Should teachers be allowed to say "Slavery was bad and it should not happen again"?

maybe the question should be

would you support any CRT ban that did not allow teachers to say "Slavery was bad and it should not happen again"?

 

CRT itself should be taught in college, not grade school

slavery\racism can be taught in jr high and high school history class

 

Teachers should be able to say whatever they want.

1st amendment rights.

 

If they have historically been regarded as a hero, you can teach that they have historically been regarded as such. I'd would avoid stating personal opinions on who you regard as a hero. If you do, make sure you say "I regard them as a hero" instead of "they are a hero". A teacher should never spread personal views as statements of fact.

Also, there are agreed upon moral codes we all share such as murder is wrong. If a teacher makes such a statement, I take no issue with it because everyone in society agrees.

If we say racial discrimination is bad. That is fine, because society by large majority agrees. If someone wants to make an exception to discrimination based on race to right past wrongs. Basically discrimination is bad, but the end justifies the means, I would disagree with allowing them to teach that. In high school they may teach why some believe one and why some believe the other but they should share each side in full and with little predudice while avoiding sharing their own position on the matter.

 

What do you mean by that?

 

That's fair. I get that.

CRT is a college level theory that looks at the origins of racism as an institution of the law. It's not taught in schools. Rather what I'm saying is the argument against "CRT" is in actuality an argument against anti-racist education. So what I'm doing with my argument is point out the hypocrisy of these two positions by forcing the anti-CRT crowd to distinguish between "slavery is bad" and "CRT is bad".

Sure but that's not quite the argument.

I'm not sure I follow what you're saying. Do you mind rephrasing?

 

I'll try that with my boss when I cuss at the customers.

 

No I'm totally fine with banning any discussion of past slavery from public schools and universities - it's a small price to pay for getting rid of critical theory, plus anyone who overuses rhetoric about "slavery" and similar points of controversy should be immediately suspect with being involved with CRT.

The same with people who over-use other buzzwords such "sexist, bigot, homophobe, fascist, Nazi", and so on - overuse of terms like that for rhetorical effect does suggest a potentially dangerous involvement with critical theory, and should give the government and the people at large a reason to be suspicious of them and investigate them further.

 

No, critical theory is taught in schools (whether as an outright subject, or as a component of other fringe subjects such as so-called "gender/women's studies").

Berkeley for example, has a specific course in critical theory:

https://criticaltheory.berkeley.edu

 

Teaching history is one thing. Teaching a Marxist based ideology is another.

 

First of all, we can all agree that slavery was bad and should not happen again. And we can all agree that racism is bad.

Secondly, teachers should be able to moralize about anything they want when they are teaching high school seniors or college students. So my next comments refer to teachers in elementary, middle, and lower high school levels.

The problem with teachers moralizing is that if they can moralize about slavery and racism, what else can they moralize about? Uh oh ... Frankly, I don't want them moralizing to young children about every issue of the day.

So the best way to teach that slavery and racism are wrong is to just teach the history straight up, without moralizing. But what is in our history? In our history are the factual events that happened and the speeches and writings of notable people who fought against slavery and racism. There are so many examples, I could not possibly list them all, but they date back to the decades long, heartfelt arguments that were made against slavery pre-Civil War. Let those people who are now a part of our history do the moralizing, for that moralizing is a part of our history. Teach what they said, what they wrote, and what they did. Let it speak for itself, and leave the teacher's moralizing out of it.

Let me give one example from my own life. I was born in the 50's. I grew up on TV westerns and movies depicting Native Americans as the bad guys, and the settlers and cowboys and the Calvary as the good guys. By the time I was a senior in high school, I really didn't know much about our history with the Native Americans until I took an elective class, "Native American History." One of my assignments was to read the book "Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee." That book and the other learning I did in that class gave me a completely different perspective on what happened. The teacher didn't have to moralize about anything. All the teacher had to do was to teach the events that happened and make some assignments. The rightness or wrongness of what happened became self-evident with the learning and by listening to voices from our past, such as in that book.

So ... of course racism is wrong. Just let our history, our predecessors, teach that.

 

#qaS #@am a asasssssaqaWesa we w

 

Another ring-around-the-rosy thread, where every reply is met by a but, but, but....I'll bite but once, ya want moral judgements, go to Sunday school, considering where the US sits in math and science being #1 when it comes to learning slavery is bad ain't much of a comfort.

 

They should be required to provide arguments from both sides... or some bull****

 

Are Repubs still allowing teachers to mention slavery?

 

As qQ

Uh no sir not quite. It began in the sixties as a Marxist study to replace Critical Theory which had utterly failed to produce the results they expected.
So they began telling the same sort of lies about about race that they had about labor management in an earlier time. It was still a lie but it was slanted in a different direction.

And please note the white wash your trying apply to this isn't going to fly. The parents began this. Not Hannity or Carlson. It is the result of you insisting on locking down the country. And parents witnessing what their kids were being taught and they were pissed, black, white, and brown. And they, black white and brown, showed up a school board meetings asking what the hell these so called educators thought they were doing and demanding change. You can sit there at your keyboard and try to gas light people but too many know what they saw on there kids school computer when they watch the instruction. The cat's out if the bag and if the Democratic Party continues to try to defend the noxious racist doctrine that is crt the resultant tsunami will sweep the socalled progressive movement into histories cess pool along with noxious doctrines like racism, Fascism, and communism.

 

1. It’s maam.
2. CRT is a structuralist account.
3. This has nothing to do with my OP.

 

Thanks for proving my point.

Schools are K-12. Graduate is post bachelor at universities. Your source:
"The Program in Critical Theory (the Designated Emphasis, or “DE,” in Critical Theory) enables graduate students already enrolled in UC Berkeley PhD programs from across the social sciences, arts, and humanities to obtain certification of a Designated-Emphasis specialization in Critical Theory."

... I don't even want to guess what you think Marxist means. "Marxist based" is a very loaded term.

There are people in this thread who don't think we should talk about slavery, or that slavery wasn't that bad. But even then more to the point, those are moral statements.

I learned we should care about elections in 1st grade. That's a moral statement. Should we not teach basic civics?

What you described is how anti-racist education can work. It doesn't matter if you provide 'equal access' to a topic. You are still creating the arguments to argue against it.
Slavery is bad because x.
Slavery is bad because y.
Slavery is bad because z.
This person said slavery was bad and should be abolished. Because you have X and Y, then you can agree with him.
This person said slavery was good (but because slavery is bad, we can dismiss their argument).

So no matter what, you're still moralizing. The TV example actually is more worrisome than I think you believe. Because that's how you get people into thinking what happened to Native Americans is okay. This leads back to the main question-when people talk about banning 'CRT', how do we make sure someone doesn't use the language of 'banning CRT' to stop people from making anti-slavery and anti-racist arguments?

1. Thanks for proving my point.
2. Do you think the scientists who fled authoritarian countries ever wondered why their country once a democracy declined into an authoritarian regime?

Yeah that's pretty much a BS argument.

 

Critical Race Theory is based on Marxist Critical Theory with the difference of replacing class with race.

 

We now have immigrants that escaped authoritarian regimes warning about what is going on in this country.

 

Good to know the argument against post-modernism is still well alive and here just using different words.

 

We do! It's almost like we need more political scientists to help explain the rise of authoritarianism in the US, and how best to promote democratic ideals both inside and outside of a class.

 

Well as a young child I wasn't shielded about human rights atrocities, I learned quite a bit from a very early age from my parents. They were both Holocaust survivors. I believe children should be taught as soon as they can understand that there are still barbarians living among enlightened civilized people. What I learned did scare the living crap out of me but it was also part of my education. I don't regret learning about the Holocaust at a very young age at all.

 

First- our primary and secondary schools should not be in the practice of teaching ideologies or political issues. That quickly becomes programming, not teaching and learning. Wrongful practice.

The issues aren't in what we discuss, but how we discuss and portray it. Slavery is a part of our history- but far beyond the history of slavery in America was the sources of that slavery, which goes back to black Africans who made slaves of their fellow black Africans, bought them, transported them, sold them- literally a business to them, and done so with a history we know has existed for at least 1300 years. American slaves were actually sold into slavery by those black Africans- who captured them, then sold them to Europeans in the slave trade business- who took most of them elsewhere. Less than 4% of the Atlantic slave traffic came to America. Thus Black slavery and slave trading was an invention of black people, and it was far more extensive than slavery in America. Truth about slavery would include all of that; and failing to do so creates an untruth in our understanding.

Half a story is almost always a lie. It can be factual as far as it goes, but becomes a lie because it fails to present a true picture of events. American slave owners- were the customers of the black African slave traders in the business of selling black slaves, but was far from their largest buyer. Further, slavery was widespread in the world, not at all an American concept or invention. And while it was a immoral practice, the truth is that slaves that arrived in America fared far better than those taken elsewhere, and the descendants of American slaves today fare far better than those of others. Understanding this balances our perception, it is truth. Not justification of slavery anywhere or anytime- just truth on the history of American slavery.

Why is it wrong to consider all the facts? Because those with political or ideological agendas find that detrimental to their purposes- which have nothing to do with "education".
Such people threaten all Americans today, regardless of race.

Slavery was an injustice to a race- and that ended long ago. However the new threat, the use of ideological lies for political manipulation of people- is an injustice to all races.
Let's talk about the whole truth, or not talk about it at all.

Half-truths can foster many evils and some very detrimental concepts, and CRT is among those.

 

Teaching CRT and teaching morality are two entirely different things. Saying you, white person, are a born racist, is not at all like saying slavery is bad or even saying racism is bad.