What are your thoughts re Hegelian Dialectic & CRT

[Ken]

Gary, I think you need to include the next sentence:

We have made a lot of progress. I think we can all agree that we are in a better place than we were 50 years ago or 100 years ago. But in many ways we still have more progress to make before we have a true color-blind society. And figuring out how to get there is going to involve lots of fits and starts and backsliding as well as mistakes and ineffective nonsense.

Focusing divisively on race is part of the backsliding and mistakes, and there's a lot of ineffective nonsense in current academia. It will probably take a radical change in methodology for progress to continue.

Focusing divisively on race can be counter-productive, yes. People need to figure out how to work together productively. And yes, there is a lot of nonsense in academia. You want to stir up trouble, ask any group of teachers what they think about the latest educational theories or fads. And whatever new thing their administration or state is pushing on them. Most of which has nothing at all to do with race but is just the latest reinventing the wheel by people who aren't actually doing the job in question.

I don't know what radical change in methodology you are talking about. This stuff always comes and goes. Teachers will pick up on the things that are working and discard the things that aren't. And then there will be some new thing that everyone is hot and bothered about. The young teachers will annoy the old teachers and vice versa. The administrators and decision-makers will annoy everyone. And the cycle will continue as it has for decades and decades. Most of teaching has nothing at all to do with any of this. It is the hard work of teaching kids to read or write in complete sentences or care about trigonometry or atomic theory or Spanish gerunds. When they are distracted by hormones and everything around them.

[ohio jones]

I don't know what radical change in methodology you are talking about.

I regret if my mention of academia as the locus of nonsense led you to think it's the focus of the change I believe needs to happen.

[Ken]

I don't know what radical change in methodology you are talking about.

I regret if my mention of academia as the locus of nonsense led you to think it's the focus of the change I believe needs to happen.

You do realize that academics mostly just talk to themselves? Most of this has little connection to what goes on in the real world on a day to day basis. Teachers mostly just have to figure out what works for themselves.

[ohio jones]

I don't know what radical change in methodology you are talking about.

I regret if my mention of academia as the locus of nonsense led you to think it's the focus of the change I believe needs to happen.

You do realize that academics mostly just talk to themselves? Most of this has little connection to what goes on in the real world on a day to day basis.

Yes, but I'm aware of several exceptions.

[GaryK]

Gary, I think you need to include the next sentence:

We have made a lot of progress. I think we can all agree that we are in a better place than we were 50 years ago or 100 years ago. But in many ways we still have more progress to make before we have a true color-blind society. And figuring out how to get there is going to involve lots of fits and starts and backsliding as well as mistakes and ineffective nonsense.

Focusing divisively on race is part of the backsliding and mistakes, and there's a lot of ineffective nonsense in current academia. It will probably take a radical change in methodology for progress to continue.

I agree.

I was simply trying to point out one idea that the anti-racism ideology promotes, which is an anti-color-blind society.

[GaryK]

We have made a lot of progress. I think we can all agree that we are in a better place than we were 50 years ago or 100 years ago. But in many ways we still have more progress to make before we have a true color-blind society.

A color-blind society? The anti-racism ideology pretty much implies that to strive for color-blindness is itself racist.

I can't speak for an entire "ideology". But I would suggest that pretending that a color-blind society actually exists when we are a long ways away from it is more the problem. When the schools attended by poor black children and rich white children have equal resources. And when black children and white children experience equal treatment when it comes to school discipline. And equal treatment in the criminal justice system and job market. Then we will be actually getting closer to a color blind society. We have a long ways to go yet.

I think we all agree that the US has a virulently racist past. On what date do you think we erased our past and achieved a color-blind society? 1980? 1990? 2000? 2010? 2020? Or are we still not there yet?

My point is that embracing the teaching of anti-racism in schools, as currently being taught, runs counter to what you think society needs to be striving for. I get it that you seem to be using the term anti-racism and color-blindness in more of a classical sense, more along the lines of what MLK promoted, and I am in agreement with that. But you risk having the ire of the anti-racism ideology proponents turned on you for embracing such a view. This ideology is what Manhattan Institute says is being widely promoted in schools today and I believe it.

[Ken]

A color-blind society? The anti-racism ideology pretty much implies that to strive for color-blindness is itself racist.

I can't speak for an entire "ideology". But I would suggest that pretending that a color-blind society actually exists when we are a long ways away from it is more the problem. When the schools attended by poor black children and rich white children have equal resources. And when black children and white children experience equal treatment when it comes to school discipline. And equal treatment in the criminal justice system and job market. Then we will be actually getting closer to a color blind society. We have a long ways to go yet.

I think we all agree that the US has a virulently racist past. On what date do you think we erased our past and achieved a color-blind society? 1980? 1990? 2000? 2010? 2020? Or are we still not there yet?

My point is that embracing the teaching of anti-racism in schools, as currently being taught, runs counter to what you think society needs to be striving for. I get it that you seem to be using the term anti-racism and color-blindness in more of a classical sense, more along the lines of what MLK promoted, and I am in agreement with that. But you risk having the ire of the anti-racism ideology proponents turned on you for embracing such a view. This ideology is what Manhattan Institute says is being widely promoted in schools today and I believe it.

I'm actually sitting in a public school right now. It isn't as you are the Manhattan Institute describe. Or that ridiculous study that proved nothing. This idea of "divisive" anti-racism that makes white kids feel bad? That is mostly invented by culture war types on the right who are trying to invent controversy. I'm sure there is the odd teacher here and there who challenges there students to examine their beliefs and assumptions. Which is probably a good thing. But I have had three kids go through the public schools and I teach in one. And there is nothing of the sort of divisive anti-racism that you imagine is pervasive. They learn about racism in US history classes as they should. The read the occasional novel that addresses race in English lit classes and have class discussions. As they should. It is part of the US experience. The schools are consistent about promoting an inclusive and welcoming environment and preventing bullying and bias. And that isn't really much about race. But special ed kids with obvious mental or physical disabilities, kids with obvious autism who might seem strange or weird, Muslim kids in headscarves, immigrant kids with limited English, LGBT kids, and so forth. Kids actually get it. It's mostly the adults and parents who are the problem.

One of the things about teaching is that it actually makes you optimistic about the future. Because the kids these days are mostly better than my generation in so many ways.

[temporal1]

Page 15:

download (2).jpeg

Stay Woke: The Black Lives Matter Movement is a 2016 American television documentary film starring Jesse Williams about the Black Lives Matter movement, and the events that led to the uprising of the movement.
The phrase "stay woke" refers to a continuing awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice and came to widespread use as a result of Black Lives Matter.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stay_Wo ... r_Movement

Just so you know we don't just make these terms up out of the blue. It is due to this "continuing awareness" of racial and social justice issues that they refer to themselves as "Woke."

Studies show the "awareness" referred to here is historically rooted in the Critical Theory of neomarxism as exemplified by Herbert Marcuse. So "Woke" isn't a racist name imposed on these movements from the outside, it's the way members of the movement choose to describe themselves.

Don't blame us for the terminology, we're just trying to keep up!

Hoping Falco Underhill / Falco Knotwise will notice this and respond:

Ben Shapiro with James Lindsay / James Lindsay Knows More About This Than Anyone / 57min

Description:
“Dr. James Lindsay is an author, mathematician, cultural critic and founder of New Discourses, a site dedicating to
“pursuing the light of objective truth in subjective darkness.”

In today’s episode, we discuss Lindsay’s new book
“The Marxification of Education," the cult of critical theory and the “long slow march through institutions'' that corrupted the educational system by political activists masquerading as teachers, and how we can ultimately reclaim our schools.”

Much has transpired in real life since these (CRT) discussions began, not long ago, on MN.
They are serious, and bulldozing their way along.

i’m glad these men are unabashedly referring to “cults,” i believe various godless cults have found the “magic formula” of invading both laws of the land and the public treasury for protections, promotion, funding .. as not before.

In my lifetime, i’ve outlived some heinous cults, none had the “vision” to hijack human law and the public treasury.
Government has the power to “give life to” that which would naturally die a natural death.

Thankfully, lots of unorganized folks are resisting, especially attempting to protect their children. Not easy.
The organized cultists are steps-ahead, willing to mow them down by any words/means imaginable.

It’s happening in real time as this is being discussed. Not speculation. Not a joke.

When a people (a city in this case) reject all sexual morality, it becomes really difficult for them to retain any morality.
Once critical mass is reached, it is about hopeless to stem the tide of evil. Evil become celebrated and is called good.

No one can judge righteous judgment, they will not tolerate it.

[temporal1]

Hoping Falco Underhill / Falco Knotwise will notice this and respond:

.. i saw what you didn’t do there ..

[Falco Knotwise]

Hoping Falco Underhill / Falco Knotwise will notice this and respond:

.. i saw what you didn’t do there ..

What have you seen happening in real time lately since we last discussed this?

(The video was excellent, by the way.)