Critical race theory (5 Viewers)

Optimus Prime said:

ATLANTA (AP) — Georgia's state superintendent of schools said Wednesday that he believes a new Advanced Placement course in African American Studies violates the state's law against teaching divisive racial concepts, explaining that is why he won’t recommend it become an approved state course.

Until now, Richard Woods, the state's elected Republican superintendent, hadn't explained why he was blocking approval of the course. Some districts have said they will teach it anyway, but others have canceled their plans.

"After reviewing the content, it was clear that parts of the coursework did violate the law," Woods said after 10 days of only expressing vague concerns.

Georgia’s 2022 ban on teaching divisive racial concepts in schools, based on a now-repealed executive order from President Donald Trump, prohibits claims that the U.S. is “fundamentally or systematically racist." It mandates that no student “should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress because of his or her race.” So far, 18 states have passed such bans.

The Advanced Placement course drew national scrutiny in 2023 when Florida’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis said he would ban the course in his state. In June, South Carolina officials also refused to approve the course. South Carolina said individual districts could still offer it.

The College Board is a nonprofit testing entity that offers Advanced Placement courses across the academic spectrum. Students who score well on an exam can usually earn college credit. Spokesperson Holly Stepp said the African American Studies class is “a dynamic and robust course that is rooted in academic scholarship," and denied that it seeks to indoctrinate students.

“AP students are expected to analyze different perspectives from their own, and no points on an AP Exam are awarded for agreement with a viewpoint,” Stepp said.

Woods' claim contradicts a specific exemption in Georgia law for Advanced Placement and other high-level college courses. State Rep. Will Wade, a Dawsonville Republican and former school board member who wrote the law, pointed to the carve-out allowing such concepts to be taught in AP courses in a text message.

More confoundingly, Woods has been saying that districts could teach the AP material and get state money by listing it as an introductory African American studies course approved by the state in 2020. Woods took that position after earlier saying districts would have to teach the course using only local tax money.

But Wednesday, Woods said teaching the AP material using the introductory course could expose a district to legal challenges under Georgia's law. Thus, Woods may be imperiling districts legally by denying the AP course, while he could protect them legally by approving it.

“It makes no sense,” said state Sen Nikki Merritt, a Democrat from Grayson and critic of Woods.............

Georgia superintendent says Black studies course breaks law against divisive racial teachings

Georgia’s state superintendent of schools says he believes a new Advanced Placement course in African American Studies violates the state’s law against teaching divisive racial concepts.

apnews.com

Click to expand...

Optimus Prime said:

David R. Williams and Rachel Hardeman are population health researchers at different universities with one thing in common: Both have been added to a right-wing “watch list” for teaching about and researching the ways racism affects health.


At the American Academy of Dermatology, some members proposed “sunsetting all diversity, equity and inclusion programs,” arguing DEI has evolved into a political movement filled with perceived antisemitism that labels people as oppressed or oppressor — a proposal that failed at the annual meeting in March.


And grant-making organizations that awarded millions of dollars to investigate racism as a threat to public health are now asking some researchers to stop using the word “racism.”


A growing number of U.S. institutes created to explore the nexus between racism and health — and the researchers who preside over them — are finding themselves under attack, their missions and funding in peril barely four years after the nation had what many called its “racial reckoning.”

Other efforts to address systemic racism and inequality — in education and corporate America — have encountered resistance, but the stakes are especially stark with health care because centuries of inequities yield life-or-death consequences.


“It’s very taxing. This anti-DEI movement creates a climate of fear,” said Chandra L. Ford, a professor at Emory University and founding director of the Center for the Study of Racism, Social Justice & Health.

In her case, Ford said she was told by a funder who gave her money to study racism “not to use that terminology after the project was underway, after the funder signed on to it, after the proposal was approved and after the project is already ongoing.”


While declining to identify the organization, Ford said this was its rationale: The political winds are shifting, and this work is now high-risk…….

And in August, Do No Harm and a Wisconsin law firm filed a complaint against the Cleveland Clinic with the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office for Civil Rights, saying two efforts — the Minority Stroke Program and Minority Men’s Health Center — illegally discriminate on the basis of race.

In a statement, the hospital system said its mission is to “care for life, research for health and educate those we serve … regardless of race, ethnicity, or other characteristics,” adding that the stroke program is “open to all patients” but the men’s health center “has not been in place for several years.”


Do No Harm, which was co-founded by Stanley Goldfarb, a nephrologist who is the former associate dean of curriculum at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, rejects the notion that systemic racism plays a role in health disparities, pointing instead to underlying medical conditions and a lack of access to prenatal care in the case of maternal health.

“Focusing on color-blind science in research and treatment of all patients must be the priority if we want better health outcomes and a strong relationship of trust in the medical community,” Goldfarb, who serves as chairman of Do No Harm, said in a statement……..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2024/10/11/dei-researchers-universities-attacked/

Click to expand...

bird said:

Gotta disagree with Dr. Goldfarb. Groups that share possible genetic conditions due to tendency to procreation within the group can possibly manifest issues. Iirc, Jewish people have a genetic possibility for developing leukemia. Beyond that, how many studies regarding medicines/treatments are done on Blacks, Indigenous peoples, Asian peoples or people of Spanish/Latin American descent? Do all peoples metabolize medicines in the same manner?

Color blindness is not the same as ignoring color and what genetic reinforcement happens within groups due to tribalistic tendencies. The only way to achieve actual color blindness is the complete and total inter-marriage/procreation between all groups. That isn’t going to happen. Testing medicines and therapies on groups is important. The ignoring of testing on all groups especially when done by a White hierarchy including White male is not color blindness. It is systemic racism.

Re: genetics I will provide an example. The genetic clotting issue called Factor 5 Leiden showed up in myself and my 3 siblings, 2 brothers and a sister. It also showed up in the 5 girls who are our cousins and are children of my mother’s sister. It has not shown up in the children of my mother’s brothers. Genetics play a huge role in the workings of the body. Unfortunately, due to the Western social construct called race we have seen genetics used as a weapon against those who are not white by white powerholders. The same applies to women.

I realize the potential for reactionary forces based upon fear to use genetics as a weapon. That being said ignoring genetics can be potentially harmful. Of course social forces must be taken into account as well. Fear of the medical community due to experimentation upon Blacks is completely understandable. It is and likely will continue to be a problem as long as reactionary forces attempt to hold power.

Click to expand...

LA - L.A. said:

People metabolize everything differently, including medicine. Even genetic relatives metabolize some things differently. It's really important for everyone to try to get their doctor to order a Comprehensive Pharmacogenomics Panel if they are taking prescription medications. In 5 to 10 years it will be a standard test that doctors order for all patients.

Click to expand...

Bigdaddysaints said:

I'm sure this has made this thread before, i saw it pop up and there is just so much truth to it.

Click to expand...

Optimus Prime said:

Click to expand...

DaveXA said:

Actually, they're proud granny did that and they're happy to tell their kids about it.

And you'd be surprised at the racism of the kids. It starts at an early age.

We tend to think our kids will be better than us...but all too often, not so much.

Click to expand...

Saintman2884 said:

Again, someone a little more clever could also take this theory and its applications and expand this much further to everything about Western civilization, even back to the ancient Greeks, Romans, their cultural, political, religious ideals, concepts, Western classical literature, legendary operas, concertos, plays classical and Western Enlightenment philosophes are incontrovertibly racist, have unconsciously, subconsciously, or knowingly 2-3,000 thousand years of supremacist, ethnocentric overtones and that fundamentally its usefulness, utility is discredited, meaningfulness, is at an end and that is belongs in the intellectual "dustin of history". Marx, Engels, Trotsky, other late 19th and 20th century left-wing intellectuals, philosophers, lawmakers were as Euro centric as the laissez-faire, decadent immoral and unethical bourgeiouse they despised and wanted to be overthrown. Marx and Engels believed Russians were backward, incorrigable peasant society that could never successfully try a workers, proletariat revolution, they would've found even the concept of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution asinine and that Lenin, Trotsky, Zinoviev were idiotic, fanciful delusional fools. Sure 19th and 20th century communist/orthodox Marxists may have found other non-European cultures, civilizations fascinating, wondrous beyond belief but do you really think they believed they belived those same civilizations or cultures were as equal as their Eurocentric reflections and centuries of descended-upon indoctrination, beliefs of superiority. Marx and Engels likely wouldve scoffed and ridiculed at people like AOC, Illam Omar, Tlalib and the notion that they were idealogically equal or that their countries all these women's ancestors immigrated from could successfully build or construct a pure Marxist-Leninist anarcho-communist state. These women's ancestors, to Marx and Engels, came from mostly rural, backward, scarcely industrialized superstitious societies still controlled by autocratic clergy or a decaying, quickly rotting and disintegrating Ottoman Empire that everyone believed 125 years ago would collapse(l
Google "Eastern Question" to get more detailed specifics.

My point is trying to argue where does it eventually end, I'm sure CRT and 1619 has extremely strong, valid historically substantiative conclusions, but where is the eventual end game? How do we know some vindictive, CRL theorists with ulterior motives and agendas, take these ideas and radicalize them turning their attention to newer targets? Most progressives seem to believe some of these ideas can be kept moderate, and that someone eventually won't distort it and out-manuever or tout they have "better credentials" and incapable of no longer giving informed opinions on the matter.

What we believe to be rational, logically scientific ideas or movements could 150 years from now might be seen as well-intentioned or well-meaning, but was hijacked, manipulated, and distorted and didn't lead to the ultimate long-term social progress its promoters and advocates wholeheartedly believed it would or we're so sure they'd covered every little eventuality or potential flaw. That's not fear-mongering, or being cynical its recorded, historical facts and consensus.

Conservatives aren't saying or using this exact rhetoric or logic, yet at least, because they think the MSM will crush and ridicule it as propesterous, and extreme but I truly believe when some of them see or read CRT curriculum, their minds start getting imaginative and they foresee something like Fahrenheit 451 occuring in the distant future. Anyone's who's read the novel or saw the good HBO original TV movie starring Michael B. Jordan and Michael Shannon that came out 2-3 years ago will know what I'm referring to and if you haven't, I highly recommend it. Maybe I'm wrong in how I think that could be one of their privately-held motivations and opinions discussed in what's one of their primary reasons, on the surface, at least.

Click to expand...