Mormons and Critical Race Theory

[MG 2.0]

Sure, as you mentioned, equal treatment of those with different racial/ethnic origins has always been something that humans have had to deal with. There have always been the overlords and the serfs....

Is there some other interpretation of this--besides the obvious-- that you could share with us?

As it stands, that is a stunningly insensitive remark.

You may be misinterpreting what I’m saying. Regimes of one sort or another have ruled upon the principle of ruler/vanquished. I’m obviously not saying I condone or agree with that FACT.

Regards,
MG

[drumdude]

It seems like this is an axiom of critical race theory, rather than something which has been demonstrated with data.

I don't think its a good axiom to build anything with.

Funny, I think it’s a solid axiom to build understanding. Isn’t it extremely arrogant to just assume you know what it’s like to be someone else? Especially someone whose background and life experiences are very different than your own? The consequences of this axiom are that we should listen to and give credence to others when they tell us what their lived experience is?

And if you actually think it’s just an axiom, then I suggest you do a little digging into the literature on privilege.

You went from the specific “white people can’t understand” to the general “people need to understand.”

It would be like teaching the golden rule by saying, “black people need to be treated like you would like to be treated.”

That is true, but it’s a narrow subset of everyone needing to treat everyone how they would like to be treated.

[Gadianton]

were to make their names known and go public in specificity, as to their personal experiences, the militantly woke

I see. So not only are they in danger if they reveal their identity, but Christianson can't even relay any specific examples of their objections because even that would put them in danger because the militantly woke are so woke.

It's really interesting that with all the power the militantly woke have, that the same bunch of moronic loudmouths who get all over social media with conspiracies about vaccines and stolen elections, can't likewise reveal their objections over critical race theory. Why do you think that is, MG?

I have little doubt that there are parents in Utah who are watching the same news channels you do and are in panic mode over critical race theory. What I doubt as that any of them have had actual real school-system experiences to back any of that up.

[MG 2.0]

Can you even imagine what it is like for a disadvantaged person to find themselves falling behind in an activity like this? I think approaching curriculum development from the point of view of “A rising tide lifts ALL boats” is going to have a more lasting and positive effect. NO ONE wants to be put in a position where they see themselves falling behind he rest of their classmates in real time.

This whole reparations thing is a fix that’s shallow and unresponsive to the real needs of the disadvantaged. But it damn well helps the white folks feel good about themselves.

Policies and curriculum that lift ALL students is the way to go in my opinion. That’s the whole idea behind he legislative enactments for Utah and Idaho listed on page one of this thread. Let’s not sink ANYONE’S boat. Let’s keep them ALL afloat. There is no reason to start firing cannons at the other boat…unless you’re a pirate looking for some kind of booty or power.

Regards,
MG

I'd suggest that a couple of old white guys CAN'T imagine what it would be like. I read a full lesson plan for the exercise. https://peacelearner.org/2016/03/14/pri ... sson-plan/

It seems to that the exercise, done properly, would lead students to empathize with each other, as well as recognize that privilege comes in all forms. I'd suggest that it would make more sense to talk to students after the exercise rather than invent a parade of horribles.

Notice that the lesson plan is written for college age students. Would you want to see this plan used in secondary or even elementary schools? Has it been? Will it be?

I disagree with the thrust of this plan and any others that essentially point fingers and demonstrably, in real time, move students into a physical spaces that are SO uncomfortable and demeaning. Is that what you want? I will agree that there is a qualitative difference in the psyche of a college student and a secondary school age student.

With these lesson plans, where are the lines going to be drawn. And possibly even more importantly, how are the teachers…many who are either liberal or leftists, going to be trusted to teach/approach such a difficult subject in an unbiased and equitable fashion?

It’s a BIG can of worms to go at this with the feds pulling the strings and knocking at the doors. Schools are not the place to literally divide students into advantaged and disadvantaged. And as I’ve alluded to, I think there are a LOT of teachers that can’t be trusted nowadays to do what many folks would consider to be the right thing.

Curriculum that lifts ALL students is preferable. At least that’s my observation from working in the education sector for many years.

Critical Race Theory, or anything like unto it, doesn’t belong in the schools.

Reading, writing, and arithmetic? Yep.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

were to make their names known and go public in specificity, as to their personal experiences, the militantly woke

I see. So not only are they in danger if they reveal their identity, but Christianson can't even relay any specific examples of their objections because even that would put them in danger because the militantly woke are so woke.

It's really interesting that with all the power the militantly woke have, that the same bunch of moronic loudmouths who get all over social media with conspiracies about vaccines and stolen elections, can't likewise reveal their objections over critical race theory. Why do you think that is, MG?

I have little doubt that there are parents in Utah who are watching the same news channels you do and are in panic mode over critical race theory. What I doubt as that any of them have had actual real school-system experiences to back any of that up.

You are looking at this through a VERY narrow viewfinder.

critical race theory asserts such concepts as the permanence of racism, the idea that racism is not an accidental bug but a deliberate feature of U.S. society, and interest convergence, which argues that white elites will yield to black demands for justice only when doing so serves the interest of the white power structure. The tenets, put forth as self-evident truths, were developed by legal scholars in the 1970s and 1980s, and later ignited across academic disciplines, such as education, English literature, sociology and political science, around the country. Today critical race theory is pushing the boundaries of science and medicine.

But what makes critical race theory truly radical is that it “questions the very foundations of the liberal order” as the source of anti-black oppression, according to “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction,” a 2001 book, now in its third edition, that’s used in high schools and universities. Classical liberal ideals such as free speech, equal treatment and individual rights are not revered as sacrosanct constitutional guarantees, but regarded as hollow phrases and unearned privileges – mere smokescreens created by white men to justify structuring social institutions for their own advantage – that sometimes need to be scaled back to advance social justice.

Critical race theory entered the field of education in the mid-1990s, initially as an academic research methodology for explaining racial disparities in school discipline, standardized test scores and high school graduation rates as consequences of systemic racism and implicit bias, as opposed to social pathologies within the black community. Over time, the study of critical race theory trickled down to education students in college, who then became K-12 teachers and administrators and began applying the ideas in their work as educators.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com ... 08528.html

Read the whole article. Carefully.

Critical race theory has been coming along and metastasizing for quite a few years. Now there are those that would like to see the fruits of their labors come to fruition. The question is, is that what WE THE PEOPLE want? I’m simply arguing the fact that I don’t think it’s wise to bring racism and divisiveness into our schools. It’s much more divisive than it is inclusive. Again, that’s what the Utah/Idaho legislators are trying to out there. Let’s work at lifting ALL boats and not one at the expense of another.

There’s a bunch of reverse racism going on from the far left in my opinion.

Anyway, I think I’ve given my two cents as a counterpoint to the left wing crowd that mainly inhabits these parts. Except, I notice, for a few that can see the dangers of Critical Race Theory coming into our schools.

Regards,
MG

[Gadianton]

You are looking at this through a VERY narrow viewfinder.

well yes, I was only looking at the video that you and A-Mike agreed made your case as anti-critical race theory.

Now that you fail to cite a single example from that long interview with Christianson of anything specifically happening that's bad with critical race theory in Utah, you're switching to a new article. And it doesn't talk about Utah. lol.

As a substitute teacher, can you tell us about your own brushes with critical race theory in Utah schools?

[Gadianton]

By the way, MG, critical race theory is a stone's through away from all the relativist stuff you're into with Terryl Givens.

I've read your article, and I'm going to use it against you the next time you try to defend the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, or the Book of Abraham with relativism.

[drumdude]

It seems to me there is actually a ton of common ground here. There aren't many (any?) examples of critical race theory overtly being taught in K-12 in Utah. This seems to be because even the proponents agree that it should be taught in college and not in K-12.

And I'll assume that Atlantic Mike and MG2.0 agree that we should teach children about the history of racism in America. They just think critical race theory is not the way to do that.

Both sides are operating based on a fear of what might happen rather than a fear of what is actually happening. The critical race theory proponents are afraid that a ban on critical race theory will lead to children not learning about racism at all, not learning about the history of oppression. The critical race theory opponents are worried that their children will be secretly taught critical race theory, and brainwashed to support a radical ideology.

I don't think either of those fears are reasonable.

[Res Ipsa]

Funny, I think it’s a solid axiom to build understanding. Isn’t it extremely arrogant to just assume you know what it’s like to be someone else? Especially someone whose background and life experiences are very different than your own? The consequences of this axiom are that we should listen to and give credence to others when they tell us what their lived experience is?

And if you actually think it’s just an axiom, then I suggest you do a little digging into the literature on privilege.

You went from the specific “white people can’t understand” to the general “people need to understand.”

It would be like teaching the golden rule by saying, “black people need to be treated like you would like to be treated.”

That is true, but it’s a narrow subset of everyone needing to treat everyone how they would like to be treated.

So? The context was an old white guy, like me, pretending that he knew what the impact of an exercise would be on someone unlike himself. Why is it that you object to general principles you actually agree with when they applied in a specific racial setting? That’s kinda what the whole concept of white fragility is about.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

First, equality of opportunity and equality of outcome aren’t mutually exclusive. Second, equality doesn’t mean identical. Third, outcome is a test of opportunity. … We don’t even really try to create anything that resembles equal opportunity.

You sure about that? That we haven’t tried? People have attempted to create utopian systems, fought wars of liberation, waged revolutions, and created republics. Even within our own system we continue to fight one another to better reflect our idealism, whatever that means for the body politic, getting some things right and getting some things wrong. The problem with creating opportunity for some, it appears, is that we have to hamstring others, take their property, or otherwise create artificial disadvantages for all sorts of individuals and groups. We have to curtail their rights to self organize how they see fit to ‘level out the playing field’. That sounds great, but the ugly reality is when you remove opportunity from one person based on whatever criteria, in order to give it to another because ‘representation matters’, you still literally discriminated against the former on an unfair criteria for them. It’s literally bigotry, but bigotry deemed as socially acceptable. How is that justice when you just switch aggrieved parties?

So, I guess my ask for you is what does your end game look like? Because when I hear equality of opportunity and equality of outcome, I don’t see a way to get there without artificial constraints levied upon the body politic. All you’re doing, in my opinion, is trading one set of problems for a solution that creates another terrible set of problems.

- Doc