Twitter is a Private Company
sprout said:
paulsurovell said:
A big factor here is the failure of liberals to reject the term "Critical Race Theory," which is apart from being undefined, suggests a doctrine rather than a well-established academic field (sorry I don't have another word for "field") of study, which is what African American studies is.
Oh, FFS. You are squarely in blame-the-victim territory.
Liberals have been trying to explain that CRT is a topic in college/grad school since the 1980's (I myself attended a law-professor led conference session about it a couple decades ago). It has historically been a field of study that examines how the law/legal system maintains systemic racism in order to try to change it.
Republicans worked overtime to misuse this term for their propaganda purposes: To enrage white snowflakes that their younger kids are learning about racism. Republican propaganda is strong - fear is winning; angertainment is winning, rage tweeting is winning. When you find the perfect antidote to all of these, let the 'liberals' know, please.
What's the "theory"?
drummerboy said:
paulsurovell said:
And part of the reason why DeSantis gets away with using the phrase "woke indoctrination" is that failure to call out out-of-control wokeness by liberals (like you) has enabled DeSantis to deceive the public into thinking that teaching African American studies is part of the woke campaign to chastise people about how they speak and think.
A big factor here is the failure of liberals to reject the term "Critical Race Theory," which is apart from being undefined, suggests a doctrine rather than a well-established academic field (sorry I don't have another word for "field") of study, which is what African American studies is.
The slogan "Defund the Police," in a similar way also confused the public and was an unnecessary gift to the right,
wow, what a post.
CRT is hardly undefined. It was redefined and weaponized by Christopher Rufo.
What a clueless thing to say.
And frankly a dangerous thing to believe.
What's the definition?
paulsurovell said:
drummerboy said:
paulsurovell said:
And part of the reason why DeSantis gets away with using the phrase "woke indoctrination" is that failure to call out out-of-control wokeness by liberals (like you) has enabled DeSantis to deceive the public into thinking that teaching African American studies is part of the woke campaign to chastise people about how they speak and think.
A big factor here is the failure of liberals to reject the term "Critical Race Theory," which is apart from being undefined, suggests a doctrine rather than a well-established academic field (sorry I don't have another word for "field") of study, which is what African American studies is.
The slogan "Defund the Police," in a similar way also confused the public and was an unnecessary gift to the right,
wow, what a post.
CRT is hardly undefined. It was redefined and weaponized by Christopher Rufo.
What a clueless thing to say.
And frankly a dangerous thing to believe.
What's the definition?
Are you kidding?
Stop embarrassing yourself.
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
DeSantis is helped by people such as yourself, who not only go along with but promote the dishonest narratives. Your use of the Stanford "Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative" is an example of that.
And as I said, it's fun and games to you.
Projection.
Reality. While you're running interference about what "woke" is, he's trying to prevent teaching history.
"After rejecting an Advanced Placement course in African American studies for high school students, the Florida Department of Education offered an explanation of what it found objectionable in the curriculum — citing examples of what it calls "the woke indoctrination" of students that would violate state laws restricting how race can be taught in the classroom."
(The article is "unlocked" so everyone can read the whole thing)
And part of the reason why DeSantis gets away with using the phrase "woke indoctrination" is that failure to call out out-of-control wokeness by liberals (like you) has enabled DeSantis to deceive the public into thinking that teaching African American studies is part of the woke campaign to chastise people about how they speak and think.
A big factor here is the failure of liberals to reject the term "Critical Race Theory," which is apart from being undefined, suggests a doctrine rather than a well-established academic field (sorry I don't have another word for "field") of study, which is what African American studies is.
The slogan "Defund the Police," in a similar way also confused the public and was an unnecessary gift to the right,
how naive of you to think liberals could do ANYTHING to stop the likes of DeSantis and other right wingers from lying about the issue of racism and anti-racism.
paulsurovell said:
sprout said:
paulsurovell said:
A big factor here is the failure of liberals to reject the term "Critical Race Theory," which is apart from being undefined, suggests a doctrine rather than a well-established academic field (sorry I don't have another word for "field") of study, which is what African American studies is.
Oh, FFS. You are squarely in blame-the-victim territory.
Liberals have been trying to explain that CRT is a topic in college/grad school since the 1980's (I myself attended a law-professor led conference session about it a couple decades ago). It has historically been a field of study that examines how the law/legal system maintains systemic racism in order to try to change it.
Republicans worked overtime to misuse this term for their propaganda purposes: To enrage white snowflakes that their younger kids are learning about racism. Republican propaganda is strong - fear is winning; angertainment is winning, rage tweeting is winning. When you find the perfect antidote to all of these, let the 'liberals' know, please.
What's the "theory"?
It's incomprehensible that you actually could be so ignorant. I suggest you read a book.
One suggestion, "On Critical Race Theory: Why It Matters & Why You Should Care", by Professor Victor Ray. Here are some pages from the introduction, covering things that have been mentioned here with respect to the deception from the right-wing.
and speaking of Rufo, DeSantis has appointed him to the New College of Florida Board of Trustees in an attempt to un-woke an entire college.
But Paul would rather us focus on the Dems "over-reaching".
nohero said:
paulsurovell said:
sprout said:
paulsurovell said:
A big factor here is the failure of liberals to reject the term "Critical Race Theory," which is apart from being undefined, suggests a doctrine rather than a well-established academic field (sorry I don't have another word for "field") of study, which is what African American studies is.
Oh, FFS. You are squarely in blame-the-victim territory.
Liberals have been trying to explain that CRT is a topic in college/grad school since the 1980's (I myself attended a law-professor led conference session about it a couple decades ago). It has historically been a field of study that examines how the law/legal system maintains systemic racism in order to try to change it.
Republicans worked overtime to misuse this term for their propaganda purposes: To enrage white snowflakes that their younger kids are learning about racism. Republican propaganda is strong - fear is winning; angertainment is winning, rage tweeting is winning. When you find the perfect antidote to all of these, let the 'liberals' know, please.
What's the "theory"?
It's incomprehensible that you actually could be so ignorant. I suggest you read a book.
One suggestion, "On Critical Race Theory: Why It Matters & Why You Should Care", by Professor Victor Ray. Here are some pages from the introduction, covering things that have been mentioned here with respect to the deception from the right-wing.
I asked for a definition of "Critical Race Theory" and so far, no one has been able to answer. Nor has anyone been able to explain what the "theory" is. You're not even pretending that there's a definition in those pages. How long did you search the internet for a definition before you gave up?
So far, you've confirmed my suspicion that CRT is a phrase that people are using that has no meaning, but it sounds like a mysterious doctrine, so the right-wing can exploit it to suggest that "CRT" is going to be used to indoctrinate schoolchildren. By refusing to explicitly reject this ambiguous and misleading term and focus on the term "African American history" as an essential component of "American history," liberals gave and continue to give the right-wing a rhetorical and demagogic gift. It's almost like CRT was created by a right-wing mole in the liberal movement.
paulsurovell said:
sprout said:
Oh, FFS. You are squarely in blame-the-victim territory.
Liberals have been trying to explain that CRT is a topic in college/grad school since the 1980's (I myself attended a law-professor led conference session about it a couple decades ago). It has historically been a field of study that examines how the law/legal system maintains systemic racism in order to try to change it.
Republicans worked overtime to misuse this term for their propaganda purposes: To enrage white snowflakes that their younger kids are learning about racism. Republican propaganda is strong - fear is winning; angertainment is winning, rage tweeting is winning. When you find the perfect antidote to all of these, let the 'liberals' know, please.
What's the "theory"?
ml1 said:
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
DeSantis is helped by people such as yourself, who not only go along with but promote the dishonest narratives. Your use of the Stanford "Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative" is an example of that.
And as I said, it's fun and games to you.
Projection.
Reality. While you're running interference about what "woke" is, he's trying to prevent teaching history.
"After rejecting an Advanced Placement course in African American studies for high school students, the Florida Department of Education offered an explanation of what it found objectionable in the curriculum — citing examples of what it calls "the woke indoctrination" of students that would violate state laws restricting how race can be taught in the classroom."
(The article is "unlocked" so everyone can read the whole thing)
And part of the reason why DeSantis gets away with using the phrase "woke indoctrination" is that failure to call out out-of-control wokeness by liberals (like you) has enabled DeSantis to deceive the public into thinking that teaching African American studies is part of the woke campaign to chastise people about how they speak and think.
A big factor here is the failure of liberals to reject the term "Critical Race Theory," which is apart from being undefined, suggests a doctrine rather than a well-established academic field (sorry I don't have another word for "field") of study, which is what African American studies is.
The slogan "Defund the Police," in a similar way also confused the public and was an unnecessary gift to the right,
how naive of you to think liberals could do ANYTHING to stop the likes of DeSantis and other right wingers from lying about the issue of racism and anti-racism.
Liberals can't prevent right-wingers from lying about racism, but they don't have to hand them rhetorical dynamite to make it easier. That's what Carville was talking about.
I see you are too lazy to google "critical race theory definition". So I did it for you, and it says the same thing you've been told several times:
Definitions from Oxford Languages
critical race theory noun
- a set of ideas holding that racial bias is inherent in many parts of western society, especially in its legal and social institutions, on the basis of their having been primarily designed for and implemented by white people.
Excerpt from Wikipedia:
CRT began in the United States in the post–civil rights era, as 1960s landmark civil rights laws were being eroded and schools were being re-segregated. With racial inequalities persisting even after civil rights legislation and color-blind laws were enacted, CRT scholars in the 1970s and 1980s began reworking and expanding critical legal studies (CLS) theories on class, economic structure, and the law to examine the role of U.S. law in perpetuating racism. CRT, a framework of analysis grounded in critical theory, originated in the mid-1970s in the writings of several American legal scholars, including Derrick Bell, Alan Freeman, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Richard Delgado, Cheryl Harris, Charles R. Lawrence III, Mari Matsuda, and Patricia J. Williams. CRT draws from the work of thinkers such as Antonio Gramsci, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, and W. E. B. Du Bois, as well as the Black Power, Chicano, and radical feminist movements from the 1960s and 1970s.
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
paulsurovell said:
sprout said:
paulsurovell said:
A big factor here is the failure of liberals to reject the term "Critical Race Theory," which is apart from being undefined, suggests a doctrine rather than a well-established academic field (sorry I don't have another word for "field") of study, which is what African American studies is.
Oh, FFS. You are squarely in blame-the-victim territory.
Liberals have been trying to explain that CRT is a topic in college/grad school since the 1980's (I myself attended a law-professor led conference session about it a couple decades ago). It has historically been a field of study that examines how the law/legal system maintains systemic racism in order to try to change it.
Republicans worked overtime to misuse this term for their propaganda purposes: To enrage white snowflakes that their younger kids are learning about racism. Republican propaganda is strong - fear is winning; angertainment is winning, rage tweeting is winning. When you find the perfect antidote to all of these, let the 'liberals' know, please.
What's the "theory"?
It's incomprehensible that you actually could be so ignorant. I suggest you read a book.
One suggestion, "On Critical Race Theory: Why It Matters & Why You Should Care", by Professor Victor Ray. Here are some pages from the introduction, covering things that have been mentioned here with respect to the deception from the right-wing.
I asked for a definition of "Critical Race Theory" and so far, no one has been able to answer. Nor has anyone been able to explain what the "theory" is. You're not even pretending that there's a definition in those pages. How long did you search the internet for a definition before you gave up?
So far, you've confirmed my suspicion that CRT is a phrase that people are using that has no meaning, but it sounds like a mysterious doctrine, so the right-wing can exploit it to suggest that "CRT" is going to be used to indoctrinate schoolchildren. By refusing to explicitly reject this ambiguous and misleading term and focus on the term "African American history" as an essential component of "American history," liberals gave and continue to give the right-wing a rhetorical and demagogic gift. It's almost like CRT was created by a right-wing mole in the liberal movement.
your posts are getting dumber and more embarrassing.
for some reason you are claiming that an academic discipline that has been taught for 40 years has no "definition".
what, exactly, is wrong with you?
and is your argument that the left has failed because it hasn't attempted to correct the right's corruption of the word CRT with rational arguments?
Do you think that's the way the world works? That rational arguments prevail against the lies of the right?
My god.
The phrase "has no meaning" because most people (like 99% of us) had no idea what CRT was before Rufo injected it into the discourse and claimed it for the right and distorted it beyond all recognition.
Also, to answer your question 'what theory?':
from https://www.britannica.com/topic/critical-race-theory
"CLS, an offshoot of Marxist-oriented critical theory..."
Did you ever really identify as a leftist?
sprout said:
Did you ever really identify as a leftist?
It's almost like he’s a right-wing mole in the liberal movement.
paulsurovell said:
Liberals can't prevent right-wingers from lying about racism, but they don't have to hand them rhetorical dynamite to make it easier. That's what Carville was talking about.
Carville is an idiot who's about 30 years past his expiration date. The fact that you're relying on him as some sort of expert embarrasses you.
Liberals haven't handed these lies to the right. The right makes them up regardless of what liberals do or do not do.
paulsurovell said:
I asked for a definition of "Critical Race Theory" and so far, no one has been able to answer. Nor has anyone been able to explain what the "theory" is. You're not even pretending that there's a definition in those pages. How long did you search the internet for a definition before you gave up?
So far, you've confirmed my suspicion that CRT is a phrase that people are using that has no meaning, but it sounds like a mysterious doctrine, so the right-wing can exploit it to suggest that "CRT" is going to be used to indoctrinate schoolchildren. By refusing to explicitly reject this ambiguous and misleading term and focus on the term "African American history" as an essential component of "American history," liberals gave and continue to give the right-wing a rhetorical and demagogic gift. It's almost like CRT was created by a right-wing mole in the liberal movement.
Critical race theory is an intellectual movement and framework for examining the ways in which race and racism intersect with other forms of oppression, such as class and gender, to create and maintain social inequality. It emerged in the 1970s as a critique of traditional civil rights approaches, which were seen as inadequate for addressing the ongoing structural and institutional forms of racism that persisted despite formal legal equality. Critical race theorists argue that racism is not just an individual problem, but rather is built into the fabric of society and its institutions. They also argue that the law and legal institutions are not neutral, but rather are themselves shaped by and help to perpetuate racial inequality.
ml1 said:
...
Liberals haven't handed these lies to the right. The right makes them up regardless of what liberals do or do not do.
That this has to be explained to a so-called leftist is mind boggling.
jamie said:
paulsurovell said:
I asked for a definition of "Critical Race Theory" and so far, no one has been able to answer. Nor has anyone been able to explain what the "theory" is. You're not even pretending that there's a definition in those pages. How long did you search the internet for a definition before you gave up?
So far, you've confirmed my suspicion that CRT is a phrase that people are using that has no meaning, but it sounds like a mysterious doctrine, so the right-wing can exploit it to suggest that "CRT" is going to be used to indoctrinate schoolchildren. By refusing to explicitly reject this ambiguous and misleading term and focus on the term "African American history" as an essential component of "American history," liberals gave and continue to give the right-wing a rhetorical and demagogic gift. It's almost like CRT was created by a right-wing mole in the liberal movement.
Critical race theory is an intellectual movement and framework for examining the ways in which race and racism intersect with other forms of oppression, such as class and gender, to create and maintain social inequality. It emerged in the 1970s as a critique of traditional civil rights approaches, which were seen as inadequate for addressing the ongoing structural and institutional forms of racism that persisted despite formal legal equality. Critical race theorists argue that racism is not just an individual problem, but rather is built into the fabric of society and its institutions. They also argue that the law and legal institutions are not neutral, but rather are themselves shaped by and help to perpetuate racial inequality.
paul did not deserve the effort of your post. He knows fully well what CRT is, unless he's admitting to being an uninformed idiot.
drummerboy said:
paul did not deserve the effort of your post. He knows fully well what CRT is, unless he's admitting to being an uninformed idiot.
It wasn't hard to find. 
sprout said:
Also, to answer your question 'what theory?':
from https://www.britannica.com/topic/critical-race-theory
"CLS, an offshoot of Marxist-oriented critical theory..."
Did you ever really identify as a leftist?
Right, CRT is a smorgasbord of ideas.
(from your post) Derrick Bell, Alan Freeman, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Richard Delgado, Cheryl
Harris, Charles R. Lawrence III, Mari Matsuda, and Patricia J. Williams.
CRT draws from the work of thinkers such as Antonio Gramsci, Sojourner
Truth, Frederick Douglass, and W. E. B. Du Bois, as well as the Black
Power, Chicano, and radical feminist movements from the 1960s and 1970s.
That covers a lot of intellectual territory.
sprout said:
I see you are too lazy to google "critical race theory definition". So I did it for you, and it says the same thing you've been told several times:
Definitions from Oxford Languages
critical race theory noun
- a set of ideas holding that racial bias is inherent in many parts of western society, especially in its legal and social institutions, on the basis of their having been primarily designed for and implemented by white people.
Excerpt from Wikipedia:
CRT began in the United States in the post–civil rights era, as 1960s landmark civil rights laws were being eroded and schools were being re-segregated. With racial inequalities persisting even after civil rights legislation and color-blind laws were enacted, CRT scholars in the 1970s and 1980s began reworking and expanding critical legal studies (CLS) theories on class, economic structure, and the law to examine the role of U.S. law in perpetuating racism. CRT, a framework of analysis grounded in critical theory, originated in the mid-1970s in the writings of several American legal scholars, including Derrick Bell, Alan Freeman, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Richard Delgado, Cheryl Harris, Charles R. Lawrence III, Mari Matsuda, and Patricia J. Williams. CRT draws from the work of thinkers such as Antonio Gramsci, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, and W. E. B. Du Bois, as well as the Black Power, Chicano, and radical feminist movements from the 1960s and 1970s.
OK, I take it back. CRT isn't undefined, it's ill-defined.
ml1 said:
paulsurovell said:
Liberals can't prevent right-wingers from lying about racism, but they don't have to hand them rhetorical dynamite to make it easier. That's what Carville was talking about.
Carville is an idiot who's about 30 years past his expiration date. The fact that you're relying on him as some sort of expert embarrasses you.
Liberals haven't handed these lies to the right. The right makes them up regardless of what liberals do or do not do.
David Plouffe doesn't go quite as far as Carville, but he says the Dems should proactively try to avoid getting tagged with the misleading term CRT:
Illustration:
This guy says Critical Race Theory is the most important issue in the Virginia Election. He also says he has no idea what Critical Race Theory is. pic.twitter.com/lBrGy4lRBG
— The Good Liars (@TheGoodLiars) November 1, 2021
paulsurovell said:
David Plouffe doesn't go quite as far as Carville, but he says the Dems should proactively try to avoid getting tagged with the misleading term CRT:
And how is/was that supposed to work? Are we back to trying to reason with the right wingers like in your video?
how naive.
I'm beginning to wonder if you even pay attention to right wing politics. You appear to have no idea of the forces that shape right wing opinion.
ml1 said:
paulsurovell said:
Liberals can't prevent right-wingers from lying about racism, but they don't have to hand them rhetorical dynamite to make it easier. That's what Carville was talking about.
Carville is an idiot who's about 30 years past his expiration date. The fact that you're relying on him as some sort of expert embarrasses you.
Liberals haven't handed these lies to the right. The right makes them up regardless of what liberals do or do not do.
It's astounding that Paul's arguments ignore what happened during the protests against the Vietnam War. The motives and goals of the antiwar movement were mischaracterized and distorted. Is he going to say that it was the fault of the leaders of the antiwar movement?
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
It's incomprehensible that you actually could be so ignorant. I suggest you read a book.
One suggestion, "On Critical Race Theory: Why It Matters & Why You Should Care", by Professor Victor Ray. Here are some pages from the introduction, covering things that have been mentioned here with respect to the deception from the right-wing.
I asked for a definition of "Critical Race Theory" and so far, no one has been able to answer. Nor has anyone been able to explain what the "theory" is. You're not even pretending that there's a definition in those pages. How long did you search the internet for a definition before you gave up?
So far, you've confirmed my suspicion that CRT is a phrase that people are using that has no meaning, but it sounds like a mysterious doctrine, so the right-wing can exploit it to suggest that "CRT" is going to be used to indoctrinate schoolchildren. By refusing to explicitly reject this ambiguous and misleading term and focus on the term "African American history" as an essential component of "American history," liberals gave and continue to give the right-wing a rhetorical and demagogic gift. It's almost like CRT was created by a right-wing mole in the liberal movement.
I assumed you could use the Google for yourself. Your comment shows that you didn't even read the contents of Professor Ray's book which I posted for you. In the excerpt I provided you, he discusses how it's the opponents who apply the label "Critical Race Theory" to the teaching of history. So, you're blaming the victim when you write: "By refusing to explicitly reject this ambiguous and misleading term and focus on the term "African American history" as an essential component of "American history," liberals gave and continue to give the right-wing a rhetorical and demagogic gift."
In other words, the definition of "CRT" is irrelevant. It's a distraction which is used to obfuscate the opponents' real goal. As Professor Ray writes in this excerpt, from the larger excerpts posted above -
Before Paul takes umbrage at my comment above, that his arguments ignore what happened during the protests against the Vietnam War, it seems that Mr. Wedjet is lurking on this discussion this morning, and "Liked" it. Paul and I both know who Mr. Wedjet is, and I would like to thank him for blunting any fake umbrage that Paul might gear up for.
paulsurovell said:
sprout said:
I see you are too lazy to google "critical race theory definition". So I did it for you, and it says the same thing you've been told several times:
Definitions from Oxford Languages
critical race theory noun
- a set of ideas holding that racial bias is inherent in many parts of western society, especially in its legal and social institutions, on the basis of their having been primarily designed for and implemented by white people.
Excerpt from Wikipedia:
CRT began in the United States in the post–civil rights era, as 1960s landmark civil rights laws were being eroded and schools were being re-segregated. With racial inequalities persisting even after civil rights legislation and color-blind laws were enacted, CRT scholars in the 1970s and 1980s began reworking and expanding critical legal studies (CLS) theories on class, economic structure, and the law to examine the role of U.S. law in perpetuating racism. CRT, a framework of analysis grounded in critical theory, originated in the mid-1970s in the writings of several American legal scholars, including Derrick Bell, Alan Freeman, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Richard Delgado, Cheryl Harris, Charles R. Lawrence III, Mari Matsuda, and Patricia J. Williams. CRT draws from the work of thinkers such as Antonio Gramsci, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, and W. E. B. Du Bois, as well as the Black Power, Chicano, and radical feminist movements from the 1960s and 1970s.
OK, I take it back. CRT isn't undefined, it's ill-defined.
I guess you're unclear on the concept of higher education and scholarship.
I suggest Paul argue with Noam Chomsky, and stop wasting time with intellectual inferiors such as ourselves.
"Also in other ways, such as the extraordinary efforts in Republican-run states to suppress teaching in schools that doesn’t conform to their white supremacist doctrines. Legislation is being enacted to ban instruction in 'critical race theory,' the new demon, replacing Communism and Islamic terror as the plague of the modern age. 'Critical race theory' is the scare-phrase used for the study of the systematic structural and cultural factors in the hideous 400-year history of slavery and enduring racist repression. Proper indoctrination in schools and universities must ban this heresy. What actually happened for 400 years and is very much alive today must be presented to students as a deviation from the real America, pure and innocent, much as in well-run totalitarian states."
Chomsky: Republicans Are Willing to Destroy Democracy to Retake Power
For Sale
-
2007 Honda Fit $4,400
More info
Garage Sales
-
House Contents Sale Sale Date: May 18, 2024
More info
Clarify this for me.
Are you saying Musk bought Twitter when there was speculation it would go bankrupt?
That would be pretty stupid, yes?
Or is there speculation now as a result of Musk's purchase?
Now that would be pretty inept of him, yes?
So what is it, stupid or inept?