You don't know what you're talking about. The problem with the right is that they take these complex ideas and try to distill them into one narrative. This is even made worse by people like you, who dismiss the idea within the narrative because it isn't exact. CRT is part of a long chain of ideologies that is designed to overthrow the capitalist system. I don't care if it originated in legal studies. I don't care that it's not being taught the exact same way it was introduced in colleges. A turd by any other name is still a turd.
We are seeing it at work at multiple different levels within our institutions. People who are social justice believers will implement a component called praxis into whatever area they have the ability to influence, whether they have power or not. Sure, there are peons who are going to function at an individual level and do very little harm in the short term, but there are also those types of believers who have institutional power. They are not only going to ensure that their preferred ideology is pushed onto others as part of their praxis, but they are also going to deliberately appoint other believers into positions of power. Again, this is not by accident. It's called the long march through the institutions, and we are finally seeing it have real power. Keep looking at the small picture and you will stay simple minded.
This stuff isn't an accident. I get it... conservatives foam at the mouth and can be guilty of knowing very little about the history of a topic, but they aren't wrong here. There are activists who have a belief system and they want nothing more than to do away with the old and bring in the "new." Unfortunately, their new has been tried many, many times, and, quite frankly, it sucks. You and the moderates like you need to pull your head out of your [BLEEP] and start trusting your eyes. You have a bunch of liars, who have repeatedly been caught peddling you disinformation, telling you that you're only smart if you listen to them. They are truly selling you snake oil, and you are too blinded by your own intellectual arrogance to see it. Wake up.
(04-10-2022, 09:32 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You don't know what you're talking about. The problem with the right is that they take these complex ideas and try to distill them into one narrative. This is even made worse by people like you, who dismiss the idea within the narrative because it isn't exact. CRT is part of a long chain of ideologies that is designed to overthrow the capitalist system. I don't care if it originated in legal studies. I don't care that it's not being taught the exact same way it was introduced in colleges. A turd by any other name is still a turd.
We are seeing it at work at multiple different levels within our institutions. People who are social justice believers will implement a component called praxis into whatever area they have the ability to influence, whether they have power or not. Sure, there are peons who are going to function at an individual level and do very little harm in the short term, but there are also those types of believers who have institutional power. They are not only going to ensure that their preferred ideology is pushed onto others as part of their praxis, but they are also going to deliberately appoint other believers into positions of power. Again, this is not by accident. It's called the long march through the institutions, and we are finally seeing it have real power. Keep looking at the small picture and you will stay simple minded.
This stuff isn't an accident. I get it... conservatives foam at the mouth and can be guilty of knowing very little about the history of a topic, but they aren't wrong here. There are activists who have a belief system and they want nothing more than to do away with the old and bring in the "new." Unfortunately, their new has been tried many, many times, and, quite frankly, it sucks. You and the moderates like you need to pull your head out of your [BLEEP] and start trusting your eyes. You have a bunch of liars, who have repeatedly been caught peddling you disinformation, telling you that you're only smart if you listen to them. They are truly selling you snake oil, and you are too blinded by your own intellectual arrogance to see it. Wake up.
Sure, there are inexact ideas out there, and you can't really catch them in the wild because they're inexact.
So you can't really prove their existence or influence on an internet message board.
But you also can't teach them, not reliably anyways, even if you want to.
And you certainly can't legislate for or against them. Laws have to be exact.
Our conversation about who we should elect to office should really be a conversation about what laws we should enact and what we should spend public money on. So why should we let this admittedly inexact subject dominate that conversation?
You're second and third lines are asinine. Other than that, I don't have a problem with what you're saying. HOWEVER, you can't ignore something that is intentional. It's battled by acknowledging it exists and forming a counter narrative, not burying you're head in the sand. Until people like you start actually acknowledging this threat and rejecting any attempts to censor those opposed to it, even in the form of demagoguery, you ARE the problem. We need to talk about WHY the bones of CRT are rooted in the overthrow of capitalism and why it won't solve racism. It's just a tool that coopts an existing problem to achieve its own ends, making new believers until it becomes a force large enough to effect change. It's that simple.
It will be taught in schools. It will be taught in higher learning. It will be taught in corporations. It will be taught in government organizations. That is the goal.
(04-10-2022, 11:24 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You're second and third lines are asinine. Other than that, I don't have a problem with what you're saying. HOWEVER, you can't ignore something that is intentional. It's battled by acknowledging it exists and forming a counter narrative, not burying you're head in the sand. Until people like you start actually acknowledging this threat and rejecting any attempts to censor those opposed to it, even in the form of demagoguery, you ARE the problem. We need to talk about WHY the bones of CRT are rooted in the overthrow of capitalism and why it won't solve racism. It's just a tool that coopts an existing problem to achieve its own ends, making new believers until it becomes a force large enough to effect change. It's that simple.
It will be taught in schools. It will be taught in higher learning. It will be taught in corporations. It will be taught in government organizations. That is the goal.
I'm all for acknowledgements and counter narratives and rejecting censorship. These are important tasks for us as citizens and thinkers.
But no one should be changing their vote based on these things. We've lost the thread badly if we think the government has a role in telling us what to think.
You don't make any sense. If one side is supporting the narrative that everyone is x and you can't only not be x unless you vote for y, and y fundamentally changes the functions of independent thought, freedom, and opportunity, then you reject that side.
(04-11-2022, 07:49 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You don't make any sense. If one side is supporting the narrative that everyone is x and you can't only not be x unless you vote for y, and y fundamentally changes the functions of independent thought, freedom, and opportunity, then you reject that side.
That's a lot of ifs.
Someone says "If you don't vote Democrat, you're racist."
You should say, "Nah, racism doesn't work like that. I'll vote for who I want, thanks."
Instead you're all like, "let's look at the implications and permutations if what you said, you line this up with that, carry the two, find the square root, and, boom! I just proved, just because you said that, that if you DO vote Democrat you're racist! This is why no one takes you seriously, because you don't get it!"
That's how logic works, dummy.
(04-12-2022, 07:34 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]That's how logic works, dummy.
There is such a thing as logic, of course, but logic actually says that whether or not a person is racist has very little to do with who they do or don't vote for.
No. Logic is a series of if then statements that you can apply to a variety of different variables. I framed the logic based on the scenario we were discussing, and you only saw the ifs because you don't actually use logic. To make it worse, you don't even understand the framework of the social justice movement. You're a sucker, like most people who key in on one or two words without understanding the depth of the issue.
CRT, for all intents and purposes, says you are a racist unless you tear down the structure that was built by racists, namely American capitalism, judicial prudence, and the constitution. It is to be replaced by a system that creates EQUITY, not EQUALITY. What system promises to do that? Oh that's right, Marxism. It's not a coincidence that this theory came from a branch of Marxist philosophy and that many of the people peddling this nonsense are admitted Marxists, but I digress. The point is that the end goal of this type of teaching, whether you call it CRT, or Marxism, or Social Justice, or Anti-Racism, is to replace our current government. It doesn't make a difference what you call it, because it's just an oppressor vs. the oppressed narrative. It just so happens that Americans actually care about racism, so this is the most successful cudgel.
Progressives believe that only replacing our government will solve the problem. Which, sure, IF replacing our government could solve those problems, I'd be open to it, but it WON'T. They don't have a solution for those problems, which is why they NEVER talk about solutions. They just want power, which is also a core component of the philosophies that undergird this movement, but again you don't know any better. They believe that once they have power, those problems will go away, which I shouldn't have to tell you is a lie.
When you advocate on behalf of people pushing this nonsense, you are advocating for the overthrow of the structure of the American government, whether you realize it or not. Just because you don't think that's true doesn't make it any less so. So let's go back to logic.
IF one side supports the idea that you can only be anti-oppressor (insert cause here) if you support the overthrow of the American way of life which means voting for progressives who will change our system, then you must reject that side if you think America has a good structure in place. Your ignorance is what leads you to think CRT is something different... you and everyone else that thinks this is just about eradicating racism. It's not. It's a tool. It creates believers while simultaneously silencing its critics. I wish you were as educated and open minded as you want to be.
(04-09-2022, 10:38 AM)Ronster Wrote: [ -> ]groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s
Is this how Tucker Carlson presented it last night?
(04-12-2022, 10:18 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]No. Logic is a series of if then statements that you can apply to a variety of different variables. I framed the logic based on the scenario we were discussing, and you only saw the ifs because you don't actually use logic. To make it worse, you don't even understand the framework of the social justice movement. You're a sucker, like most people who key in on one or two words without understanding the depth of the issue.
CRT, for all intents and purposes, says you are a racist unless you tear down the structure that was built by racists, namely American capitalism, judicial prudence, and the constitution. It is to be replaced by a system that creates EQUITY, not EQUALITY. What system promises to do that? Oh that's right, Marxism. It's not a coincidence that this theory came from a branch of Marxist philosophy and that many of the people peddling this nonsense are admitted Marxists, but I digress. The point is that the end goal of this type of teaching, whether you call it CRT, or Marxism, or Social Justice, or Anti-Racism, is to replace our current government. It doesn't make a difference what you call it, because it's just an oppressor vs. the oppressed narrative. It just so happens that Americans actually care about racism, so this is the most successful cudgel.
Progressives believe that only replacing our government will solve the problem. Which, sure, IF replacing our government could solve those problems, I'd be open to it, but it WON'T. They don't have a solution for those problems, which is why they NEVER talk about solutions. They just want power, which is also a core component of the philosophies that undergird this movement, but again you don't know any better. They believe that once they have power, those problems will go away, which I shouldn't have to tell you is a lie.
When you advocate on behalf of people pushing this nonsense, you are advocating for the overthrow of the structure of the American government, whether you realize it or not. Just because you don't think that's true doesn't make it any less so. So let's go back to logic.
IF one side supports the idea that you can only be anti-oppressor (insert cause here) if you support the overthrow of the American way of life which means voting for progressives who will change our system, then you must reject that side if you think America has a good structure in place. Your ignorance is what leads you to think CRT is something different... you and everyone else that thinks this is just about eradicating racism. It's not. It's a tool. It creates believers while simultaneously silencing its critics. I wish you were as educated and open minded as you want to be.
The fallacy you keep glossing over is your idea that either side is homogenous.
Neither side is homogenous.
If I told you I was a Democrat, and then told you that I favor the legalization of bestiality, would you then conclude that all Democrats are goat lovers?
Or would you conclude that I don't speak for that party and decide to rely on what the candidates and officials of that party say instead?
Or, just maybe, you could stop living in your fairy tale world and frame that analogy correctly. Instead of an individual believing it, you could say that democrats are trying to pass federal laws that guarantee beastiality will be taught in schools. Would you vote for a party that supported that position?
(04-09-2022, 10:38 AM)Ronster Wrote: [ -> ]Apparently this term is really making many on the left butthurt. They really don’t like us pointing out the fact that adults, “teacher’s” are grooming little kids to be sexualized at an inappropriate age. So, this post is for them.
groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s groomer’s
It is not YOUR job to groom my child with your perversions. When it comes to sex, I’ll decide when and what MY child learns. Stay in your lane. There is no reason for anyone to poison kids innocent minds with perverted ideas at 6, 7, 8 years old.
Let them be kids, at that age they need to focus on being kids. When I was that age, I had no idea nor did I care who my teacher was having sex with. I didn’t even know or cared what sex was..
Why are so many so called teachers perving on kids? They should go to JAIL. If a strange adult came up to your kid in a park and started talking to them about the stuff teachers are, they would be arrested for sex crimes. And so too should activist teachers grooming our kids..
Back off groomers, back off!!
Perving on kids has always been a 'perk' of teaching. It goes all the way up to college professorship. Some man or woman's little power trip of being able to lord it over a bunch of immature kids. What else do teachers have anyway? Their pay sucks, they get blamed for everything, they have little to no control of how to run their class or what to teach. They can't work in the 'real' world with that degree. Leave em' alone and let them fondle and molest. In fact, let's make them exempt from any child abuse or molestation laws. What President could be more sympathetic to legislation of that ilk? (And before you say what I know most of you are going to say, at least THAT President waited till they were of legal age before he got all handsy) The time is now! Progressive!
(04-12-2022, 01:40 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Or, just maybe, you could stop living in your fairy tale world and frame that analogy correctly. Instead of an individual believing it, you could say that democrats are trying to pass federal laws that guarantee beastiality will be taught in schools. Would you vote for a party that supported that position?
If I thought that enough Democrats supported that position, and enough of those supportive Democrats could plausibly be elected to enact that position, then yes, it would and should affect my vote.
Not every issue rises to that level. Most don't. Voting is a marginal activity and the strategy for voting should change based on which policies could plausibly be changed, or prevented from changing, based on our vote.
Based on campaign rhetoric, voting history, and the partisan makeup of the House and Senate, it was rational to change your vote in federal elections based on tax rates or health insurance policy. Those were on the knife edge of being enacted or repealed. But it was not, and is not, rational to change your vote in the general election based on the green new deal or slavery reparations. Those are nowhere close to being enacted.
(04-12-2022, 01:40 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Or, just maybe, you could stop living in your fairy tale world and frame that analogy correctly. Instead of an individual believing it, you could say that democrats are trying to pass federal laws that guarantee beastiality will be taught in schools. Would you vote for a party that supported that position?
Once you've had horse, there is no recourse.
(04-12-2022, 02:39 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (04-12-2022, 01:40 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Or, just maybe, you could stop living in your fairy tale world and frame that analogy correctly. Instead of an individual believing it, you could say that democrats are trying to pass federal laws that guarantee beastiality will be taught in schools. Would you vote for a party that supported that position?
If I thought that enough Democrats supported that position, and enough of those supportive Democrats could plausibly be elected to enact that position, then yes, it would and should affect my vote.
Not every issue rises to that level. Most don't. Voting is a marginal activity and the strategy for voting should change based on which policies could plausibly be changed, or prevented from changing, based on our vote.
Based on campaign rhetoric, voting history, and the partisan makeup of the House and Senate, it was rational to change your vote in federal elections based on tax rates or health insurance policy. Those were on the knife edge of being enacted or repealed. But it was not, and is not, rational to change your vote in the general election based on the green new deal or slavery reparations. Those are nowhere close to being enacted.
We're not talking about the green new deal or slavery reparations. That's the point. Your party is literally putting CRT training into federal programs, schools, and corporations. It doesn't matter if it's called CRT or not. It's the same idea. It's conditioning people to accept the change that's coming. Your party does not care about the constitution, individual freedoms, or independent thought. Sure, there are individuals like you and Marty that don't think that way, but the elites and influencers within your party certainly do. You just think people think like you, and that's a HUGE mistake.
(04-13-2022, 08:05 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (04-12-2022, 02:39 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]If I thought that enough Democrats supported that position, and enough of those supportive Democrats could plausibly be elected to enact that position, then yes, it would and should affect my vote.
Not every issue rises to that level. Most don't. Voting is a marginal activity and the strategy for voting should change based on which policies could plausibly be changed, or prevented from changing, based on our vote.
Based on campaign rhetoric, voting history, and the partisan makeup of the House and Senate, it was rational to change your vote in federal elections based on tax rates or health insurance policy. Those were on the knife edge of being enacted or repealed. But it was not, and is not, rational to change your vote in the general election based on the green new deal or slavery reparations. Those are nowhere close to being enacted.
We're not talking about the green new deal or slavery reparations. That's the point. Your party is literally putting CRT training into federal programs, schools, and corporations. It doesn't matter if it's called CRT or not. It's the same idea. It's conditioning people to accept the change that's coming. Your party does not care about the constitution, individual freedoms, or independent thought. Sure, there are individuals like you and Marty that don't think that way, but the elites and influencers within your party certainly do. You just think people think like you, and that's a HUGE mistake.
I am not a Democrat.
(04-13-2022, 08:05 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (04-12-2022, 02:39 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]If I thought that enough Democrats supported that position, and enough of those supportive Democrats could plausibly be elected to enact that position, then yes, it would and should affect my vote.
Not every issue rises to that level. Most don't. Voting is a marginal activity and the strategy for voting should change based on which policies could plausibly be changed, or prevented from changing, based on our vote.
Based on campaign rhetoric, voting history, and the partisan makeup of the House and Senate, it was rational to change your vote in federal elections based on tax rates or health insurance policy. Those were on the knife edge of being enacted or repealed. But it was not, and is not, rational to change your vote in the general election based on the green new deal or slavery reparations. Those are nowhere close to being enacted.
We're not talking about the green new deal or slavery reparations. That's the point. Your party is literally putting CRT training into federal programs, schools, and corporations. It doesn't matter if it's called CRT or not. It's the same idea. It's conditioning people to accept the change that's coming. Your party does not care about the constitution, individual freedoms, or independent thought. Sure, there are individuals like you and Marty that don't think that way, but the elites and influencers within your party certainly do. You just think people think like you, and that's a HUGE mistake.
1) I'm a Republican
2) racial sensitivity training is not CRT, nor is it the same idea as CRT.
3) A good government should be indifferent to what private corporations teach their employees, as long as the employees' civil rights (notably their freedom of religion and political association) are not violated. This is what conservatism used to be about.
If you need training for that.. you should be fired anyway.