DissTroy:


Really? But the textbook, singular definition of Critical Race Theory which is accepted by all states that everything must be viewed through a racial prism.

In your own words, Roy L. Brooks is very silly.

Thank you.

budaatum:


What you posted does not mean "Insist that everything the black person faces, or deals with or has to do has to be viewed through a racial in decking".

DissTroy:


Budaatum, stop with the semantics. You should know better than that. The definition of CRT as stated and accepted by all means examining issues which concern the black person from a racial perspective. I even posted the screenshot.

budaatum:


"Stop with the semantics", or stop using my brain?

The definition above does not "Insist that everything the black person faces, or deals with or has to do has to be viewed through a racial in decking".

DissTroy:


For the purpose of clarity, do explain this:

"Roy L. Brooks defined critical race theory in 1994 as "a collection of critical stances against the existing legal order from a race-based point of view".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory (Check the "Definition" subheading.)

Not from any other point of view from a race-based point of view. It's the definitive prism CRT is viewed from - race.

budaatum:



"A critical stance" can and usually is one stance in many stances like, financial stance, motivational stance, opportunity stance, gender, sex, capability etc,

DissTroy:


Exactly! CRT examines all these stances - gender, education, finance, incarceration, family... - but from a racial perspective or racial prism.

For example, it postulates that the reason blacks are poorer is connected to institutional racism, or the institutional racism is responsible for black men getting incarcerated hence kids growing up without fathers.

It blames racism for it all.

It refuses to hold the black community responsible for its predisposition to gang violence or black-on-black crime or substance abuse or why black women lead the charts for abortion because it is overly subsidized for them. Need I go on?

CRT examines all issues but from a racial perspective.

DissTroy:


Exactly! CRT examines all these stances - gender, education, finance, incarceration, family... - but from a racial perspective or racial prism.

For example, it postulates that the reason blacks are poorer is connected to institutional racism, or the institutional racism is responsible for black men getting incarcerated hence kids growing up without fathers.

It blames racism for it all.

It refuses to hold the black community responsible for its predisposition to gang violence or black-on-black crime or substance abuse or why black women lead the charts for abortion because it is overly subsidized for them. Need I go on?

CRT examines all issues but from a racial perspective.

budaatum:


Diss, CRT also has to consider a 'gender perspective' in its own right, and an education perspective, and a finance perspective, and incarceration perspective, family perspective, all in their own right and without racial input or prejudice. It must be done for comparative studies, and to have evidence of your racial claim and for respect by your peers for not doing shoddy research. Or can you not hear those on your side accusing those you claim "Insist that everything the black person faces, or deals with or has to do has to be viewed through a racial in decking", of being ignorant and institutionally racists themselves?

If CRT insists on what you say it does no one would give it the light of day because we are far too advanced and smart for "I'm broke because I'm black", and no one is really selling "you are broke because you are black", despite your rhetoric that they are, and even if they are selling it, then I'm sorry to say that the fool who buys it deserves it. Jussie Smollett has come to my mind, but he is rare.

benalvino3:


Even that maths debate we had was looking at the performance of minority groups from race base. If they fail it is because of racism and white supremacy.

Even when student refused to study its not their fault but racism and white supremacy

DissTroy:


See? Actually, many people buy it. There is still racism just like there's always be tribalism but to what degree?

Sadly, most black people buy that narrative that they are held down by racism.

Texas Republicans apparently worried not enough people know they’re abject racists

So just to be clear, they‘ve passed a bill eliminating a requirement for public schools to teach students that the KKK and its white supremacist reign of terror were “morally wrong.” Yes, that’s right: They don‘t like the bad rap the Ku Klux Klan has been getting. Per HuffPo:

The cut is among some two dozen curriculum requirements dropped from the new measure, along with studying Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech, the works of United Farm Workers leader Cesar Chavez, Susan B. Anthony’s writings about the women’s suffragist movement, and Native American history. Critics say the state is promoting an “anti-civics” education.

Senate Bill 3—passed last Friday 18-4—drops most mentions of people of color and women from the state’s required curriculum. That includes eliminating a requirement that students be taught the “history of white supremacy, including but not limited to the institution of slavery, the eugenics movement, and the Ku Klux Klan, and the ways in which it is morally wrong.”

The new bill echoes language from last month’s law that bars teachers from requiring students to develop “an understanding” of the 1619 Project, which calls for a far more profound examination of the significance of slavery in American history. It also retains the language that teachers may not “be compelled” to discuss current events or “controversial issue[s] of public policy or social affairs” and that if they do, they can’t give “deference to any one perspective.”
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/07/donald-trump-friend-thomas-barrack-arrested

budaatum:
The following is the consequence of your stance against what CRT is about. Its similar to Nigeria removing history from the curricula and to what made Adam a slave. You starve of knowledge so you can chain them to alimajerism, instead of trusting that most aren't stupid and are more valuable if they know more.

Timiofak:
I thought You people said KKK we're democrats na? Lmao

benalvino3:


You know the media and politicians are lying that Texas ban teaching that kkk is morally wrong right?

benalvino3:


Definitions of race

1. any one of the groups that humans are often divided into based on physical traits regarded as common among people of shared ancestry.

2. a group within a species that is distinguishable (as morphologically, genetically, or behaviorally) from others of the same species

3. Race is socially constructed, not biologically natural.

From all this definition. Cancel out the one you disagree with and why.

Also, define what you think racism is.

Livelystone01:

Racism...

1. prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.

2. a belief that a race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences pproduce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

3. [s]The system oppression to the social, economic and political advantage of another.[/s]

Also, systemic racism which is more or less of an issue today is seen as a deeply rooted prejudice, combined with institutional power and systemic oppression of certain groups of people."

Please cross out the things you disagree with and give me your take on the above.

I agreed with your definistions of race.

Why does racism exist in Scotland?
For many hundreds of years, white British society has enjoyed a position of economic, social, and political power over non-white people in Britain and across the world through empire and colonialism and their after-effects. Although people in Scotland often know little about this history, the social attitudes that developed over this time are still present in our society. This is known as ‘white ideology’, or sometimes as ‘white supremacy’. The advantages that this still brings to white majority ethnic Scottish people are known as ‘white privilege’.
https://www.crer.scot/what-is-racism

budaatum:

My UK perspective of race might jaundice my sight of course, but over here only losers buy the narrative of race holding them down. You can't do poorly at school and easily get away with "my teacher failed me because I'm black" or not get a job and shout "racist" unless you have evidence for your claim.

Your parents would take koboko to your backside if you tried the first - mine would have, and the school board would investigate; and no one would employ those who believed the second. We can after all identify it at the interview. Those who shift responsibility from themselves.

I think you overgeneralise. We black Brit Nigerians would tell you our race, our blackness, is a superior advantage wherever we go, which is why we walk with our heads tall, and I know other blacks the world over who feel the same and no one who thinks as you claim CRT says.

budaatum:

My UK perspective of race might jaundice my sight of course, but over here only losers buy the narrative of race holding them down. You can't do poorly at school and easily get away with "my teacher failed me because I'm black" or not get a job and shout "racist" unless you have evidence for your claim.

Your parents would take koboko to your backside if you tried the first - mine would have, and the school board would investigate; and no one would employ those who believed the second. We can after all identify it at the interview. Those who shift responsibility from themselves.

I think you overgeneralise. We black Brit Nigerians would tell you our race, our blackness, is a superior advantage wherever we go, which is why we walk with our heads tall, and I know other blacks the world over who feel the same and no one who thinks as you claim CRT says.

budaatum:
The following is the consequence of your stance against what CRT is about. Its similar to Nigeria removing history from the curricula and to what made Adam a slave. You starve of knowledge so you can chain them to alimajerism, instead of trusting that most aren't stupid and are more valuable if they know more.

benalvino3:


CRT argues that race is not biologically grounded and natural but is a socially constructed concept that is used by white people to further their economic and political interests at the expense of people of colour.

Is race biologically grounded or not?
Do you accept the CRT definition of race? If yes why? If not why not?

Why I crossed out number 3 is because it fell in line with crt definition of race. Notice he does not differentiate groups. This is more in line with the race is a social construct narrative. And if we go by this definition a racist is the oppressor towards the oppressed. According to crt whiteness is oppression and blackness is victim hood. If this is the case then someone like Obama can be racist because he was part of the system which they label whiteness.

Livelystone01:

First of all I have said I'd never talk about the CRT because i don't understand what it is, I haven't even taken out time to check it out and I won't because it has become a political weapon.

Also, before I say more i want to ask if you understand or know that systemic racism exists in America.

DissTroy:


Actually, most people are gullible. Maybe not stupid but easily impressed upon. Religion and the acceptance of religious excesses like fanaticism are some of such proofs that people are gullible. Preach CRT religiously for decades and the effects are the same - mindless sheep feeding on what they are being fed without questioning if it's toxic or not.

I believe Black History should taught but go beyond victimhood. Most Black Americans are ignorant about the world around them and Black History as a whole. Most don't know more than "our fathers used to be slaves and were imported from Africa".

Most don't even know the Hieroglyphics was formed and written by people with same woolly hair and brown skin as them.

Most don't even know their slave ancestors had cultures of literacy already before enslavement; like the Nsibidi writing system of the Akwa-Cross people, which was also adopted by their Igbo cousins from Arochukwu and beyond.

Most don't know who Mansa Musa was.

This is the black history they need to learn. Know the dark past but learn the good and hold your head high in pride.

Insidenaija:
Marcus Rashford has defended his off-field partnerships following claims that he profited from his campaigning, Newspremises reports.

The Manchester United and England star earned an MBE for his charitable efforts helping feed children in need throughout the last year-and-a-half.

Rashford called out the government on a number of occasions during the pandemic to ensure schoolchildren were given access to meals, which resulted in U-turns and a shift in policy, and he did a huge amount to raise funds for charity.

The forward, who was racially abused after missing a penalty in the final of Euro 2020, tweeted on Tuesday night that he had heard political magazine The Spectator was planning to run a story suggesting he has ‘benefitted commercially’ from his charity work and decided to speak against it.

"Just heard @spectator are planning to run a story on me tomorrow about how I have benefitted commercially in the last 18 months," Rashford tweeted.

"To clarify, I don't need to partner with brands. I partner because I want to progress the work I do off the pitch and most of any fee I would receive contributes to that.

"Last summer, 1.3M children had access to food support, through my relationship with Burberry children have a safe place to be after school where they will be fed, following the November investment vulnerable children have safe places to go this summer holiday, and due to my relationship with Macmillan 80,000 children now have a book to call their own.

"Do I have a larger commercial appeal following the u-turns? I'm sure. But I'm also a Manchester United and England international footballer. Why has there always got to be a motive? Why can't we just do the right thing?"

Source: https://newspremises.com.ng/marcus-rashford-defends-his-charity-partnerships-over-claims-he-benefited-commercially/

Lalasticlala
Mynd44
Dominique

budaatum:


Ironically, maga is America first, and not "Hieroglyphics was formed and written by people with same woolly hair and brown skin as them", nor "Nsibidi writing system of the Akwa-Cross people", or "who Mansa Musa was", and when we do teach that, which we do you just haven't noticed yet, you will claim we are telling people to go back to Arochukwu or something more absurd.