We don't need to be afraid of CRT

[Szdfan]

As a new teacher who is trying to understand state educational standards and figure out how to teach “Macbeth” to tenth graders, it’s been fascinating to watch the CRT “controversy” play out. This time, it’s not the liberals who are trying to control what’s being taught in the classroom, it’s the “freedom-loving” conservatives who are pushing legislation in order to dictate and impose an ideological perspective onto teachers. The fear-mongering about CRT is just an excuse to push a different ideological perspective.

Actual CRT isn’t taught in high schools or even on the undergrad college level. It’s usually grad-level work.
Same with Foucault and Derrida.

Don’t be coy.
Teachers teach - what they’ve learned, and how they’ve learned to learn. There may not be a designated label on a specific class.
If you have not viewed these BRIEF videos, take a moment and get a glimpse of how “a rose by any other name, is still a rose.”

"It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing."
-- Macbeth

[Neto]

I don't think anyone wants to be put in a "color box", but I'll repeat this story from 1979 SIL training for Wycliffe Bible Translators service. A group of us were lingering around the supper table in the cafeteria, and a Black girl from California was a part of the group. Someone asked her how she'd prefer to be called, 'Black", or "African American". (This was a time when there was a sort of change in this regard.) She gave her name. She wanted to be known as a person, an individual, with her own emotions, thoughts, & convictions. I think that most people want to be known personally, not as a single member of some social construct.

Absolutely.

But they also want to be able to share their experiences and understandings based on who they are and what they have experienced. Nobody wants to be just a generic person, some things are really personal to each of us, and that varies by culture. In that SIL training, you were also taught to be sensitive to local culture and language and ready to listen. I don't think that contradicts what you said above.

And the people I am listening to say that the deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Tony McDade, Ahmaud Arbery, Stephon Clark, Philando Castile, Alton Sterling, Tamir Rice, Sandra Bland, Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and others have really hit them hard. So has the message that black people who care about this should just shut up, a message they are hearing loudly from some ends of the political spectrum and even parts of the church. The black people I know generally believe that racial profiling is alive and well in the United States. Tim Scott, a Republican, has shared abuot this quite openly (see, e.g. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/2 ... ice-336650). Racial profiling and videos of unwarranted violence against black people are the real source of outrage, CRT is just a framework some scholars use to try to explain it.

In the church, I think we should be interested in listening to our black brothers and sisters as they share their feelings and experiences about these things. I don't think we should tell people it's wrong to speak openly about these things. In Acts, just saying that there is no difference between Jews and Greeks was not enough. When believers of Greek heritage said their widows were being neglected, the church decided to act.

The thing I really cannot understand about this public out-cry is why was there almost no response at all to the shooting death of Botham Jean? Was it because he was not from American background? He was completely and totally innocent. He wasn't committing any sort of crime, had no police record, etc. He was just eating a dish of ice cream in his own apartment, and stood up when a police woman came into his apartment and started yelling at him. Why isn't his name in that list? (He was also a Christian, as I understood - our brother in spirit as well as in body, in second birth as well as in first birth.)

[Ken]

I don't think anyone wants to be put in a "color box", but I'll repeat this story from 1979 SIL training for Wycliffe Bible Translators service. A group of us were lingering around the supper table in the cafeteria, and a Black girl from California was a part of the group. Someone asked her how she'd prefer to be called, 'Black", or "African American". (This was a time when there was a sort of change in this regard.) She gave her name. She wanted to be known as a person, an individual, with her own emotions, thoughts, & convictions. I think that most people want to be known personally, not as a single member of some social construct.

Absolutely.

But they also want to be able to share their experiences and understandings based on who they are and what they have experienced. Nobody wants to be just a generic person, some things are really personal to each of us, and that varies by culture. In that SIL training, you were also taught to be sensitive to local culture and language and ready to listen. I don't think that contradicts what you said above.

And the people I am listening to say that the deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Tony McDade, Ahmaud Arbery, Stephon Clark, Philando Castile, Alton Sterling, Tamir Rice, Sandra Bland, Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and others have really hit them hard. So has the message that black people who care about this should just shut up, a message they are hearing loudly from some ends of the political spectrum and even parts of the church. The black people I know generally believe that racial profiling is alive and well in the United States. Tim Scott, a Republican, has shared abuot this quite openly (see, e.g. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/2 ... ice-336650). Racial profiling and videos of unwarranted violence against black people are the real source of outrage, CRT is just a framework some scholars use to try to explain it.

In the church, I think we should be interested in listening to our black brothers and sisters as they share their feelings and experiences about these things. I don't think we should tell people it's wrong to speak openly about these things. In Acts, just saying that there is no difference between Jews and Greeks was not enough. When believers of Greek heritage said their widows were being neglected, the church decided to act.

The thing I really cannot understand about this public out-cry is why was there almost no response at all to the shooting death of Botham Jean? Was it because he was not from American background? He was completely and totally innocent. He wasn't committing any sort of crime, had no police record, etc. He was just eating a dish of ice cream in his own apartment, and stood up when a police woman came into his apartment and started yelling at him. Why isn't his name in that list? (He was also a Christian, as I understood - our brother in spirit as well as in body, in second birth as well as in first birth.)

There was plenty of outcry at the time. But the police officer who killed him was quickly arrested and convicted and is serving a 10-year sentence. So in that case there was not really as much to protest.

[Szdfan]

The thing I really cannot understand about this public out-cry is why was there almost no response at all to the shooting death of Botham Jean? Was it because he was not from American background? He was completely and totally innocent. He wasn't committing any sort of crime, had no police record, etc. He was just eating a dish of ice cream in his own apartment, and stood up when a police woman came into his apartment and started yelling at him. Why isn't his name in that list? (He was also a Christian, as I understood - our brother in spirit as well as in body, in second birth as well as in first birth.)

There was plenty of outcry at the time. But the police officer who killed him was quickly arrested and convicted and is serving a 10-year sentence. So in that case there was not really as much to protest.

There were protests in Dallas in response to Botham's death.

https://www.dallasobserver.com/news/bot ... s-11129675

Two protests Monday night outside police headquarters captured the range of emotions aroused by the death of Botham Jean, who was killed last week in his apartment by Dallas police Officer Amber Guyger. One was a silent sit-in. The second, louder protest was met by police firing balls of pepper spray.

And there were protests in 2020, remembering Botham and other victims of police violence.
https://www.fox4news.com/news/demonstra ... was-killed

Protests and demonstrations continued Sunday in Dallas, just a day after thousands of people marched through Downtown Dallas.

Protests kicked off Sunday morning outside Dallas police headquarters with the National Injustice Peaceful Rally.

Hundreds of protesters stopped for a moment of silence at the apartment complex where Botham Jean was killed in his apartment by former Dallas PD officer Amber Guyger in 2018.

[Szdfan]

The thing I really cannot understand about this public out-cry is why was there almost no response at all to the shooting death of Botham Jean? Was it because he was not from American background? He was completely and totally innocent. He wasn't committing any sort of crime, had no police record, etc. He was just eating a dish of ice cream in his own apartment, and stood up when a police woman came into his apartment and started yelling at him. Why isn't his name in that list? (He was also a Christian, as I understood - our brother in spirit as well as in body, in second birth as well as in first birth.)

There was plenty of outcry at the time. But the police officer who killed him was quickly arrested and convicted and is serving a 10-year sentence. So in that case there was not really as much to protest.

There were protests in Dallas in response to Botham's death.

https://www.dallasobserver.com/news/bot ... s-11129675

Two protests Monday night outside police headquarters captured the range of emotions aroused by the death of Botham Jean, who was killed last week in his apartment by Dallas police Officer Amber Guyger. One was a silent sit-in. The second, louder protest was met by police firing balls of pepper spray.

And there were protests in 2020, remembering Botham and other victims of police violence.
https://www.fox4news.com/news/demonstra ... was-killed

Protests and demonstrations continued Sunday in Dallas, just a day after thousands of people marched through Downtown Dallas.

Protests kicked off Sunday morning outside Dallas police headquarters with the National Injustice Peaceful Rally.

Hundreds of protesters stopped for a moment of silence at the apartment complex where Botham Jean was killed in his apartment by former Dallas PD officer Amber Guyger in 2018.

There were also protests after Guyger's sentencing since people believed the sentence wasn't long enough:
https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/activ ... ng/273463/

[temporal1]

Miriam Carey. crickets.

[Robert]

Since we are talking about CRT, I should point out that Derrick Bell, who is often considered the founder of CRT, agrees with you, which is why he proposes solutions like magnet schools, which offer advantages to both whites and blacks. That's what he means when he says whites will always act in their own interest and anyone seeking equity for blacks need to take that into account.

If white will only act in their own self interest, then why did so many die fighting in the civil war to free blacks from slavery and what about the many who marched with the civil rights movements who were also attacked for their involvement?

I disagree with this premise.

[Soloist]

Since we are talking about CRT, I should point out that Derrick Bell, who is often considered the founder of CRT, agrees with you, which is why he proposes solutions like magnet schools, which offer advantages to both whites and blacks. That's what he means when he says whites will always act in their own interest and anyone seeking equity for blacks need to take that into account.

If white will only act in their own self interest, then why did so many die fighting in the civil war to free blacks from slavery and what about the many who marched with the civil rights movements who were also attacked for their involvement?

I disagree with this premise.

So... what reason would someone have to seek equity with the blacks? what self interest would they have to pursue this? They are speaking to someone about white people... so what is this someone's interest in doing so?

This whole discussion reeks of someone who believes altruism doesn't exist.

So... Anyone who wants to seek equity with blacks, what's in it for you? what is your selfish reason for it?

Is it possible that this is rubbish and people do good because they actually care? and that it has nothing to do with their skin?

[GaryK]

As for Christians joining with secular movements and earthly governments to deal with sin issues - that's something I don't find Jesus and the Apostles teaching or engaging in. In fact the NT scriptures clearly warn against being yoked together with unbelievers. That's at the heart of my concern about Christians embracing CRT and other secular ideologies to try and accomplish something the finished work of Jesus sufficiently provides for. You seem to be promoting this idea in your paper. This may surprise you, but I find that idea equally as galling as Christian nationalism, which is truly galling to me.

I am not advocating for Christians to join the organization BLM or the CP. Not at all. Let me explain it this way.

One approach, the one I often hear from conservative Christian's across the USA is that CRT is a threat to the church and it is evil, racist and Marxist/Commujist ideology. And the church should repudiate it as did SBC. I am suggesting that CRT actually, like Marxism, brings some important thinking to the conversation. And when we reject those theories with a religious fervor or concern it doesn't do away with the real problems noted by the theories and it doesn't sit well with those that see the validity of the issues being raised. The truth is black people are not more wicked, lazy, or sinful than anybody else, neither are they more righteous. They are people. There are real social, historical, and political reasons, systems, as to why black people have less economic and social power, why there are more of them in prison, etc, in this country. These reasons go way beyond black people are lazier and more wicked sinners or more promiscuous than whites. CRT gives a framework for understanding this outside of a "blaming the victim" approach. That can, and should in my view, be validated. It is a lie that black people are worse than white people and that explains the inequity. That lie severely impacts white people and also black people with regard to how they see themselves.

All that said, violence and coercion, though tempting, are not the solutions. I think Christian's should acknowledge the issues some of these theories raise. We can say to the commie, we value brotherhood, we appreciate your concern regarding the poor and inequality. You are right. However violent revolution wont work to fix it, but let us tell you about a kingdom that is led by a man where these problems are acknowledged and worked on. And that King is advancing his kingdom across our society. To the CRT folks we can say, you are right. Black people have been historically oppressed and yet today as a result they have less social and economic opportunity and have less political power. And they are discriminated against in many ways yet today. Violence wont work to make the rights wrong, but there are tools and a kingdom where we can fight to end these wrongs and work for racial reconciliation and restitution. In my view that approach would be much more effective and Christlike rather than issuing formal denunciations and papers condemning evil theories. That is what I am advocating for.

Now, why Christian Nationalism is especially galling. First that narionalism is an actual idol in the USA church. There are no hymns of praise sung to CRT. CRT flags and idols are not at the front of every church in America. CRT is not spoken of in glowing myths about its founders being Christian and it being a special theory blest by God. There wasn't CRT emblazoned on church bulletins and programs on July 4th Sunday like there was on even at least one CA church. The mixture of nationalism with Christianity deserves a more rigorous critique because it is a heresy within the church itself, and because it is an actual idol in the church. Look how the conservative Chrsitians responsed when a few athletes wouldn't stand and worship the flag at a football game. The true devotion came out clearly. Skipping church to watch the superbowl? No problem. Not standing for the flag at the actual game...big problem. My daughter's Christian Abeka teacher literally said, after singing a patriotic hymn, "now that we are done singing praises to our country, let's sing praises to our God." (At that point we dispensed with Abeka Bible curriculum). As Chrisitans I believe we should be more discerning and prophetic for our own issues. The world we expect to not model Jesus, the church however names his name is rightdully held to a higher standard methinks.

I'm trying to understand why it's important for followers of Jesus to affirm "good" things in secular ideologies. You are presenting only 2 possible responses to CRT and other ideologies here. 1. Affirm the "good" in these ideologies and then use that "good" to promote the Kingdom. 2. Issue formal denunciations and papers condemning evil theories.

The primary problem I have with the first response is that it affirms parts of ideologies that are secular in nature. Secularism is clearly at odds with the NT Kingdom. And for Kingdom Christians to team up with these ideologies by promoting them, even to the extent of writing papers doing so, is, in my view, anti-Kingdom in nature.

You state above: "CRT is not spoken of in glowing myths about its founders being Christian and it being a special theory blest by God." In your paper you say things like "So what then is the essence of some of these “valid points” CRT brings to the anti-racism conversation? Well, they are these (none of which contradict the person Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior, his teachings and his witness):" and "None of the above propositions is particularly objectionable with regard to Jesus Christ and his good news or the scriptures. In fact, in some ways these particular components dovetail well with a biblical understanding of the human condition." That sounds pretty close to saying that parts of the theory are blest by God.

You seem to look negatively at Christians writing papers denouncing particular secular ideologies but seem to be okay with Christians writing papers promoting them. Why is the one more right than the other?

The problem I have with the 2nd response you present is that I don't find in Jesus' and the apostles teaching where followers of Jesus are called to become activists against every secular ideology that comes along. I live in the south and see an abundance of "Christian" patriotism and anti-left sentiment and I want no part of it.

These responses, in my view, are opposite sides of the same coin. The coin being the idea that it is the Christian's duty to try and reform societies through civil activism. I do not believe followers of Jesus are called to that.

I believe our calling as followers of Jesus is to present to individuals the good news as you presented it in the other thread rather than using the tools of secular societies to try and accomplish Kingdom building. I contend you are using some of those tools in your paper.

[Neto]

re: the lack of an out cry regarding the death of Botham Jean: Maybe "almost no outcry" was wrong terminology. But in comparison to these other cases, situations where a person already had a police record, had in some cases just committed a crime, or was uncooperative with police orders, in that sense there was very little response. (Not that I was hoping for riots, but such an unwarranted shooting almost cried out for one.) Maybe it was because he wasn't really a part of their in-group, their particular sub-culture. Maybe it was because his ancestors, if they had been slaves, were not slaves here in the States. I just don't understand it. It was more of a musing, really, something that just didn't (and doesn't) make sense to me.