Lies About CRT makes it worse

[Dutch Uncle]

The Amazon driver’s attack on an older woman is an important warning

https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...n_an_older_woman_is_an_important_warning.html

"Ramirez is being held on $100,000 bail and will be charged with elder abuse and battery."

I fail to see why your panties are in a bunch. I looooove my security cameras and wish more people had them. This is as open and shut an assault case against Ramirez as Chauvin's was a murder case. No privilege or "CRT" bullshit involved no matter what was claimed.

Look at the Qless in jail now who are claiming the "Trump defense". That's not going to fly anymore than the "white privilege" or "CRT" defense. It's an assault and elderly abuse in this case and Chauvin's was a murder case. Case closed, life goes on. Feel free to unclench anytime you like.

 

[dukkha]

Some of CRT’s assumptions are baseless lol.

It *assumes* ‘structural racism’ is an actual thing, for example. That’s just a start. It belongs on college campuses—as an elective.

it needs to be banned though for kids

 

[moon]

it needs to be banned though for kids

Good luck with banning thought processes


Haw, haw, haw, haw.............................................haw.

 

[TOP]

It most assuredly will be... There is actually very little support for it in public/private schools... From anyone...

 

[LV426]

Some of CRT’s assumptions are baseless lol.

It *assumes* ‘structural racism’ is an actual thing, for example. That’s just a start. It belongs on college campuses—as an elective.

If structural racism isn't "a thing", then you are arguing that people are inherently born racist.

Do you believe that racism is genetic?

 

[LV426]

it needs to be banned though for kids

Why? Because you don't want kids to learn that you had institutional advantages that other people didn't, and despite getting all those advantages you rose to a level of mediocrity anyway, that you think is an achievement.

Since even the most trivial of your achievements aren't owed to your work ethic, then the persona you present on JPP is a load of posturing horseshit.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

it needs to be banned though for kids

Why? Because you don't want kids to learn that you had institutional advantages that other people didn't, and despite getting all those advantages you rose to a level of mediocrity anyway, that you think is an achievement.

Since even the most trivial of your achievements aren't owed to your work ethic, then the persona you present on JPP is a load of posturing horseshit.

No, because he wants to indoctrinate children with RW ideology so they grow up to be Qless Sheeple just like Russian peasants.

 

[moon]

Why? Because you don't want kids to learn that you had institutional advantages that other people didn't, and despite getting all those advantages you rose to a level of mediocrity anyway, that you think is an achievement.

Since even the most trivial of your achievements aren't owed to your work ethic, then the persona you present on JPP is a load of posturing horseshit.

Man, there're more than a few of those.

 

[LV426]

Man, there're more than a few of those.

These people like to pretend that they achieved their exaggerated level of success solely through their hard work and ethic, when it was really due to the structurally racist and misogynist systems that set them up to succeed in spite of all their glaring flaws and laziness.

They want people to believe the myth of America because that is easier than coming to terms with the fact that they "didn't build that".

 

[TOP]

These people like to pretend that they achieved their exaggerated level of success solely through their hard work and ethic, when it was really due to the structurally racist and misogynist systems that set them up to succeed in spite of all their glaring flaws and laziness.

They want people to believe the myth of America because that is easier than coming to terms with the fact that they "didn't build that".

Interesting that you're so very "aware" of how complete strangers achieved success.... So....How did you achieve your success?

 

[LV426]

Interesting that you're so very "aware" of how complete strangers achieved success.... So....How did you achieve your success?

They're not strangers, though, because they are more than willing to spill every personal detail about themselves on a message board if they think doing so will give them an advantage in a debate they otherwise don't have along the facts.

So they will say that they worked hard to achieve the mediocrity they wallow in today, convincing themselves that it's an accomplishment when it's really a personal failure.

With all these advantages, you still can't manage to rise above the mediocrity you're pretending is an accomplishment today.

WHAT A FUCKIN' WASTE.

 

[LV426]

So....How did you achieve your success?

None of your fucking business.

I don't need to lean on personal anecdotes to lend my argument credibility.

You and your "very fine people" should try it sometime.

 

[LV426]

If it's none of my business then it's none of yours.

Difference is you cannot control yourself from making your personal business everyone's business on JPP.

When your argument runs its course (very quickly) you and your "very fine people" always resort to these "take my word for it" anecdotes that we have no reason to trust.

So while you have nothing to support yourselves, your overactive imaginations conjure people and circumstances that just so happen to confirm your biases, even though none of you are willing to verify any of it.

It's a nice, convenient escape hatch you frequently use because you get frustrated that you have nothing of substance to enter into the debate...but you're so insecure you HAVE to be inserted into it somehow, and that's from where all the fake personal stories come.

I believe you've shared personal anecdotes" in the past

Only when it's been asked, and only when I feel comfortable doing so.

You make it a standard matter of practice, so we always end up in the same place:

You: *Says something about yourself that isn't true*

Me: Prove it

You: No.

Nothing about myself or my circumstances has anything to do with any subject I talk about here.

You and your "very fine people" always seek to make things personal because you know there's no way any of the personal stuff you say about yourself is verifiable. And you know that. So you want people to give you the benefit of the doubt when it comes to your capacity for honesty, and I just simply don't know or understand why you think you're entitled to that level of trust when you've done nothing to earn it.

 

[TOP]

Difference is you cannot control yourself from making your personal business everyone's business on JPP.

When your argument runs its course (very quickly) you and your "very fine people" always resort to these "take my word for it" anecdotes that we have no reason to trust.

So while you have nothing to support yourselves, your overactive imaginations conjure people and circumstances that just so happen to confirm your biases, even though none of you are willing to verify any of it.

It's a nice, convenient escape hatch you frequently use because you get frustrated that you have nothing of substance to enter into the debate...but you're so insecure you HAVE to be inserted into it somehow, and that's from where all the fake personal stories come.




Only when it's been asked, and only when I feel comfortable doing so.

You make it a standard matter of practice, so we always end up in the same place:

You: *Says something about yourself that isn't true*

Me: Prove it

You: No.

Nothing about myself or my circumstances has anything to do with any subject I talk about here.

You and your "very fine people" always seek to make things personal because you know there's no way any of the personal stuff you say about yourself is verifiable. And you know that. So you want people to give you the benefit of the doubt when it comes to your capacity for honesty, and I just simply don't know or understand why you think you're entitled to that level of trust when you've done nothing to earn it.

If there's nothing "verifiable" to you, then ignore them....it's none of your business....
You cannot prove that they're not telling the truth...and you certainly can't prove any of this: "These people like to pretend that they achieved their exaggerated level of success solely through their hard work and ethic, when it was really due to the structurally racist and misogynist systems that set them up to succeed in spite of all their glaring flaws and laziness.

They want people to believe the myth of America because that is easier than coming to terms with the fact that they "didn't build that". "

 

[moon]

People's use of language is an open book on their character. Sifting the genuine from the poseurs is a cinch- with practice.

 

[LV426]

If there's nothing "verifiable" to you, then ignore them....it's none of your business....

It is my business because you make it my business by using it as your reference/source in any given debate.

So instead of using empirical evidence that we can all consider and look at, you choose to use evidence NO ONE can consider and look at other than you, and you expect us to treat that bullshit with the same level of credibility as something from BLS or The Fed.

 

[LV426]

People's use of language is an open book on their character. Sifting the genuine from the poseurs is a cinch- with practice.

Absolutely. I've been on enough message boards to know when someone is bullshitting me.

 

[Truth Detector]

First, I am not "all in" on CRT. However, like most theories, I am not all in. For me, that is why it is a theory. It is an idea, not proven, but sometimes worthy of discussion. In my experience, if CRT is presented that way, as an idea, not fact, it is a great tool to encourage critical thinking.

Unfortunately, when encouraging critical thinking, the context is important. Articles like this, are a disservice because of how misleading they are. Moreover, by misleading people, the real concerns that could actually improve teaching and learning, are overshadowed by misplaced anger.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/rhode-island-mother-lawsuit-critical-race-theory-requests

""""I was also told that they refrain from using gendered terminology in general terms of anti-racism. I was told that kids in kindergarten are asked what could have been done differently at Thanksgiving, and this struck me as a way to shame children for their American heritage," Solas said."""

Ok, told they did something. Great, but in what context. What else was included in the lesson? If the only mention of Thanksgiving was this assignment then there is a problem. Personally, I doubt that. Asking that question, even of kindergarten students, is worthwhile. Just saying everyone got along, end of story is misleading and insults the truth.

"""Solas was advised by the school district to submit a public records request through the Access to Public Records Act. Upon receiving some information, Solas said she "did not see any evidence of gender theory or anti-racism" but knew that it was being taught to students."""

No evidence but she knew. Wow, that is just insane. She has no credibility on this but according to the article, "she knew". No wonder people are confusing a theory with propaganda and propaganda with fact.

"""CRT curriculum has sparked a national conversation about the role of race and racism in school districts across the country.*Often compared by critics to actual racism, CRT is a school of thought*that generally focuses on how power structures and institutions impact racial minorities."""

Nice that at the end of the article convincing people AGAIN of the horrors of CRT they present a factual summary of what CRT actually is. Unfortunately, if you read the comments you will quickly realize the propaganda worked. CRT is anti-American hate.

True garbage. Even for fox, this is disappointing.

Critical Race Theory is based on a massive pile of stupid lies and already credibly debunked by numerous history experts. Only the lowest of IQs thinks there is any substance to it.

 

[LV426]

You cannot prove that they're not telling the trut

And that's the crux of the problem; you want us to take your word for it, and I simply won't because you've given me absolutely no reason to trust you.

So if you want to use personal given circumstances as your argument, the expectation is that you'd be verifying those personal given circumstances, or just don't use them at all.

You should be able to argue your position without making shit up.

If you can't, then you shouldn't be engaging in the debate at all.

 

[LV426]

and you certainly can't prove any of this: "These people like to pretend that they achieved their exaggerated level of success solely through their hard work and ethic, when it was really due to the structurally racist and misogynist systems that set them up to succeed in spite of all their glaring flaws and laziness.

Well, that's because that's an opinion informed by your actions on JPP.

Basically, the fact that I know you're making shit up about yourself proves exactly what I said in what you quoted above.

You achieved your relative level of "success" not through your hard work or work ethic, obviously, because hard work and work ethic would show in pulling an argument together...which you and your "very fine people" seem incapable of doing.

It's OK to admit that you had help...it's a lot less insulting then trying to convince people that the lazy person you are somehow, someway worked hard to achieve something.

I just don't buy that...I don't see how you could have achieved anything through hard work or a strong work ethic based on your posts on JPP, and how you present yourself here.