1 Comment
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Passion guided by reason's avatar

Steve, I understand and sympathize with the difficulty of organizing a solid presentation. I will work with you to ease that burden, and to the degree that it makes sense, share it.

How about a simpler starting point:

> "I've seen school board meetings where enraged parents called all teaching about America's racial history CRT"

Great, could you provide a link to one such of the multiple such recording which you have watched? Multiple would be better, but let's start with one.

I've watched some videos too (obviously not all of the hundreds or thousands online), and I've never actually seen parents object to all teaching of America's racial history, or call all of it CRT. What I HAVE encountered is progressives impute that to them. But I'm sure that we have watched different videos (ie: you've seen some I haven't), and I'm very willing to learn, so I'd like to see an example which fits your quoted words above.

If it's common enough to have a meaningful effect on the national discourse (rather than a rare anomaly with little societal effect), such examples should be easy to find. I'm not asking you to do my work for me - I HAVE already watched a number of videos, I just didn't find any matching your characterization yet, but I can't prove a negative. If you have found such videos, then please share.

----

Let me give you an example of the distortion which I do find, nearly every time I explore some CSJ issue in detail. The progressive press was all atwitter with characterizations of Florida as forcing teachers to justify slavery, since it was actually good for the slaves because they learned skills. So I read through the entire Florida curriculum guidance on the subject for K12 (ie: the specific source cited by the activists). It was actually pretty comprehensive (in line with their guideline for other subjects). It was FAR from suppressing teaching about slavery or Jim Crow, more the opposite. Critics mined it for ONE sentence, a minor clarification note rather than direct guidance. The critics were, in my best intellectual honestly, grossly distorting the Black History curriculum, with extreme out-of-context cherry picking, omitting the much stronger counterpoint to their characterization. I'll be glad to go through the Fla Black history curriculum guidance with you (it's a few pages out of a document covering many subjects), to see if you believe it's lumping all "racial history" as CRT or prohibiting the teaching of it. After we deal with this.

I mention this, which is distinct from parents at school board meetings, just as an easily evidenced example of the kind of misrepresentation I have also found dismayingly common in progressive characterizations of such objections at school board meetings.

I see very related misrepresentations and strawman arguments presented about things like the teaching of Black history in other places than Florida of course. If I read the progressive press accounts, and then watch the hearing for myself, I often find the former to be a seriously biased "interpretation" rather than a fair account. For example, a parent will say something about wanting history taught accurately and neutrally rather than from an ideological viewpoint - and the commenter will interpret that as the parent really wanting the school to omit slavery from the curriculum. The parent didn't actually say that - but the activist just conveniently knows that's what's really in their hearts.

(By the way, I think that legislatively trying to prevent CRT from being taught is likely a bad idea - this discussion is not about that, tho, but about the assertion quoted above regarding parents at school board meetings)

But - the presence of misrepresentation in some (or even many) cases doesn't mean that there are no other cases where parents really are calling *all* teaching of Black history (or racial history) in schools "CRT" - rather than calling out only the subset of such teaching which they feel is biased by CRT. So I'm willing to explore that.

So the first step is finding one good example. A second step would be trying to cooperatively assess the prevalence. If it takes a lot of work to find such a single example, the cases which fit your characterization quoted above may be rare; if it's easy to find multiple examples, they may be common.

I'm open to anybody else also finding examples of parents at school boards who consider all forms of teaching Black/racial history to be "CRT" (distinct from saying asserting that the way it's being taught at a particular school is framed by CRT like ideologies).

My prediction is that people who search for examples of that may find that the videos they do discover are not nearly so cut and dried as they remembered them, and some biased interpretation is required to make them fit the characterization - like imputing unknowable motive to the parents, projecting what the parents *really* want (in one's imagining). If that's the best people can find, let's examine those videos together. But I'm hoping for a more solid example(s) where it would be clear to a neutral observer that the parents consider all teaching of Black/racial history to be "CRT".

Also - if anybody does start searching, and discovers that they cannot actually find any good examples, I would expect silence, but I can hope that they would report back on their lack of success.

Expand full comment