 

[Bullneck 18987]

On 5/19/2021 at 4:18 PM, PHLaggie said:

Let's see if I can actually post a live link to the youtube video I'm hoping you'll watch and then share your thoughts on! hah

 

 

Fuck you and fuck this doughy blogger dudea

 

[Bullneck 18987]

1 hour ago, Bruno Sardine said:

You're the person who displayed ignorance about the world's second largest religion, asserting, falsely, that racism is fundamental to Islam. So yeah, if the shoe fits...

And I never said it couldn't be used. I said you could try to apply it, but it would yield incoherent results. And furthermore, I explained why. Because the focus of CRT, as I understand it, is legal, institutional. And legally, institutionally, Egypt is fundamentally shaped by Islam, the scriptural tenets of which preclude racism. 

What are we talking about Egypt now? I thought this thread was about UT Austin. Negging you when I get to my computer.

[Neonmoon 38127]

54 minutes ago, Bruno Sardine said:

Because racism is not the result of a complex system of policies enacted over a protracted period of time by the government of Egypt to discriminate against blacks. That's why CRT would be of limited utility there.  How is that in the least bit controversial and why would anyone take exception to that?

You are projecting your own definition of what CRT stands for, specifically "system of policies enacted over a protracted period of time by the government of Egypt to discriminate against blacks" and disqualifying CRT because it doesn't support your own definition. That is the disconnect. 

[jimmyjazz 45554]

"Jesus taught us to love one another as we love ourselves; therefore, Christians can't be racists".

[Hanrahan 1306]

This thing has all the hallmarks of a concept that is helpful and beneficial as described by scholars but will instantly be dumbed down, misinterpreted and misapplied, furthering the dumbass screeching from both sides. Seems like we’re already past that point.