What does Critical Race Theory teach?

There is no systemic racism or institutional racism today. FACT.

Millions of arrests a year, thousands of assaults against officers a year, over 1 million violent crimes a year and only around 20 unarmed blacks killed a year? many of them justified shootings. ZERO EVIDENCE...

No racism in our universities or corporate america unless you consider affirmative action racist. If you are a qualified minority, you are in demand actually

CRT is a total lie, based it originated from 50s-70s... the world has changed.

I truly believe that CRT's main goal is to create more racism as what the left is terrified of is the perception of racism disappearing. They have played the race card for so long to attain power that the idea of not being able to use racism as a political weapon is terrifying. What is really happening is that the left knows system racism doesn't really exist anymore but they need to convince people it is still a problem; otherwise, they will lose one of their most potent political weapons. CRT is about inciting racial tensions, teaching kids that race matters more than your values, character, what you deserve based on merit. When kids are even being separated into groups 'oppressor' and 'oppressed' as part of school teachings, it is teaching them that they are not the same, they are different... that race is most important thing in life. Young white kids will resent this, being made to feel guilty and actually become racists. Young black kids will also resent being made to feel inferior, become insecure and become racists. The whole idea behind CRT is create more racism as it will help politicians attain power especially as whites become a minority. I can totally see political operatives behind closed rooms planning on ways to keep system racism alive and well, thriving and i mean leftists, not righties.

it's all a f BS scam. Take zoning laws. They claim zoning is racist but really it is not. People of of all colors are welcome to buy a a single family home in any neighborhood. Is the left claiming minorities just can't make money? now that's racist! plenty of minorities LOVE the idea of zoning, they want to live in peaceful neighborhoods where there isn't costco right in the middle of the community and cheap crap houses next door, potentially inhabited by not so good people. Fact is poverty and crime and related so yes, can't blame people from wanting to set some standards in their neighborhoods. People also don't want the value of their homes to plummet because some leftists are forcing poor housing and cheap apartments next door.



CRT = Toxic = factory for racism... what the left wants

 

Well, recent experience has shown us that education professionals arent even capable of adhering to laws regarding racial discrimination, and neo marxism and its critical theories are political advocacy.

 

"Standardized tests have become the most effective racist weapon" Kendi

Because redlining and profiling arent issues in schools except for reverse discrimination

 

But you have no problem with others like... white on black crime, huh!

 

OP demonstrates, with links, references, studies, analysis, ...; that it didn't.

Your statement to the contrary, on the other hand is based on... what?.... "Tucker Carlson's told me so"?

 

No, your links merely show that racial disparities still exist and under CRT, any racial disparity that disfavors blacks is by definition labeled as systemic racism.

 

but those studies are bias, so it is essentially statistical garbage just an attempt to ignite racial war.

 

In schools here skin color is the first and most important thing taught. It’s in the curriculum. A whistleblower in our city schools exposed it.

 

Like the three white guys recently convicted of murder for shooting the black guy when he grabbed the barrel of the shooters gun?

 

Exactly! That's what I meant about people being killed that you don't have a problem with. I kinda picture you biting your nails during the trial hoping the three white supremacists were exonerated.

Anyway, I see you have no problem confirming what I suspected.

 

I have no problem with them being sent to rot in prison.

 

These guys are fighting the good fight.
Why We Keep Going in Circles Pointing Out Kendi's B.S.

Loury & McWhorter, Substack

 

You're the only one going around in circles about this... Kendi-person. I've been showing you studies, facts, analysis, ... Which you refuse to address. And that is understandable. A classic right-wing denialist tactic when they are confronted with irrefutable facts: make up an imaginary "enemy" and point all your guns at them.

 

Odd that you would write about CRT without knowing who is Ibram X. Kendi. As for your "studies, facts, analysis," they are nothing of the sort. They are your advocacy positions and assumptions dressed up as something else.

 

You see, unlike folks on the right, us on the left don't need "Messiahs" to tell us what to think. Instead of that we use facts, science, reality....

So, bottom line, on my side I have submitted studies, analysis, reports... and the links, in case you want to verify them or rebut them. On your side you have denial that those studies exist and an invisible enemy who is not here to defend themselves and whom, as you yourself admitted, you go around and around in circles trying to fight. But after 74 pages of this topic, and not a single rebuttal of the FACTS, which have been available to you and others in the OP, is anywhere to be seen.

Given this, I think the conclusion is clear to any unbiased reader who manages to follow this thread. That excludes you, of course.

 

And that is the sad part. You have not, in fact, done anything you have claimed. The results of all your studies are more likely explained without resort to CRT. Indeed, Occam's Razor weighs strongly against CRT as an explanation. Therefore:

 

Your facts are in reference to racial disparities. Your and Kendis conclusions that any racial disparity that disfavors blacks, is by definition, systemic racism, is BS analysis that is the foundation of CRT.

 

You would THINK it would be likely. But only IF they could be explained without resort to CRT. However, we have 74 pages of this thread, and nobody has.

Least of all you.... You have been desperately trying to change the subject by attacking an "invisible enemy" instead.

So it's a pretty safe bet that CRT has proven its case.

 

I haven't attacked any enemy, let alone an invisible one. CRT is not needed to explain all the findings in all your studies.

 

Bzzzz! Wrong answer! The right answer was SHOWING some other way to explain all those pee-reviewed studies, analysis and reports. Because the researchers certainly couldn't find any. Even a 9 year old could sit there and type "there is another way. But I won't tell you what it is"

And, BTW, I have not seen this... Kendi fella in this thread. So yes, you have definitely been trying to change the subject by attacking an invisible enemy.

 

The thread title asks what CRT teaches. Kendi is a leading teacher; he's relevant, no matter how embarrassing you find his arguments.
And in your very first set of examples in the OP you cite a study that is not about what you said it was about. And it goes downhill from there.

 

As the OP makes clear, it's a rhetorical question. Not a poll. The OP answers the question. So your choice was to either debate somebody who is here: ME; or an invisible foe who can't respond. Good choice! It would have been disastrous for you if you had attempted to debate somebody who actually answers back.

 

That is a claim unsupported by the plain language of your OP. Nowhere is there even a hint that it's a rhetorical question. In fact, the OP is a mere sequence of assertions.
I'm happy you answer back; your answers make me look good.

 

In the realm of criminal law, blacks committing more crime quite adequately explains the disparity.

 

Of course there is! The fact that I ANSWERED it is... more than a "hint".

So you don't even know what a rhetorical question is.

Makes no difference, though. The OP demonstrates my arguments. And you chose to attack an invisible enemy instead of addressing them. Even now you try to change the subject to "rhetorical questions". So, my point is made.