Politics And Current Events

[CBear3]

We've had this discussion before, but the problem with CRT is that the Western world absolutely used race to divide and maintain power historically, but that the real historical lesson to carry forward is that those in power will try to maintain power and status by dividing under any means or line of delineation necessary.

[Troy Loney]

Thats just history.

Problem you are talking about here are bad actors demonizing the term CRT and confusing it with things they don’t like being told about.

CRT should be demonized because it's racist garbage. But CRT is absolutely not the teaching of accurate history. CRT is the neo-Marxist concept (heavily flavored with postmodernist gibberish) that: (1) the fundamental underlying structure of society is race and racism; (2) every system and concept created by a dominant group (which is always white people) has been overtly or covertly structured to enforce and perpetuate the dominant status of that group, even if the people who created that system had the explicit goal of being race-neutral; (3) white people are inherently racist and benefit from "whiteness" because every system created by white people has been overtly or covertly structured to enforce and perpetuate the dominant status of white people; (4) any disparate outcomes between white people and other groups are demonstrative of this structural racism*; and (5) the solution to all of this is "equity," which does not mean equality but rather means active discrimination against white people** in order to ensure proportional representation of all races without regard to performance.***


* Except for Asians, for many racist reasons.
** And also those pesky Asians.
*** Excluding any areas, of course, where minorities already outperform whites, such as the NBA having ~75% black players.

Okay.

Again, the post I was responding to was conflating factual history with crt. Crt should not be discussed below university level courses. The important item here being “theory”, critical thinking and theory is not really what we’d expect from standard secondary ed history stuff. I mean, again, to the whole nonsense around banning something that isn’t really being “taught”. As opposed to maybe some gestures or lessons from random teachers across the country that may fall under some crt type discussions.

But yeah, go off on crt (again)

[tifosi77]

I pledge allegiance to the mag...

At least it's fitting in Santos' case, since he invented the gun and all. 'AR' stand for 'George Soros' (in his native Hindi)

[tifosi77]

ok. What is it?


I guess my point is that it’s subjective and definitions change from person to person. To me, both are bad

You seem to make that point quite often.

Anyway: I'm not a big fan of either, but nationalism is certainly the more dangerous variant. I think this is a pretty good definition (which I stole from the net; sorry, I'm lazy): Patriotism refers to devotion to a particular place and involves social conditioning and personal opinions. Nationalism involves national identity and a superior feeling towards one's own nation.

Of course, nationalists tend to frame themselves as patriots. Then they storm the Capitol where they get shot by patriots.

Patriotism is at least somewhat evidence-based if still largely subjective, and can change based on the passage of time. The Constitution should fuel patriotism, Jim Crow should temper it. People can wildly disagree on the evaluation of the country and still both be patriotic imo.

The latter is absolutism. Your country, no matter what. ( Or "[insert totally random country name here] over all", as it was once said)

[tifosi77]

Poop poop poop, didn't see the someone else already made the Santos joke. Carry on.

[NAN]

Poop poop poop, didn't see the someone else already made the Santos joke. Carry on.

Mine was better jerky mcjerkface

[Gaucho]

[Ad@m]

Dafuq

[willeyeam]

I would have been surprised if there wasn't anything spying on us tbh

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

[Gaucho]

just one?

[Beveridge]

If China didn't sensor social media, they would know that we aren't worth spying on.

[dodint]

They want to watch ulf fill that cup.

[Shyster]

Okay.

Again, the post I was responding to was conflating factual history with crt. Crt should not be discussed below university level courses. The important item here being “theory”, critical thinking and theory is not really what we’d expect from standard secondary ed history stuff. I mean, again, to the whole nonsense around banning something that isn’t really being “taught”. As opposed to maybe some gestures or lessons from random teachers across the country that may fall under some crt type discussions.

But yeah, go off on crt (again)

I was agreeing with you when I said, "But CRT is absolutely not the teaching of accurate history." Anyone who conflates the teaching of accurate history with CRT is incorrect.

I would also agree that CRT isn't being "taught" per se in secondary schools. High-school teachers are not giving instruction on CRT itself. The problem is that CRT is essentially a comprehensive worldview. (The discussion isn't necessary here, but there are some interesting and credible arguments that CRT could be considered a form of religion.) That worldview is something that in many cases will influence the way that high-school teacher actually teaches history. Take for example the 1619 Project; the whole purpose of that project is to reframe US history through a lens of CRT. A teacher using the 1619 Project as the basis for a lesson plan on US history would no doubt say, "I'm teaching history, not Critical Race Theory," but that wouldn't be the whole truth because the 1619 Project is based on the assumption that the tenets of CRT (i.e., everything ever created by white people is structurally racist in favor of white people) are true and accurate.

[Shyster]

China has plenty of spy satellites. They wouldn't need to use a balloon for surveillance.

[mikey]

Developing a spy balloon from China
Has-been senior official surveilling the U.S.

[meow]

Surveil deez nuts

[NTP66]

Surveil deez nuts

[MrKennethTKangaroo]

I wonder if they are surveilling any of weenie's dates? For their sake I hope not

[Shyster]

Today the Fifth Circuit held that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8)—which bars people subject to domestic violence restraining orders from owning or possessing firearms—is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

[crusherstasiak]

well, shysdaddy, i'm guessing this made your day
but as the father of a daughter and uncle of a young woman who escaped an abusive relationship with a gun fanatic i think i can speak for my sister and brother-in-law and say we all think this sucks

[MR25]

Not really something to celebrate IMO, especially given the connection between those who commit mass shootings and past instances of domestic violence/violence against women.

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

Another ruling in the guise of freedom that will only lead to more death and suffering.

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

Is there a difference between a civil and criminal restraining order?

[Pavel Bure]

Yuri? Where’s Kane?