lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2007
- Messages
- 13,208
Not really. The principles of CRT are for the most part pretty bland. Eg:True and misleading at the same time. CRT is not taught in elementary or high school but its principles are clearly guiding decisions of school boards and administrators, many of whom actually have graduate degrees.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory
A tenet of CRT is that racism and disparate racial outcomes are the result of complex, changing, and often subtle social and institutional dynamics, rather than explicit and intentional prejudices of individuals.
They are referring to classical liberals there, not left-leaning Americans.
"Classical Liberalism" is just modern mainstream Liberalism with the last 100 years of Economics stripped away. Despite what your propaganda sources have told you these are not any more different than that.
One is to improve the abilities of the lowest performers. This can be difficult. The other is to lower the abilities of the highest performers. This is comparatively easy and the route that California has chosen.
Having higher and lower performing students in the same classroom seems pretty normal these days and seems to stem from new theories in education, not CRT.
As a card-carrying member of the right wing nutbars, I can tell you that it is easy to tell the actual history of race and racism in America as a positive tale of two great evils (slavery and segregation) that were overcome, largely because they so obviously contradicted the ideals expressed by the founders about things like liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Don't forget the genocide...
You are wrong in saying these have been overcome. People are still being systematically targeted with repression and economic disadvantage based on their skin color. Actual academic opposition to CRT isn't based on denying this happens but disagreement on the suitability of some of it's proposed solutions.