Man, for something that doesn’t exist and no one teaches, they sure seem to hate the parents who oppose it:

 

Trumplicans talk about CRT because they have nothing else to offer the American people. 

 

How long before it's reported on False(Fox) News and becomes talking points on the Extremist, Radical Right. 

Surprise surprise 

Memo Confirms National School Board Group ‘Actively Engaged’ with White House While Drafting ‘Domestic Terrorists’ Letter

He is great at marketing and selling books.  I'll give him that (Shellenberger)...

Personally, I think it is good to be critical of all races, creeds and religions.

Starting with your own. Take your time. Be thorough.

 

10 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

 

Yes, please double, no, triple down on the stupidity.  

On 11/11/2021 at 5:45 PM, Toastrel said:

Personally, I think it is good to be critical of all races, creeds and religions.

Starting with your own. Take your time. Be thorough.

After a thorough review, us white people are pretty Fing awesome!

 

well, this thread took a completely expected turn! 

 

 

35 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

 

He's definitely getting a "threat tag" from the justice department...right?  Or does that only work for white parents?

7 hours ago, TEW said:

After a thorough review, us white people are pretty Fing awesome!

 

With a SMIDGE of Diversity too :

and dancing robots even:

 

Just wait until they unleash Critical Face Theory! 😮

8 hours ago, Ipiggles said:

 

I couldn't help but notice he was the only one who showed up.

15 hours ago, TEW said:

After a thorough review, us white people are pretty Fing awesome!

 

You might want to talk to your doctor about adjusting your dosage.

 

 

On 11/16/2021 at 2:42 PM, TEW said:

After a thorough review, us white people are pretty Fing awesome!

 

There should be a parade celebrating White People. 

 

Tricky topic (i.e. I'm not supportive of the bill) but no one cried "authoritarianism" during the last 50+ years when this below was in effect.

Quote

The bill updates a piece of Cold War-era law that bans educators from advocating for communism in schools, and adds additional bans on advocating for socialism and Marxism.

 

Just like news, education is always angled/tilted toward a narrative of sorts.  There is no such thing as completely objective news and there is no such thing as completely objective teaching of history.  There is always a significant amount of subjectivity involved.

8 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

Tricky topic (i.e. I'm not supportive of the bill) but no one cried "authoritarianism" during the last 50+ years when this below was in effect.

 

Just like news, education is always angled/tilted toward a narrative of sorts.  There is no such thing as completely objective news and there is no such thing as completely objective teaching of history.  There is always a significant amount of subjectivity involved.

Especially when you have tools like Moss and Munson polluting minds

10 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

Tricky topic (i.e. I'm not supportive of the bill) but no one cried "authoritarianism" during the last 50+ years when this below was in effect.

 

Haven't checked out the link yet, as I am admittedly lacking intellectual energy on a Saturday night, but my initial thoughts on the law you mention here are that, while obviously a vestige of Red Scare hysteria, it squares pretty neatly with my general understanding of how states organize and regulate public education from at an individual, instructional level. At least in PA, educators are acutely aware of being barred from making overtly political statements or otherwise advocating for particular candidates in the classroom. I've always assumed this to be written into law, and it is not much different from a variety of other legally binding provisions barring government employees of any kind at the state and federal levels from engaging in politicking while on the job. This law seems to simply target specific ideologies that were considered particularly insidious and subversive at the time, and perhaps for good reason, as there were undoubtedly many spies and double agents beholden to Communist states working to weaken American institutions in order to increase the power and influence of internationalist authoritarianism. Ultimately, however, these laws could be reasonably argued to not violate freedom of speech as they did not ban teaching about these political movements but promoting them. Of course, one could perceive a slippery slope in which merely informative statements made in the classroom could be seized upon by zealous conservatives as something akin to campaigning for them.

Personally, I feel that, whether it's socialism, communism, or modern-day CRT and wokeism, attempts to litigate what can and cannot be said in the classroom at a categorical level does more harm than good as means of rooting out truly anti-American principles. Like pretty much anything else, prohibition of something tends to draw interest and breath life into it as taboo topics seem more intriguing and tempting to young, ignorant minds yearning for an identity and purpose that makes them stand out from the crowd, especially for those with a thirst for social clout and political power. It also has the self-defeating effect of making a democratic state seem authoritarian itself. I mean, even the title of the, with it's promotion of "Teacher Loyalty," sounds like some kind of sedition provision that you'd expect in a dystopian society, not one founded on liberal democracy. It's generally best to let all ideas, even bad ones, flow freely and be subject to public scrutiny with the belief that our democratic principles are rooted deeply enough in conviction that these principles loyalties will prevail among the majority of citizens in a constitutional republic.

 

10 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

Just like news, education is always angled/tilted toward a narrative of sorts.  There is no such thing as completely objective news and there is no such thing as completely objective teaching of history.  There is always a significant amount of subjectivity involved.

100% correct. I wish more people understood this. Any freshman college student studying the social sciences should have this drilled into them in their seminars. I think most professors know this and attempt to disillusion their students to the myth of "objective history," but it's not done enough at the secondary level, while at the post-secondary level, agenda-driven upstarts of the woke variety are more likely to draw a crowd and fill the airwaves in an era driven by social-media popularity contests.

11 hours ago, Dave Moss said:

 

To answer the question, hopefully yes!

 You're not allowed to use tax dollars to brainwash children any more.

1 hour ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

100% correct. I wish more people understood this. Any freshman college student studying the social sciences should have this drilled into them in their seminars. I think most professors know this and attempt to disillusion their students to the myth of "objective history," but it's not done enough at the secondary level, while at the post-secondary level, agenda-driven upstarts of the woke variety are more likely to draw a crowd and fill the airwaves in an era driven by social-media popularity contests.

This is why college kids need to spend less time in text books and more time in primary sources.

But that doesn't fit the age. Why read the actual people you're talking about, in their own words, when you can read someone else's bullsh** condensed and filtered opinion of what they said?