EnlightenedUFO:
I'll use this article from CNN that perfectly outlines why this topic (which has been on for decades) is always the truth and why many yet ignorant Americans need to study it's racist past. Please keep your right-left divide aside, your apologetic statements and lets look at each points one by one. I'll break it down.

Why even bother?
The anger about CRT is simply what you called it, Faux outrage.

The far right would always look for a boogie man to latch unto. Combine that with a largely uneducated support base then you have all sort of nonsense and jargons to get them riled up. It was 5G yesterday, Bill Gates and Soros the week before. It's CRT today. Lol.

A long read below but very worth it:

Fox News has mentioned “critical race theory” 1,300 times in less than four months. Why? Because critical race theory (CRT) has become a new boogie man for people unwilling to acknowledge our country’s racist history and how it impacts the present.

To understand why CRT has become such a flash point in the culture, it is important to understand what it is and what it is not. Opponents fear that CRT admonishes all white people for being oppressors while classifying all Black people as hopelessly oppressed victims. These fears have spurred school boards and state legislatures from Tennessee to Idaho to ban teachings about racism in classrooms. However, there is a fundamental problem: these narratives about CRT are gross exaggerations of the theoretical framework. The broad brush that is being applied to CRT is puzzling to academics, including some of the scholars who coined and advanced the framework.

CRT does not attribute racism to white people as individuals or even to entire groups of people. Simply put, critical race theory states that U.S. social institutions (e.g., the criminal justice system, education system, labor market, housing market, and healthcare system) are laced with racism embedded in laws, regulations, rules, and procedures that lead to differential outcomes by race. Sociologists and other scholars have long noted that racism can exist without racists. However, many Americans are not able to separate their individual identity as an American from the social institutions that govern us—these people perceive themselves as the system. Consequently, they interpret calling social institutions racist as calling them racist personally. It speaks to how normative racial ideology is to American identity that some people just cannot separate the two. There are also people who may recognize America’s racist past but have bought into the false narrative that the U.S. is now an equitable democracy. They are simply unwilling to remove the blind spot obscuring the fact that America is still not great for everyone.
Scholars and activists who discuss CRT are not arguing that white people living now are to blame for what people did in the past. They are saying that white people living now have a moral responsibility to do something about how racism still impacts all of our lives today. Policies attempting to suffocate this much-needed national conversation are an obstacle to the pursuit of an equitable democracy. Supporters of CRT bans often quote Martin Luther King Jr’s proclamation that individuals should be viewed by the content of their character instead of the color of their skin, ignoring the context of the quote and the true meaning behind it.

To better understand how widespread these efforts are to ban critical race theory from U.S. classrooms, we did an assessment of anti-CRT state legislation. Here’s what we found:

Seven states (Idaho, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Iowa, New Hampshire, and Arizona) have passed legislation.
None of the state bills that have passed even actually mention the words “critical race theory” explicitly, with the exception of Idaho.
The legislations mostly ban the discussion, training, and/or orientation that the U.S. is inherently racist as well as any discussions about conscious and unconscious bias, privilege, discrimination, and oppression. These parameters also extend beyond race to include gender lectures and discussions.
State actors in Montana and South Dakota have denounced teaching concepts associated with CRT. The state school boards in Florida, Georgia, Utah, and Oklahoma introduced new guidelines barring CRT-related discussions. Local school boards in Georgia, North Carolina, Kentucky, and Virginia also criticized CRT.
Nearly 20 additional states have introduced or plan to introduce similar legislation.
You can find a summary of this legislation in the appendix to this post.

The approach of some Republican-led state legislatures is a method for continuing to roll back racial progress regarding everything from voting rights to police reform. This is a horrible idea and does an injustice to our kids. Laws forbidding any teacher or lesson from mentioning race/racism, and even gender/sexism, would put a chilling effect on what educators are willing to discuss in the classroom and provide cover for those who are not comfortable hearing or telling the truth about the history and state of race relations in the United States. Ironically, “making laws outlawing critical race theory confirms the point that racism is embedded in the law,” as sociologist Victor Ray noted.

Some parents are worried about their kids learning things in school that they do not have the capacity to address. As a college professor who does teach CRT as one of the many theoretical frameworks that I bring into the classroom, students are alarmed by how little they have learned about inequality. They are upset at their schools, teachers, and even their parents. So, this is the conundrum: teachers in K-12 schools are not actually teaching CRT. But teachers are trying to respond to students asking them why people are protesting and why Black people are more likely to be killed by the police.

Ultimately, we cannot employ colorblind ideology in a society that is far from colorblind. Everyone sees it, whether they acknowledge it consciously or not. As I wrote in a previous Brookings article on whether the U.S. is a racist country, systemic racism can explain racial disparities in police killings, COVID-19, and the devaluing of homes in Black neighborhoods. If we love America, we should want it to be the best it can be. Rather than run from the issue of racism in America, we should confront it head on. Our kids and country will be better for it.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2021/07/02/why-are-states-banning-critical-race-theory/

DissTroy:


Exactly! You are corroborating my assertion!

Why is why Critical Race Theory is premised on absurd exaggerations. It blames racism (institutional mostly) as the culprit to be hanged for the failings of the black person.
CRT postulates that as a black person you'd be prejudiced at every turned based solely on your skin colour when the reality lays to waste the validity or truism of that assertion.

No it is not based on the premises nor postulate what you claim! And its rather absurd to be claimimg CRT proponents will agree that one is an addict or a thief because of discrimination one experienced due to race. Unless race is the reason one is an addict or a thief of course.

benalvino3:


Its nice you brought up this argument the way you did. Others will be shouting coon, kkk bla bla bla without saying any tangible thing.



In life, there are people who use people, sometimes they do something for you because it benefits them but THAT IS NOT ALWAYS THE CASE. Critical race theory has made it to always be the case which is why I said it's stupid.

Let's say democrats(white) promise minority free cash($300) every month. According to Crt it's racist because this advancement only occurs because it benefits the dominant group. But the same people making this argument will turn around and call Republicans racist for telling the blacks to pull themselves up. At the end if whites do anything for blacks it's racist and if they don't do its racist. No matter what they do its racist.

Now the CRT itself is being pushed by democrats, in their school which is part of the systemic structure CRT says is used to keep black people down. If white teachers are pushing it, the systemic structure put in place are use to push it, is it not the case that critical race theory itself is used to keep the dominant race dominant? Because what you and I are discussing is about

The truth is, no group will ever want to help another in this life if they won't gain anything at the end of the day.

Me I haven't said anything about the CRT because I have not fully grasped it. In short, I have never focused on it.

benalvino3:


I don't think you explained anything to me. My point is if a white man like agbadah, it means he likes Nigerian culture and no one should fault him or call him racist for wanting to wear agbadah. We should be happy our culture attracts others. There are reasons tourists by souvenirs.

Was the problem him liking agbada or that the same agbada used to be a thing of mockery and harassment to minorities who wore it previously.

Everything isn't white or black, many minorities suffer, look at this Hispanics in USA are actually afraid to speak their own language they get threats and shut down now when they start culture appropriation you will say they are bitter people

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44201444

Livelystone01:

The truth is, no group will ever want to help another in this life if they won't gain anything at the end of the day.

Me I haven't said anything about the CRT because I have not fully grasped it. In short, I have never focused on it.

Don't see it as group, see it as individuals. And there are people who risk their lives or make huge donation for others yet remain anonymous so it does not remove attention from the ones in need.

In CRT, it focus more on the systemic structure of the society and also race is a social construct which means racism is a matter of oppressors and the oppressed.

budaatum:


No it is not based on the premises nor postulate what you claim! And its rather absurd to be claimimg CRT proponents will agree that one is an addict or a thief because of discrimination one experienced due to race. Unless race is the reason one is an addict or a thief of course.

No, it's not about the CRT proponents but the theory itself.

Insisting that everything the black person faces, or deals with or has to do has to be viewed through a racial in decking the black person in an apparel of victimhood.

Damn it! There were those who paint a racial colouration with Ghana losing the 2010 WC Quarter-Final to Uruguay.

CRT is very divisive. Yes, racism would always exist just like all forms of prejudice would never truly end, but everything doesn't have to be racially motivated.

sanpipita:


Was the problem him liking agbada or that the same agbada used to be a thing of mockery and harassment to minorities who wore it previously.

Everything isn't white or black, many minorities suffer, look at this Hispanics in USA are actually afraid to speak their own language they get threats and shut down now when they start culture appropriation you will say they are bitter people

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44201444

I don't know of any white man who wore agbada to oppress blacks.
I really don't know where you are getting at.

Hispanics being stopped for speaking Spanish does not have anything to do with cultural appropriation.

DissTroy:

No, it's not about the CRT proponents but the theory itself.

Insisting that everything the black person faces, or deals with or has to do has to be viewed through a racial in decking the black person in an apparel of victimhood.

Damn it! There were those who paint a racial colouration with Ghana losing the 2010 WC Quarter-Final to Uruguay.

CRT is very divisive. Yes, racism would always exist just like all forms of prejudice would never truly end, but everything doesn't have to be racially motivated.

Its funny how they complained that Italian team that won the euro 2020 was too white. Nobody is complaining that Nigerian team is too black

They just look for a problem all the time and most time it is about race.

@benalvino2, disstroy, basilico, lets continue..

5) Jim Crow was accepted
.
Voting rights, citizenship and property ownership for African Americans came during post-war Reconstruction, which later saw Black Southerners ascend to political power -- but it didn't last. Twelve years after the Civil War, Jim Crow -- an evolution of slave codes and Black codes -- took hold, ushering in a series of laws and societal norms that would prove ruinous to the newly freed Americans.

As clergy, journalists, politicians and scientists reinforced the abhorrent notions of White supremacy, Jim Crow laws provided the backbone of America's racial caste system, which the Supreme Court upheld in 1896. It would remain the law of the land for about seven more decades.

States enacted segregation laws, separating public services and spaces along racial lines or barring African Americans outright, while the Jim Crow era's etiquette rules governed everything from how Black people showed affection to each other to how they addressed White people. The price for defiance? Usually beatings or lynchings.

Recommended reading: "Plessy v. Ferguson: Who Was Plessy?", "Jim Crow Guide: The Way It Was" and "Daily Life in the Jim Crow South, 1900-1945"

Black passengers wait on a bus in 1940 in Durham, North Carolina

6) Lynching was tolerated

Laws prohibited the arbitrary or extrajudicial killing of Black people, but more important than what was codified during Jim Crow is what was not codified. When an anti-lynching bill was introduced in Congress in 1918, it took years to pass the House before hitting a Senate roadblock.

Southern lawmakers baselessly claimed Black men were lynched for raping White women -- a phantasm that still haunts Black men -- and asserted laws governing lynchings were best left to the states. Researchers have found evidence of thousands of lynchings -- and they're sure they're undercounting.

While many associate lynchings with hangings, historians say numerous mass killings fit the definition -- from the political violence in New Orleans in 1866, Colfax, Louisiana, in 1873, and Wilmington, North Carolina, in 1898, to massacres in Atlanta (1906), Springfield, Illinois, (1908) East St. Louis, Illinois, (1917) Tulsa, Oklahoma, (1921) and Rosewood, Florida (1923), to name a few.

Congress has never passed an anti-lynching law. A bill named for Emmett Till passed the House last year by a 410-4 vote, but was held up in the Senate by a lone lawmaker who called it overly broad.

Recommended reading: United States v. Cruikshank, "The Charleston Massacre and the Rape Myth of Reconstruction" and CNN's report on America's long legacy of lynching

7) Immigration was biased

White supremacy was clearly at the heart of early immigration laws. The 1790 Naturalization Act said only "a free white person" need apply. In the mid- to late 1800s, as German, Irish and Chinese immigrants began to arrive on American shores, Asian immigrants were singled out in the Page Act of 1875 and later the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. Immigration officials were particularly hard on Asian women, who were maligned as disease-ridden and promiscuous and subjected to humiliating interrogations and physical exams.

Beginning in 1929, California and other states deported about 2 million people of Mexican ancestry, more than half of whom had been born in the United States (about 400,000 in California alone were citizens or legal residents). In the 1950s, Operation Wetback (yes, the actual name) resulted in hundreds of thousands of deportations to Mexico, though the exact number is disputed.

While immigration policies are fairer today, at least one successful presidential candidate resurrected specters of America's dark past, praising Operation Wetback, attacking Dreamers, using bigoted terms for Covid-19 and allegedly bashing immigrants from "s**thole countries, including Haiti and some African nations.

Recommended reading: "History of Angel Island Immigration Station," a report on the lost history of Mexican "repatriation" and "The Chinese Must Go!"

Immigration officials examine Japanese immigrants in 1931 aboard a ship on Angel Island, California.

EnlightenedUFO:
6) Lynching was tolerated

Laws prohibited the arbitrary or extrajudicial killing of Black people, but more important than what was codified during Jim Crow is what was not codified. When an anti-lynching bill was introduced in Congress in 1918, it took years to pass the House before hitting a Senate roadblock.

Southern lawmakers baselessly claimed Black men were lynched for raping White women -- a phantasm that still haunts Black men -- and asserted laws governing lynchings were best left to the states. Researchers have found evidence of thousands of lynchings -- and they're sure they're undercounting.

While many associate lynchings with hangings, historians say numerous mass killings fit the definition -- from the political violence in New Orleans in 1866, Colfax, Louisiana, in 1873, and Wilmington, North Carolina, in 1898, to massacres in Atlanta (1906), Springfield, Illinois, (1908) East St. Louis, Illinois, (1917) Tulsa, Oklahoma, (1921) and Rosewood, Florida (1923), to name a few.

Congress has never passed an anti-lynching law. A bill named for Emmett Till passed the House last year by a 410-4 vote, but was held up in the Senate by a lone lawmaker who called it overly broad.

Recommended reading: United States v. Cruikshank, "The Charleston Massacre and the Rape Myth of Reconstruction" and CNN's report on America's long legacy of lynching

Nothing you can say to get those self hating Coons to see the right thing. Anything good for african Americans is bad for them because they love their white masters in Appalachia. They hate CRT but the same Nazi loving Coons will not tell the Jews to forget the horrors unleashed on them by Hitler and his henchmen. Ask these Nazi lovers one thing they despise about the Nazis and Klans in America. They will not criticize the Nazis and Klans but they will call Black Americans all kind of ugly names in the book and 99% of Blacks that i know in America are doing much better than these hungry loudmouths.

benalvino3:


Its funny how they complained that Italian team that won the euro 2020 was too white. Nobody is complaining that Nigerian team is too black

They just look for a problem all the time and most time it is about race.

Or the French team is too black. They said the french team was an African team and France couldn't have done it without Africans. Italy listened and played with an all-white team yet they yelled.

Miss USA and Miss England can be black but the times when Miss South Africa was white, all hell was let lose.

It's alright for black comedians to make fun of white skin colour or them being hippies and trailer-dwelling trash but if a white person dares, he's canceled.

Do they want me to show them video and stand-up comedy clips of black comedians calling Obama a 'mixed race fool' when he declared he wanted to be POTUS but when he won he was black?

8- Education was curtailed

Slavery brought with it anti-literacy laws, which states continued to pass and enforce until the mid-1800s. The aversion to educating African Americans wasn't limited to the South. See the stories of a rejected proposal for a college in New Haven, Connecticut, a mob's destruction of the Noyes Academy in Canaan, New Hampshire, or the attack on a school for "young ladies of color" in Canterbury, Connecticut.

Post-slavery, segregation ensured Black children were sent to their own schools, and while the Supreme Court's Plessy v. Ferguson decision demanded "separate but equal" facilities, there was nothing equal about the education Black kids received. The high court recognized as much in its landmark Brown v. Board of Education ruling.

Still, segregated school systems remain a reality. Rights groups have pointed out inequality throughout the US education system, including in school funding, "tracking" practices, redistricting, school discipline (and the "school-to-prison pipeline", high-stakes testing and how African American boys are perceived, among other phenomena. The uneven treatment can continue in college and after.

Recommended reading: "The Essence of Innocence: Consequences of Dehumanizing Black Children," the US Department of Education's 2014 report on "troubling racial disparities" in public schools and the personal narrative of a woman jailed in 1854 in Virginia for teaching Black children to read

Jeff Bezos gifted $100m to Van Jones

Trumpanzees about to burst a blood vessel

EnlightenedUFO:
@benalvino2, disstroy, basilico, lets continue..

5) Jim Crow was accepted
.
Voting rights, citizenship and property ownership for African Americans came during post-war Reconstruction, which later saw Black Southerners ascend to political power -- but it didn't last. Twelve years after the Civil War, Jim Crow -- an evolution of slave codes and Black codes -- took hold, ushering in a series of laws and societal norms that would prove ruinous to the newly freed Americans.

As clergy, journalists, politicians and scientists reinforced the abhorrent notions of White supremacy, Jim Crow laws provided the backbone of America's racial caste system, which the Supreme Court upheld in 1896. It would remain the law of the land for about seven more decades.

States enacted segregation laws, separating public services and spaces along racial lines or barring African Americans outright, while the Jim Crow era's etiquette rules governed everything from how Black people showed affection to each other to how they addressed White people. The price for defiance? Usually beatings or lynchings.

Recommended reading: "Plessy v. Ferguson: Who Was Plessy?", "Jim Crow Guide: The Way It Was" and "Daily Life in the Jim Crow South, 1900-1945"

Black passengers wait on a bus in 1940 in Durham, North Carolina

None what you have been posting has to do with CRT. CRT is not history lessons.

9) Good jobs were elusive

Slavery and Jim Crow funneled workers of color into low-wage vocations, such as farm work, housecleaning and driving wagons -- and the percent of people of color working in similar occupations today remains skewed.

Black codes and their subsequent Jim Crow manifestations criminalized elements of African American behavior -- whether promoting "social equality" in Mississippi or waiting in the wrong room for a train in Kentucky -- reopening them to slavery via incarceration, a la the 13th Amendment.

Anti-enticement measures tilted the jobs landscape by forbidding employers from offering Black workers higher wages than they were already receiving. Debt peonage -- in which an employer compels someone to work to cover a debt -- was outlawed in 1867, but through transportation and living expenses, merchant credits and sharecropping loans, scurrilous White employers could force minorities to work until the system was eradicated in the 1940s.

The Fair Labor Standards Act and Wagner Act improved working conditions and collective bargaining, respectively, but they also excluded many jobs filled by people of color.

Data on 2019 household income showed that while wages have risen since 2000, Asian and White households fare the best, with the median White household bringing in $20,000 a year more than a median Hispanic household and $30,000 more than a Black one. Meanwhile, since 1980, funding and staffing for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has been on the decline.

Recommended reading: "The Impact of Structural Racism in Employment and Wages on Minority Women's Health," economist William Spriggs' 2019 testimony to a House committee and a report on how Black workers face two lethal pre-existing conditions for Covid-19: racism and economic inequality


Members of the Congress of Racial Equality protest employment discrimination in 1965 in New York City.

Ibime:
Jeff Bezos gifted $100m to Van Jones

Trumpanzees about to burst a blood vessel

Van Jones is not too far left. Sometimes he makes sense. I don't have much issues with the guy.

10) Housing was exclusionary

Following the broken promise of "40 Acres and a Mule," Jim Crow stoked the Great Migration of millions of Southern Black people to the North and West -- which, in turn, spurred exclusionary zoning. In 1910, Baltimore became the first city to ban African Americans from living in White neighborhoods. The practice spread west to Oklahoma City and north to Colwyn, Pennsylvania, by 1916.

After the Supreme Court ruled such discrimination unconstitutional in 1917's Buchanan v. Warley decision, cities devoted significant real estate solely to detached single-family housing -- which, without mentioning race, shut out most minorities. Racial covenants in property deeds also precluded non-White buyers.

The Federal Housing Administration, created in 1934 to boost home ownership, exacerbated matters. Worried that African American homeowners would bring down White property values, the FHA refused to insure Black homes in White neighborhoods, resulting in redlining -- whereby African Americans were steered to "hazardous" inner cities and Whites to "desirable" suburbia. Government underwriters and 1944's GI Bill continued the pattern of prejudice, while the American Housing Act of 1949 and Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 displaced tens of thousands of minorities. Discriminatory lending and racial covenants weren't outlawed until 1968.

After the subprime lending crisis hit in 2007, about 2.5 million Americans lost their homes by 2009, with Black and Latino homeowners' foreclosure rates among recent borrowers more than doubling that of their White counterparts. The return of Whites to cities in the last decade further displaced minorities. In 2019, Black home ownership hit its lowest rate since 1970, and a recent study shows Hispanics and African Americans must earn more than Whites to live in affluent neighborhoods.

Recommended reading: Report on cities questioning single-family zoning, the Village of Euclid, Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co. and "The controversial history of Levittown, America's first suburb"

B.G. Miller points to an anti-Japanese sign on her house in Hollywood, California, in 1923.

EnlightenedUFO:
@benalvino.2, disstro.y., basi.lico, lets continue..

Though this is you muddying the waters by recounting history, the concerns are noted still. Be done pasting the news articles then the points stated would be debated on. I'm particularly interested in this topic of CRT. Notify me when you are done and I'm game.

The Question is why are racists suddenly becoming snowflakes and angry about the issue of CRT?

Another interesting article from the Michigan State University.

Ask the Expert: What is critical race theory and why is it under attack in our schools?

"Ask the Expert" articles provide information and insights from MSU scientists, researchers and scholars about national and global issues, complex research and general-interest subjects based on their areas of academic expertise and study. They may feature historical information, background, research findings, or offer tips.

Michigan joins other states that have introduced legislation that would sharply limit classroom discussions on how race and racism have shaped American history.

What is critical race theory?
Critical race theory, or CRT, is a framework developed in the 1970s by legal scholars that argues white supremacy maintains power through the law and other legal systems. CRT dismisses the idea that racism stems from acts of individuals but rather rooted in a system of oppression based on socially constructed racial hierarchy where white people reap material benefits over people of color resulting from misuse of power.

Teaching young people about race and racism is not synonymous with teaching them critical race theory. Critical race theory is not an ideology or a political orientation that assumes white people are bad; it assumes white supremacy is bad in all of its forms. It’s a practice or approach that provides language and a lens for examining racism at institutional and structural levels. Underlying this is the premise that racism is endemic to American society and that white supremacist ideals and practices should be dismantled.

Why are there proposals to ban critical race theory in schools?
As of mid-May, legislation to outlaw CRT in schools has passed in Idaho, Iowa, Oklahoma and Tennessee and have been proposed in various other statehouses. Since the onset of teaching about American history, teachers have been teaching about forms of systemic racial discrimination and oppression, including slavery. This is not new to schools. However, traditionally school curriculums have taken a Eurocentric approach.

Now we are living in a time where the voices of people of color are being lifted up, and tragic events like George Floyd's death one year ago and violence against members of the Asian panethnic community prove that problems remain. The narrative of U.S. history is being diversified, and that is creating fear, particularly among white people. Teaching young people how to be antiracist should not be seen as an attack on American values. It’s actually working in support of American ideals like inclusion and valuing diverse perspectives.

Why is it important for students to learn about systemic racism in schools?
It’s important to try to help youth understand how bias and oppression are institutional, structural and systemic, and not simply interpersonal. Young people are not colorblind or color mute. They see color and they talk race and racism in their own social circles and peer groups. Research indicates that as early as age 3, children have negative associations about some racial groups. By the time they enter elementary school, children already have a level of racial literacy that evidences their awareness that some individuals and groups are treated differently in their schools and society based on skin color. This is particularly apparent for elementary-aged children of color. If children of color are old enough to experience racial discrimination and injustice, then all children, especially white children, are old enough to learn about racism in ways that enhance their cross-cultural competency, racial literacy skills and skill set for improving our democracy.

What is proposed in the Michigan legislation?
A new bill introduced to the Michigan Legislature would sharply limit Michigan classroom discussions of how race and racism have shaped American history. Under the legislation introduced, K-12 school districts would lose 5% of their funding if educators teach critical race theory, “anti-American” ideas about race in America, or material from The 1619 Project, a New York Times initiative that puts Black history and the consequences of slavery at the center of the U.S. national narrative. School funding penalties tied to implementing antiracist curriculum is actually a racist move that furthers systemic racial oppression in education, disadvantages all children, and upholds white supremacist ideals.


What are the possible consequences of this legislation?
The bills are vague and it’s unclear what they will cover and if they are constitutional, or whether they impermissibly restrict free speech.

It would be difficult to monitor what goes on inside hundreds of thousands of classrooms. Educators fear that such laws could have a sobering effect on teachers who might censor lessons out of concern for parent or administrator complaints. Additionally, such bills can actually work to undermine educational goals of diversifying the teaching workforce. Students of color may be less likely to pursue a teaching career if there is censorship around race talk across subject areas.

benalvino3:


Van Jones is not too far left. Sometimes he makes sense. I don't have much issues with the guy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eMoCW1Pq54

11) Health care was inferior

In the country's early years, the medical profession believed it was OK to experiment on minorities -- often without consent -- and deliver subpar, if any, medical treatment, but the behavior continued long after that.

The father of gynecology experimented on enslaved women without anesthesia in the mid-1800s; loose laws in the early 1900s allowed forced sterilization of countless minorities and others, into the 1970s; the US government-led Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, which let 399 Black men go untreated for the disease, ran from 1932 to 1972; Ebb Cade, a Black man, was unknowingly the first subject in the Manhattan Project's human radiation experiments; and Henrietta Lacks' cells have led to groundbreaking medical breakthroughs, but the 31-year-old Black woman died of cancer in 1951 with no knowledge her tissue had been taken without her consent.


Black Americans' trust in the medical profession remains battered. Recent studies show bias, while better, remains problematic -- with pain management and health care algorithms offering just two examples. African Americans are also disproportionately enrolled in studies that don't require informed consent and are hit much harder when it comes to a range of medical issues, from maternal mortality to Covid-19.
A dearth of Black doctors, of course, does nothing to rectify the issues.

Recommended reading: "Health Inequality Actually Is a 'Black and White Issue,' Research Says," the debate over former Surgeon General Thomas Parran's legacy and "A medical hell recounted by its victims"

There were so many embedded links i left out in the article points. Posting it here would be easier to read bit by bit but if you want to check all the links in the articles here is the link to the page.

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/05/27/us/critical-race-theory-lens-history-crt/index.html

It is fake outrage to say Americans shouldn't learn about its racist past and present, come to terms with it and reckon how to move ahead as Americans. Some misguided trump cultists here think its all about black and white, which is very farther from the truth. It is also not about attacking white people, because there are millions of white men who support teaching young kids about America's racist past so they can come to terms with the future. If history was reversed and the black men were the one who enslaved white men, put them through lynchings, voter suppression and prohibition etc, it would be some sections of black people making up grievances about letting people learn about the racist past they were involved in. I'm sad for those black people here holding water for a small section of white supremacists and their sympathizers because of what? just because they hate the liberal lifestyle and policies, nothing else. Not about good governance but about clash of ideologies. Not that they benefit anything from these minority white supremacists.
If you don't reconcile your past, the future will always remain bleak no matter how wide you open your eyes.

Ibime:
Jeff Bezos gifted $100m to Van Jones

Trumpanzees about to burst a blood vessel

Who cares about what Trumpanzees think. We all know Trump inherited his wealth from his father Fred and didn't make much of it unlike people like Bezos, Zuckerberg, Bloomberg, Buffett, Gates and co that came from humble backgrounds. Meanwhile, all those mega Billionaires i mentioned tilt to the left and i will be worried about guys that will have N100.000 in their Bank Accounts in Nigeria towing the lines of Nazis and Klans.

DissTroy:


Though this is you muddying the waters by recounting history, the concerns are noted still. Be done pasting the news articles then the points stated would be debated on. I'm particularly interested in this topic of CRT. Notify me when you are done and I'm game.

Seriously, get lost, i mean go deep down into the sahara desert and get lost.

PrideofLincoln2:
Nothing you can say to get those self hating Coons to see the right thing. Anything good for african Americans is bad for them because they love their white masters in Appalachia. They hate CRT but the same Nazi loving Coons will not tell the Jews to forget the horrors unleashed on them by Hitler and his henchmen. Ask these Nazi lovers one thing they despise about the Nazis and Klans in America. They will not criticize the Nazis and Klans but they will call Black Americans all kind of ugly names in the book and 99% of Blacks that i know in America are doing much better than these hungry loudmouths.

They are stroking themselves thinking i pasted this history of racism for them. I care less about what trump cultists think, they are far gone and dead weight. Just for the guests who come through here reading all the rubbish they post, and the statements they make that we don't challenge them concerning crt. But they have actually lost it, they can't stop this changing world, only shout and misinform while they gain nothing out of it.

benalvino3:


I don't know of any white man who wore agbada to oppress blacks.
I really don't know where you are getting at.

Hispanics being stopped for speaking Spanish does not have anything to do with cultural appropriation.

Bad faith arguments, I didn't even expect you to understand.

Meanwhile culture appropriation isn't just about clothes, could be food, music, language, hairstyle etc but still you won't understand

EnlightenedUFO:


They are stroking themselves thinking i pasted this history of racism for them. I care less about what trump cultists think, they are far gone and dead weight. Just for the guests who come through here reading all the rubbish they post, and the statements they make that we don't challenge them concerning crt. But they have actually lost it, they can't stop this changing world, only shout and misinform while they gain nothing out of it.

Most people that comes here knows these Coons are the bottom feeders in the society. I used to say that Trump could have sent a drone to wipe out their villages when he was in power and these Coons will absolve him and blame their village elders for upsetting Trump. They probably love Trump more than their own fathers. So sad people are so dumb that they hate themselves without realizing it.

sanpipita:


Bad faith arguments, I didn't even expect you to understand.

Meanwhile culture appropriation isn't just about clothes, could be food, music, language, hairstyle etc but still you won't understand

So is it bad to eat Chinese?

Goodvibes007:

Why even bother?
The anger about CRT is simply what you called it, Faux outrage.

The far right would always look for a boogie man to latch unto. Combine that with a largely uneducated support base then you have all sort of nonsense and jargons to get them riled up. It was 5G yesterday, Bill Gates and Soros the week before. It's CRT today. Lol.

A long read below but very worth it:



https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2021/07/02/why-are-states-banning-critical-race-theory/

Thank you for that article. It says it all.
Some choose to be color blind to reality and to the truth. There is still embedded racism in US institutions today and why is that? The refusal of "some" white men to accept their racist past and own up to it. They want everyone to forget it or in some cases honor it when it pertains to their traitorous confederacy in the civil war.

EnlightenedUFO:


Seriously, get lost, i mean go deep down into the sahara desert and get lost.

Of course, he resorts to insults after spending 4 hours researching a topic and posting other people's articles. Garbage in, garbage out. I wanted to humour you.

And he chickens out, people.

Mental mdiget.