"Anti Racism" controversy getting ugly in Virginia

Page 2 of 6 [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 43,358
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

07 Jun 2021, 7:10 pm

^^^
Oooookay.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


roronoa79
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jan 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 882
Location: Indiana

07 Jun 2021, 7:37 pm

When does it stop being education and start being indoctrination then?
Was it not indoctrination when the older among us received an education that told us America is special, capitalism is good, and communism is evil? Was it not indoctrination when we were taught how to rationalize genocide and slavery as acceptable or necessary? These were doctrines shoved down our throats by statists, nationalists, and big business. By people trying to make money off you and people who want you to lay down your life overseas for their donors' business interests.

Is indoctrination only acceptable when it benefits the state? Is indoctrination only acceptable when it tells you that your country and economic model are better than all the others? And that if you believe otherwise then you are an enemy of America?

That is the real indoctrination. Educators are just finally starting to get fed up with peddling nationalist, statist bs. Once they were pulled out of the government's nationalist/capitalist indoctrination centers, they entered the real marketplace of ideas.

Conservatives seem to resent universities because they are the real marketplace of ideas. They are where people of all backgrounds could go to debate and change their views. Conservatives have lost in these debates because their arguments are often just regurgitating nationalist indoctrination they learned from the state. Theirs is a house built upon sand. Their faith in the marketplace of ideas seems to evaporate when people stop buying their ideas.


_________________
Diagnoses: AS, Depression, General & Social Anxiety
I guess I just wasn't made for these times.
- Brian Wilson

Δυνατὰ δὲ οἱ προύχοντες πράσσουσι καὶ οἱ ἀσθενεῖς ξυγχωροῦσιν
Those with power do what their power permits, while the weak have no choice but to accept it.

- Thucydides


Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 33
Posts: 2,062
Location: England

07 Jun 2021, 8:32 pm

Education and indoctrination have always waltzed awkwardly together along the thinnest of edges, the latter often wearing the skin of the other. But if you think education is winning that battle today, you are either selectively blind or do not know the difference between the two. It is far worse than it has ever been.


_________________
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man -
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began: -
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!


ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,948
Location: Long Island, New York

08 Jun 2021, 8:38 am

roronoa79 wrote:
When does it stop being education and start being indoctrination then?
Was it not indoctrination when the older among us received an education that told us America is special, capitalism is good, and communism is evil? Was it not indoctrination when we were taught how to rationalize genocide and slavery as acceptable or necessary? These were doctrines shoved down our throats by statists, nationalists, and big business. By people trying to make money off you and people who want you to lay down your life overseas for their donors' business interests.

Is indoctrination only acceptable when it benefits the state? Is indoctrination only acceptable when it tells you that your country and economic model are better than all the others? And that if you believe otherwise then you are an enemy of America?

That is the real indoctrination. Educators are just finally starting to get fed up with peddling nationalist, statist bs. Once they were pulled out of the government's nationalist/capitalist indoctrination centers, they entered the real marketplace of ideas.

Conservatives seem to resent universities because they are the real marketplace of ideas. They are where people of all backgrounds could go to debate and change their views. Conservatives have lost in these debates because their arguments are often just regurgitating nationalist indoctrination they learned from the state. Theirs is a house built upon sand. Their faith in the marketplace of ideas seems to evaporate when people stop buying their ideas.

I was “educated” in the 60s and 70s and slavery and genocide was never rationalized. Roosevelt and Lincoln were the good guys because they ended slavery and defeated the Nazis. The Freedom Riders and MLK were the good guys. I do not remember it being called genocide but I was taught about the capture and massacres of the Indians.

What was at fault about my education was a lot of oversimplification and whitewashing. The made up cherry tree story, George Washington would never tell a lie, not that he owned and impregnated slaves, nothing about Lincoln being a cold calculating politician.

A simplistic thing we were taught that is apt because they are rejected today is “two wrongs do not make a right” and “colorblindness is good”. The new way to solve systematic racism is to be racist, and be restorative, and create equity which means discrimination and getting rid of whiteness.

As far as anti communism indoctrination was concerned it came from the most part the news media, TV, and movies not so much education.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


Mr Reynholm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,226
Location: Tulsa, OK

08 Jun 2021, 1:53 pm

So Where does this lead? It's fairly certain that CRT will be mandatory everywhere eventually in the public school system. What will the outcome be? Somehow I don't think it will be the harmonic utopian vision the proponents of CRT are assuring us of.



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,948
Location: Long Island, New York

08 Jun 2021, 2:32 pm

Mr Reynholm wrote:
Somehow I don't think it will be the harmonic utopian vision the proponents of CRT are assuring us of.

It will be anything but.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,968
Location: Melbourne, Australia

09 Jun 2021, 12:25 am

"Anti-racism" (or "reverse racism") is only the opposite of "racism" in the same way that "-1" is the opposite of "1". It is not a default (neutral) position, but rather an identical force being applied in the opposite direction to that which it is claimed to be preventing.

The opposite of "racism" is not "anti-racism" or "reverse racism" (which are merely a form of "racism" for which the holder of those views sees as desireable), but simply "no racism" (or "not racist"). Look at what MLK and his supporters were fighting for in their battle against racism - Was it that people would be judged on the colour of their skin (or race), or that this would not be a consideration when judging others? How does placing emphasis on a person's race (for "good" or "bad" reasons) help bring his dream any closer to reality?


_________________
Quote:
"When people express opinions that differ from yours, take it as a chance to grow. Seek to understand over being understood. Be curious, not defensive. The only way to disarm another human being is by listening." - Glennon Doyle Melton

Quote:
"Never forget that you have every right to question any individual, system, movement, or group that only tolerates you when you think and behave exactly like them" - Africa Brooke

Quote:
“There was a saying that a man's true character was revealed in defeat. I thought it was also revealed in victory.”
― Alison Goodman, Eon: Dragoneye Reborn


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 43,358
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

09 Jun 2021, 1:31 am

Brictoria wrote:
"Anti-racism" (or "reverse racism") is only the opposite of "racism" in the same way that "-1" is the opposite of "1". It is not a default (neutral) position, but rather an identical force being applied in the opposite direction to that which it is claimed to be preventing.

The opposite of "racism" is not "anti-racism" or "reverse racism" (which are merely a form of "racism" for which the holder of those views sees as desireable), but simply "no racism" (or "not racist"). Look at what MLK and his supporters were fighting for in their battle against racism - Was it that people would be judged on the colour of their skin (or race), or that this would not be a consideration when judging others? How does placing emphasis on a person's race (for "good" or "bad" reasons) help bring his dream any closer to reality?


Most of us use the term, "anti-racist," as the same as "no racism." Most people hardly defend reverse racism.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,948
Location: Long Island, New York

09 Jun 2021, 4:08 pm

Brictoria wrote:
"Anti-racism" (or "reverse racism") is only the opposite of "racism" in the same way that "-1" is the opposite of "1". It is not a default (neutral) position, but rather an identical force being applied in the opposite direction to that which it is claimed to be preventing.

The opposite of "racism" is not "anti-racism" or "reverse racism" (which are merely a form of "racism" for which the holder of those views sees as desireable), but simply "no racism" (or "not racist"). Look at what MLK and his supporters were fighting for in their battle against racism - Was it that people would be judged on the colour of their skin (or race), or that this would not be a consideration when judging others? How does placing emphasis on a person's race (for "good" or "bad" reasons) help bring his dream any closer to reality?

If the wokes do take full control MLK would be canceled both for popularizing colorblindness and his alleged private life.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 43,358
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

09 Jun 2021, 7:48 pm

ASPartOfMe wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
"Anti-racism" (or "reverse racism") is only the opposite of "racism" in the same way that "-1" is the opposite of "1". It is not a default (neutral) position, but rather an identical force being applied in the opposite direction to that which it is claimed to be preventing.

The opposite of "racism" is not "anti-racism" or "reverse racism" (which are merely a form of "racism" for which the holder of those views sees as desireable), but simply "no racism" (or "not racist"). Look at what MLK and his supporters were fighting for in their battle against racism - Was it that people would be judged on the colour of their skin (or race), or that this would not be a consideration when judging others? How does placing emphasis on a person's race (for "good" or "bad" reasons) help bring his dream any closer to reality?

If the wokes do take full control MLK would be canceled both for popularizing colorblindness and his alleged private life.


I think it would be more likely that the right, playing tit-for-tat with the woke crowd, who'd argue that King should be judged by the same standards, in order to erase him.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,968
Location: Melbourne, Australia

09 Jun 2021, 8:15 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
"Anti-racism" (or "reverse racism") is only the opposite of "racism" in the same way that "-1" is the opposite of "1". It is not a default (neutral) position, but rather an identical force being applied in the opposite direction to that which it is claimed to be preventing.

The opposite of "racism" is not "anti-racism" or "reverse racism" (which are merely a form of "racism" for which the holder of those views sees as desireable), but simply "no racism" (or "not racist"). Look at what MLK and his supporters were fighting for in their battle against racism - Was it that people would be judged on the colour of their skin (or race), or that this would not be a consideration when judging others? How does placing emphasis on a person's race (for "good" or "bad" reasons) help bring his dream any closer to reality?

If the wokes do take full control MLK would be canceled both for popularizing colorblindness and his alleged private life.


I think it would be more likely that the right, playing tit-for-tat with the woke crowd, who'd argue that King should be judged by the same standards, in order to erase him.


On what do you base that assumption?

It may have escaped your attention, but "judging people by their own standards" would (excluding the theoretical potential for hypocracy on his part) be the "right" treating him as he desired all people to be treated - From what I am aware, he wasn't the type of person the present day "woke" mob consist of, where "race" is the sole characteristic around which the treatment of a person would be considered, with words\actions about others being "appropriate"\"inappropriate" based on that person's race, so wouldn't be held to the same standards as a "woke" person would.


_________________
Quote:
"When people express opinions that differ from yours, take it as a chance to grow. Seek to understand over being understood. Be curious, not defensive. The only way to disarm another human being is by listening." - Glennon Doyle Melton

Quote:
"Never forget that you have every right to question any individual, system, movement, or group that only tolerates you when you think and behave exactly like them" - Africa Brooke

Quote:
“There was a saying that a man's true character was revealed in defeat. I thought it was also revealed in victory.”
― Alison Goodman, Eon: Dragoneye Reborn


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 36
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 13,472
Location: I'm right here

09 Jun 2021, 8:19 pm

ASPartOfMe wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
"Anti-racism" (or "reverse racism") is only the opposite of "racism" in the same way that "-1" is the opposite of "1". It is not a default (neutral) position, but rather an identical force being applied in the opposite direction to that which it is claimed to be preventing.

The opposite of "racism" is not "anti-racism" or "reverse racism" (which are merely a form of "racism" for which the holder of those views sees as desireable), but simply "no racism" (or "not racist"). Look at what MLK and his supporters were fighting for in their battle against racism - Was it that people would be judged on the colour of their skin (or race), or that this would not be a consideration when judging others? How does placing emphasis on a person's race (for "good" or "bad" reasons) help bring his dream any closer to reality?

If the wokes do take full control MLK would be canceled both for popularizing colorblindness and his alleged private life.


That seems unlikely, his dream was admirable and makes for a desirable end goal. We're just not there yet so trying to behave in a colourblind matter while racism exists often amounts to just dismissing the claims and insisting well, I just don't see colour.


_________________
the problem with capitalism is that eventually you run out of other people's resources and cheap labour to exploit
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 43,358
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

09 Jun 2021, 8:52 pm

Brictoria wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
"Anti-racism" (or "reverse racism") is only the opposite of "racism" in the same way that "-1" is the opposite of "1". It is not a default (neutral) position, but rather an identical force being applied in the opposite direction to that which it is claimed to be preventing.

The opposite of "racism" is not "anti-racism" or "reverse racism" (which are merely a form of "racism" for which the holder of those views sees as desireable), but simply "no racism" (or "not racist"). Look at what MLK and his supporters were fighting for in their battle against racism - Was it that people would be judged on the colour of their skin (or race), or that this would not be a consideration when judging others? How does placing emphasis on a person's race (for "good" or "bad" reasons) help bring his dream any closer to reality?

If the wokes do take full control MLK would be canceled both for popularizing colorblindness and his alleged private life.


I think it would be more likely that the right, playing tit-for-tat with the woke crowd, who'd argue that King should be judged by the same standards, in order to erase him.


On what do you base that assumption?

It may have escaped your attention, but "judging people by their own standards" would (excluding the theoretical potential for hypocracy on his part) be the "right" treating him as he desired all people to be treated - From what I am aware, he wasn't the type of person the present day "woke" mob consist of, where "race" is the sole characteristic around which the treatment of a person would be considered, with words\actions about others being "appropriate"\"inappropriate" based on that person's race, so wouldn't be held to the same standards as a "woke" person would.


The far right has been trying to demonize King from the very beginning, they fought against the King holiday, and still try defaming him. Too many people - the left, the center, the sane right - know he wasn't a perfect human being, but still honor his status as America secular saint who fought to redeem the country of racism.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


roronoa79
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jan 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 882
Location: Indiana

10 Jun 2021, 5:46 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
"Anti-racism" (or "reverse racism") is only the opposite of "racism" in the same way that "-1" is the opposite of "1". It is not a default (neutral) position, but rather an identical force being applied in the opposite direction to that which it is claimed to be preventing.

The opposite of "racism" is not "anti-racism" or "reverse racism" (which are merely a form of "racism" for which the holder of those views sees as desireable), but simply "no racism" (or "not racist"). Look at what MLK and his supporters were fighting for in their battle against racism - Was it that people would be judged on the colour of their skin (or race), or that this would not be a consideration when judging others? How does placing emphasis on a person's race (for "good" or "bad" reasons) help bring his dream any closer to reality?

If the wokes do take full control MLK would be canceled both for popularizing colorblindness and his alleged private life.


I think it would be more likely that the right, playing tit-for-tat with the woke crowd, who'd argue that King should be judged by the same standards, in order to erase him.


On what do you base that assumption?

It may have escaped your attention, but "judging people by their own standards" would (excluding the theoretical potential for hypocracy on his part) be the "right" treating him as he desired all people to be treated - From what I am aware, he wasn't the type of person the present day "woke" mob consist of, where "race" is the sole characteristic around which the treatment of a person would be considered, with words\actions about others being "appropriate"\"inappropriate" based on that person's race, so wouldn't be held to the same standards as a "woke" person would.


The far right has been trying to demonize King from the very beginning, they fought against the King holiday, and still try defaming him. Too many people - the left, the center, the sane right - know he wasn't a perfect human being, but still honor his status as America secular saint who fought to redeem the country of racism.

The right despised MLK for decades, then decided they were always his biggest fans all along once he became vindicated by history.

It helped that they realized they could use MLK's rhetoric to undermine future civil rights advocates. They act like they're ignoring MLK's words by not being non-violent enough or act like they're making a big deal out of things that arent that important bc they don't associate those issues with MLK. do modern conservatives actually think that MLK didn't speak out against police brutality? Income inequality? Capitalism? American interventionism? The romanticizing of slaveholders and the Confederacy?

This all of course ignores that conservatives (and most Americans at the time in general) scoffed at MLK suggesting he supported non-violence any time civil rights protests descended into riots. Sound familiar? The rhetoric never changes.

Colour-blindness as a concept was hijacked by the right. Colour-blindness just became a buzzword conservatives could toss out there so they could ignore the fact that race creates serious issues for hundreds of millions of people. They act like they're fighting racism by burying their heads in the sand and acting like racism doesn't affect anyone, and that they can't possibly be racist if they don't think they're racist.

Don't worry, in about 30-40 years I guarantee you conservatives will act like they supported BLM all along--because that's what they do when they lose these battles. Without exception.


_________________
Diagnoses: AS, Depression, General & Social Anxiety
I guess I just wasn't made for these times.
- Brian Wilson

Δυνατὰ δὲ οἱ προύχοντες πράσσουσι καὶ οἱ ἀσθενεῖς ξυγχωροῦσιν
Those with power do what their power permits, while the weak have no choice but to accept it.

- Thucydides


ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,948
Location: Long Island, New York

10 Jun 2021, 7:39 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
"Anti-racism" (or "reverse racism") is only the opposite of "racism" in the same way that "-1" is the opposite of "1". It is not a default (neutral) position, but rather an identical force being applied in the opposite direction to that which it is claimed to be preventing.

The opposite of "racism" is not "anti-racism" or "reverse racism" (which are merely a form of "racism" for which the holder of those views sees as desireable), but simply "no racism" (or "not racist"). Look at what MLK and his supporters were fighting for in their battle against racism - Was it that people would be judged on the colour of their skin (or race), or that this would not be a consideration when judging others? How does placing emphasis on a person's race (for "good" or "bad" reasons) help bring his dream any closer to reality?

If the wokes do take full control MLK would be canceled both for popularizing colorblindness and his alleged private life.


I think it would be more likely that the right, playing tit-for-tat with the woke crowd, who'd argue that King should be judged by the same standards, in order to erase him.


On what do you base that assumption?

It may have escaped your attention, but "judging people by their own standards" would (excluding the theoretical potential for hypocracy on his part) be the "right" treating him as he desired all people to be treated - From what I am aware, he wasn't the type of person the present day "woke" mob consist of, where "race" is the sole characteristic around which the treatment of a person would be considered, with words\actions about others being "appropriate"\"inappropriate" based on that person's race, so wouldn't be held to the same standards as a "woke" person would.


The far right has been trying to demonize King from the very beginning, they fought against the King holiday, and still try defaming him. Too many people - the left, the center, the sane right - know he wasn't a perfect human being, but still honor his status as America secular saint who fought to redeem the country of racism.

Yeah that is cool, but when that argument made about other flawed historical figures that did great things, those making that argument are assumed to be racists and said historical figure is canceled anyway.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 36
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 13,472
Location: I'm right here

10 Jun 2021, 7:45 pm

ASPartOfMe wrote:
Yeah that is cool, but when that argument made about other flawed historical figures that did great things, those making that argument are assumed to be racists and said historical figure is canceled anyway.


Which historical figure has been cancelled? Jefferson still hasn't been and his legacy is terrible. Johnson and Jackson haven't been and they're at least as bad.


_________________
the problem with capitalism is that eventually you run out of other people's resources and cheap labour to exploit
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う