Detroit Public Schools Community District "deeply using critical race theory,"

"Our curriculum is deeply using critical race theory, especially in social studies, but you’ll find it in English, language arts, and the other disciplines," Vitti said. "We’re very intentional about creating a curriculum, infusing materials and embedding critical race theory within our curriculum."

Superintendent Nikolai Vitti made the remarks during a Nov. 9 school board meeting. So what is Critical Race Theory [[CRT)? Well, here is what the Urban Dictionary says:

“A hybrid scholarly/activist approach that seeks to read ‘systemic racism’ into every racial disparity [[specifically, those where Black people are at a disadvantage), along with advocacy of policies to redistribute income, wealth, legal rights & privileges, and political power. These are intended to equalize outcomes for Blacks and Whites in relation to those selected disparities.

The main ‘method of inquiry’ employed in CRT is its creative use of language, selective examples, and the redefinition of familiar terms that you thought were well-settled. These serve to catastrophize racial disparities, close down lines of inquiry that may lead to non-racialized explanations, and hence to convey a strong moral compulsion to accept CRT’s redistributive policies.”

Uh-oh! Flashing lights, alarm bells, sirens! Next, they'll be teaching humans evolved from apes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikeM

Uh-oh! Flashing lights, alarm bells, sirens! Next, they'll be teaching humans evolved from apes.

---

God must be rolling in his grave :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CassTechGrad

"Our curriculum is deeply using critical race theory, especially in social studies, but you’ll find it in English, language arts, and the other disciplines," Vitti said. "We’re very intentional about creating a curriculum, infusing materials and embedding critical race theory within our curriculum."

Superintendent Nikolai Vitti made the remarks during a Nov. 9 school board meeting. So what is Critical Race Theory [[CRT)? Well, here is what the Urban Dictionary says:

“A hybrid scholarly/activist approach that seeks to read ‘systemic racism’ into every racial disparity [[specifically, those where Black people are at a disadvantage), along with advocacy of policies to redistribute income, wealth, legal rights & privileges, and political power. These are intended to equalize outcomes for Blacks and Whites in relation to those selected disparities.

The main ‘method of inquiry’ employed in CRT is its creative use of language, selective examples, and the redefinition of familiar terms that you thought were well-settled. These serve to catastrophize racial disparities, close down lines of inquiry that may lead to non-racialized explanations, and hence to convey a strong moral compulsion to accept CRT’s redistributive policies.”

---

And that's DPSCD's prerogative. Good for them!

Folks who don't like it can send their sends to another school outside the district. Although given the current demographic makeup of the district, I doubt most will have any real objection to this.

The echo chamber sprung a leak. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimaz

The echo chamber sprung a leak. ;)

---

I heard someone recently call CRT “Race Marxism” and I couldn’t agree more. Only an idiot would think it’s a good idea.

From the less incendiary Wikipedia definition; which wouldn’t quite follow the agenda of this diary:

CRT is a framework of analysis grounded in critical theory^[6] which 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.^[7] One 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.^[8][9][10]
“CRT draws from thinkers such as Antonio Gramsci, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, and W. E. B. DuBois, as well as the Black Power, Chicano, and radical feminist movements from the 1960s and 1970s.^[7] Scholars of CRT view race as a social construct that is not "biologically grounded and natural".^[11][8] They state that the idea of "race" advances the interests of white people^[11] at the expense of people of color.<sup>[12][13]”

But I guess even this can trigger snowflakes. The whole CRT bugaboo is yet another attempt by the right to divide.</sup>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroiterOnTheWestCoast

The whole CRT bugaboo is yet another attempt by the right to divide.

---

Agreed, and the newest attempt to divide and conquer was launched recently in a speech by retired LTG Michael T. Flynn who stated that the U.S. should have only one religion, i.e., fundamentalist Christianity. This in a speech to QAnon by retired general and active-duty lunatic and insurrectionist Flynn whose theory is that although the First Amendment forbids Congress from promoting religion, the Supreme Court can promote whatever it wishes.

Jeez, the ink on the First Amendment is barely dry and fascists are trying to destroy it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroiterOnTheWestCoast

From the less incendiary Wikipedia definition; which wouldn’t quite follow the agenda of this diary:

CRT is a framework of analysis grounded in critical theory^[6] which 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.^[7] One 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.^[8][9][10]
“CRT draws from thinkers such as Antonio Gramsci, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, and W. E. B. DuBois, as well as the Black Power, Chicano, and radical feminist movements from the 1960s and 1970s.^[7] Scholars of CRT view race as a social construct that is not "biologically grounded and natural".^[11][8] They state that the idea of "race" advances the interests of white people^[11] at the expense of people of color.<sup>[12][13]”

But I guess even this can trigger snowflakes. The whole CRT bugaboo is yet another attempt by the right to divide.</sup>

---

Attachment 41849

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CassTechGrad

Attachment 41849

---

👍

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikeM

Uh-oh! Flashing lights, alarm bells, sirens! Next, they'll be teaching humans evolved from apes.

---

wowowowowowowowwowowwowo!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CassTechGrad

Well, here is what the Urban Dictionary says:

---

Who the fuck cares what Urban Dictionary says.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CassTechGrad

Attachment 41849

---

White liberals* love MLK Jr because he's dead and so whatever quote that makes them feel good they can just say and therefore the world is all better.

*I have no idea if you are white but MLK, Jr. was not the only black thinker of the 20th century but because he's the one that white people only seem to know and care about. We tell ourselves an overused quote like that and forget all about his Letter from the Birmingham Jail.

"First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CassTechGrad

Attachment 41849

---

Don’t worry, we know the content of your character.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CassTechGrad

Attachment 41849

---

There's a global effort aimed at finding a way to read minds and see into souls. It's inevitable that governments will acquire the means, and equally predictable that such technology will become commercially available, e.g., as smart-phone apps. So eventually it will be possible to realize the dream of MLK, but in a dystopian way by reading minds before judging people. And these apps will make a fortune for the developers.

Considering the political left, those that push CRT, are in many instances supporting re-segregation, I think it's safe to say MLK and other civil rights leaders of that era wouldn't get behind what's being pushed today.

There is a big difference between teaching a philosophy to create understanding and a more informed populace, and indoctrinating students into that philosophies beliefs. Sounds like DPS is doing the latter unfortunately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroiterOnTheWestCoast

The whole CRT bugaboo is yet another attempt by the right to divide.

---

John McWhorter on the subject, via NPR [[regarding the recent Youngkin win)

Quote:

---

Frankly, the left has to get more honest about this sort of thing. If you want to say that Youngkin has exploited a certain kind of sentiment and maybe sometimes even racist sentiment, there's an argument there.

But for the left to say that there's nothing going on in schools that we need to talk about, that critical race theory isn't in the schools because nobody's teaching the papers of Richard Delgado and Kimberlé Crenshaw — that's a debate team feint. There is something going on in terms of how children are being taught in a lot of schools, and to pretend that it's not true, or to quietly think that that's the way it should be and so therefore we shouldn't talk about it as a new development: that doesn't work. There's a certain kind of maybe, regrettably, imperfect voter who is not fooled by that. And it's time for a more honest conversation.

---

He doesn't seem to think it's a non-issue. He's pretty far from being right-wing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CassTechGrad

Attachment 41849

---

Unfortunately, that day is never coming Dr King......

The irony with the right wing boogeymen of "CRT!" is that most people agree with CRT.

Black people are more likely to be negatively affected by lead paint. That's because black people are more likely to live in old houses that used lead paint, and compared to white people living in old houses are less likely to be living in an old house that has been renovated or remediated.

Did racist paint company owners plan this all out 100+ years ago in order to poison black kids? No of course not. Are random individual white people racist for buying houses that are less likely to have lead paint? No, most white people aren't even thinking about lead when buying houses. Is paint itself a conscious entity with racist intent? No.

But even though there wasn't any individual racist act, the negative outcome is still unfairly biased against blacks, right? The vast majority of people would agree with this analysis. This is critical race theory.

But what we know to be true is not what most of us here were taught in school. We were taught that racist outcomes exist because many individual evil people committed racist acts. The way to defeat racism is for the good guys like MLK to rise up and defeat the bad guys.

And we all know that's not how it works. There are no bad guys with the lead paint issue. And even when an individual purposefully does some terrible racist act, we still know that racism is something learned from the environment and not some kind of intrinsic quality that evil people are born with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jason

The irony with the right wing boogeymen of "CRT!" is that most people agree with CRT.

Black people are more likely to be negatively affected by lead paint. That's because black people are more likely to live in old houses that used lead paint, and compared to white people living in old houses are less likely to be living in an old house that has been renovated or remediated.

Did racist paint company owners plan this all out 100+ years ago in order to poison black kids? No of course not. Are random individual white people racist for buying houses that are less likely to have lead paint? No, most white people aren't even thinking about lead when buying houses. Is paint itself a conscious entity with racist intent? No.

But even though there wasn't any individual racist act, the negative outcome is still unfairly biased against blacks, right? The vast majority of people would agree with this analysis. This is critical race theory.

But what we know to be true is not what most of us here were taught in school. We were taught that racist outcomes exist because many individual evil people committed racist acts. The way to defeat racism is for the good guys like MLK to rise up and defeat the bad guys.

And we all know that's not how it works. There are no bad guys with the lead paint issue. And even when an individual purposefully does some terrible racist act, we still know that racism is something learned from the environment and not some kind of intrinsic quality that evil people are born with.

---

Mostly agree, but with your example, redlining would have a huge impact on the ability of black people to move out of older houses into newer built homes. And even if legal redlining doesn't exist now, discriminatory lending and showings definitely do. So yeah its a circumstance thing, but there's definitely been societal forces that have causes or worsened the impact, so it's not as if there isn't some blame to be put on certain people, or groups of people, for perpetuating these instances.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JonWylie

Mostly agree, but with your example, redlining would have a huge impact on the ability of black people to move out of older houses into newer built homes. And even if legal redlining doesn't exist now, discriminatory lending and showings definitely do. So yeah its a circumstance thing, but there's definitely been societal forces that have causes or worsened the impact, so it's not as if there isn't some blame to be put on certain people, or groups of people, for perpetuating these instances.

---

Yeah you can trace many things back and find an explicitly racist action, but it's beside the point for the CRT people because for them it's all about systems and outcomes and not individuals or even historical group moralities.

It's the irony of it, the white right wingers think that CRT is saying that they are racist because they're white, when really CRT doesn't even concern itself with individuals, and basically absolves all people of any responsibility for any kind of existing racism. The only thing CRT actually demands of anyone is to acknowledge that the world they were born into is racially biased and to make some kind of good faith effort to undo that.

For far as I know Critical Race Theory has already been taught in DPS and other American Schools for a long time. We just bring this word up and trying to either keep or cut it.

But how do kids and rest of generation learn from culturally biased education?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jason

The only thing CRT actually demands of anyone is to acknowledge that the world they were born into is racially biased and to make some kind of good faith effort to undo that.

---

Nope. From Delgado's An Introduction to Critical Race Theory, page 3:
“Unlike traditional civil rights, which embraces incrementalism and step-by-step progress, critical race theory questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.”

It's an anti-liberal movement. If rational discourse leads to inequity, it is to be done away with. If logic leads to inequity, it is to be done away with. If equal protection under the law leads to inequity, it is to be done away with.

It's, literally, Orwell's society of Oceana in 1984. *ALL* that matters is the outcome. This is why actual liberals, as in left-wing liberals, are also concerned about it.

There are other modes of effective anti-racism. CRT is simply the worst.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danny

For far as I know Critical Race Theory has already been taught in DPS and other American Schools for a long time. We just bring this word up and trying to either keep or cut it.

But how do kids and rest of generation learn from culturally biased education?

---

Addressing your question: I grew up in white lower middle class just off the boat tradesmen family. College at Wayne State and especially Michigan State was an often hostile environment. The presumptions of those who ran those institutions were alien to me. I was paying my own way while they were raising my tuition to give away to other students. Many of the students at MSU were the children of upper middle class business and professional parent who paid their way. Those rich kids didn't care how much their parents' paid. The only three students at MSU I knew who were from working class families was a guy who worked at a pizza business every hour he could to pay his bills, the daughter of a carpenter who dropped out, and the daughter of a mailman from Grand Rapids who got caught up in her Long Island boyfriend's drug scene.

I had this one encounter with a history instructor at WSU. Her history course featured the classic 'democracy hopped from the Tigris Valley to Greece to Rome to France to England and came into full bloom in the U.S.' narrative. On a test, she asked, "What was the most important Indo-European group and why". The answer was supposed to be the reasoning behind whichever mid-east group I chose. Instead, I wrote feverishly for over an hour promoting supporting my thesis that democracy was given a huge boost by Germanic barbarians. We hadn't been studying them, never did, and it wasn't the answer she wanted. She invited me out in the hallway for a conversation. At that point, I had committed myself to 3 years in the Army so I didn't have anything to lose by writing down what I thought. She asked me if I wanted to know my grade and I told her no. I've since wondered what it might have been. I'll credit her with trying to talk me out of going in the Army though.

So yes, I think the traditional mainstream education was culturally biased and think I understand that it was even more culturally biased toward groups further away from power than my own. However, I also think the pendulum has swung too far the other way with wokeness orthodoxy and what I consider to be racist identity politics. Once, my father came across some of my homework at Wayne State. I don't remember what course it had to do with...maybe it had to do with art or poetry. He asked me what good that was going to do me. I was embarrassed and could only say that it was required to get a degree. I can only imagine that today's kids with my background are coming home with some woke book and being asked the same question.

I've thought about solutions to this cultural imperialism that include more local school decisions about what to teach at the local level and more degree options. For instance, instead of having to earn 120 semester credits with University and college requirements constituting most of those credits, allow students the option of earning 135 credits of anything the student chooses for a custom degree. If they had a problem with foreign languages or if they chose to pack their degree with major courses, so be it. Maybe they wouldn't be so 'well-rounded' but they would know more. More freedom for both of us and ours respectively from culturally biased education.

I love the hypocrisy of the righties nowadays suddenly pulling a few specific MLK quotes out of their asses, to try to strain to make a point while "owning" their opponents. Especially since they loathed him so deeply when he was alive, opposed [[and still oppose) most things he stood for, conducted a decade long witch hunt to try to tag him as an immoral anti-American commie, supported law enforcement violence and harassment against him and the civil rights movement in general, and weren't unhappy when he was murdered.

I also like their hypocrisy of being constantly very vocal in favoring local control of pretty much everything. Except it seems when a local body does something they disagree with, then it's time to bring higher government power to bear to ban whatever those unbearable local elected officials saw fit to do. And of course time to whip out those couple of pet MLK quotes again too.