Critical race theory (1 Viewer)

[DaveXA]

Frankly, I'm completely ignorant when it comes to the Critical Race Theory curriculum. What is it, where does it come from, and is it legitimate? Has anyone here read it and maybe give a quick summary?

If this has been covered in another thread, then I missed it.

 

[brandon]

That is my hunch, but I am not certain. I cannot predict the future.

Then why did you state it as a fact? You didn't say "they might be victimized," you said "they will be victimized," and even went further with "and that's why they're running scared."

But let's just say it's your hunch...an opinion, and not a fact. That's fine. What do you think whites should do while they're still in the majority? I would think if they are in the majority now and, according to you, are at least likely to be victimized when they become the minority, that they should take steps to protect themselves and their future generations, no?

Are people with dark skin capable of bigotry and racism? I would say yes.

I already agreed with your previous post that nonwhite cultures have certainly been oppressive in their own right at various times in history. Therefore, there is some support for your argument that nonwhite people could certainly be oppressive to whites if they became the majority.

What do you envision? You obviously have an opinion.

My opinion is that whites are not going to be victimized when they become a minority, therefore there is no need for them to take any steps to protect themselves and their future generations. For someone who does believe they will be victimized, like yourself, I just wonder if you think they should take some steps to protect themselves and their future generations, or simply prepare for their inevitable victimhood. Not really asking for any specific steps, really. Just any sort of steps to ensure that white people are not oppressed and ensuring a future for future white generations.

 

[Paul]

Then why did you state it as a fact? You didn't say "they might be victimized," you said "they will be victimized," and even went further with "and that's why they're running scared."

But let's just say it's your hunch...an opinion, and not a fact. That's fine. What do you think whites should do while they're still in the majority? I would think if they are in the majority now and, according to you, are at least likely to be victimized when they become the minority, that they should take steps to protect themselves and their future generations, no?

My plan would be to eliminate race ID politics and to hopefully lessen tribalism. However, the trend is in the opposite direction. The differences between gri=oups are emphasized in an effort to collect data. The polarization is greater.

I already agreed with your previous post that nonwhite cultures have certainly been oppressive in their own right at various times in history. Therefore, there is some support for your argument that nonwhite people could certainly be oppressive to whites if they became the majority.

Ideally those formerly oppressed groups should not behave like people during the time of slavery. You would think they are the most enlighten people in the world.

My opinion is that whites are not going to be victimized when they become a minority, therefore there is no need for them to take any steps to protect themselves and their future generations.

I do not have a horse in that race. Why do you think they will be fine?

For someone who does believe they will be victimized, like yourself, I just wonder if you think they should take some steps to protect themselves and their future generations, or simply prepare for their inevitable victimhood. Not really asking for any specific steps, really. Just any sort of steps to ensure that white people are not oppressed and ensuring a future for future white generations.

I think there is a model in South Africa and Zimbabwe, but I know nothing about their politics.

This may be a more likely scenario once the USA is run by POC.


"To be white in Zimbabwe, Townsend explains, is to accept that the rules have changed. Blacks, not whites, fill the top government posts. They write the laws, draft the budgets, set the trade policies. Whites are politically inconsequential. But they remain enormously powerful economically. They retreat to predominantly white enclaves, soothed by servants and swimming pools. Most of their children go to private schools.

“We’re a white tribe here, that’s what we are,” Fletcher says as he checks the progress of a toolshed under construction. “We’re as African as any African, and we’re just as keen to see that this whole show works. If the country prospers, we prosper.”

Whites Under Black Rule: What’s Changed and What Hasn’t in Zimbabwe | Catherine Woodard

catherinewoodard.com

 

[Paul]

Who was the authority to whom I appealed?

Here:

It's incredibly egotistical to think that your uninformed opinions carry the same weight as those offered by people who are informed on the subject.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Here:

Are you saying that it's impossible to hold an informed opinion on a subject without being an authority on that subject?

 

[Paul]

Are you saying that it's impossible to hold an informed opinion on a subject without being an authority on that subject?

A college professor who is an expert may be wrong and his student may be right. That is why the appeal to authority is a fallacy,

 

[cuddlemonkey]

A college professor who is an expert may be wrong and his student may be right. That is why the appeal to authority is a fallacy,

So the student may have a valid opinion because they are informed on the subject matter without being an authority like the professor?

 

[Paul]

So the student may have a valid opinion because they are informed on the subject matter without being an authority like the professor?

You set up the post as informed versus not informed. The not informed may be correct and the informed incorrect. That is still an appeal to authority fallacy. I suggest you simply state your argument or refute the argument in your own words.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

You set up the post as informed versus not informed. The not informed may be correct and the informed incorrect. That is still an appeal to authority fallacy. I suggest you simply state your argument or refute the argument in your own words.

It's not, and you once more demonstrate your inability to differentiate between fallacious and non-fallacious arguments.

In the example you gave, you said that it's possible for a student of a subject (one who is, by your stance, informed but not an expert) can be correct while their professor (one who is, by your stance, an expert) is incorrect.

Therefore, your example demonstrates my point. It is possible for a person to know enough about a topic to offer informed opinions without claiming that they are an expert.

It is also possible to admit to being mostly uninformed on a topic and still willing to offer strong opinions despite the lack of information.

 

[Paul]

In the example you gave, you said that it's possible for a student of a subject (one who is, by your stance, informed but not an expert) can be correct while their professor (one who is, by your stance, an expert) is incorrect.

Therefore, your example demonstrates my point. It is possible for a person to know enough about a topic to offer informed opinions without claiming that they are an expert.

It is also possible to admit to being mostly uninformed on a topic and still willing to offer strong opinions despite the lack of information.

This is not a competition about who is the most or least informed. This is about making the argument in your won words. Just saying "I am more informed than you" does not win the argument. You could also say "I am smarter than you and have more academic degrees." That does not win the argument either.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

This is not a competition about who is the most or least informed. This is about making the argument in your won words. Just saying "I am more informed than you" does not win the argument. You could also say "I am smarter than you and have more academic degrees." That does not win the argument either.

I was making an observation, not an argument. My observation is that when you admit to not knowing a lot about a topic, insisting on holding strong opinions makes you look foolish, and perhaps the best course of action is to see what others are saying, do some research, and educate yourself. Otherwise, you are just running your mouth and basking in your own ignorance.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

Thanks for the insulting remarks. I guess it means you arre insecure. This is what you said:

Yes. Why, just yesterday I changed my son's surname and encouraged my children to marry white people because of how insecure and self-loathing I am about my heritage.

Oh wait, that was another guy.

Realizing you're someone entirely driven by self-loathing, have very little actual knowledge, and are more repetitive than a merry-go-round doesn't make me insecure, it makes me perceptive.

 

[Paul]

Yes. Why, just yesterday I changed my son's surname and encouraged my children to marry white people because of how insecure and self-loathing I am about my heritage.

Oh wait, that was another guy.

Realizing you're someone entirely driven by self-loathing, have very little actual knowledge, and are more repetitive than a merry-go-round doesn't make me insecure, it makes me perceptive.

"Don’t take anything personally.

Whatever happens around you, don’t take it personally. Nothing other people do is because of you. It is because of themselves. All people live in their own dream, in their own mind; they are in a completely different world from the one we live in. When we take something personally, we make the assumption that they know what is in our world, and we try to impose our world on their world.

Even when a situation seems so personal, even if others insult you directly, it has nothing to do with you. What they say, what they do, and the opinions they give are according to the agreements they have in their own minds…Taking things personally makes you easy prey for these predators, the black magicians. They can hook you easily with one little opinion and feed you whatever poison they want, and because you take it personally, you eat it up…

But if you do not take it personally, you are immune in the middle of hell. Immunity in the middle of hell is the gift of this agreement."

Miguel Ruiz
2nd Agreements

 

[Paul]

I was making an observation, not an argument. My observation is that when you admit to not knowing a lot about a topic, insisting on holding strong opinions makes you look foolish, and perhaps the best course of action is to see what others are saying, do some research, and educate yourself. Otherwise, you are just running your mouth and basking in your own ignorance.

"Don’t take anything personally.

Whatever happens around you, don’t take it personally. Nothing other people do is because of you. It is because of themselves. All people live in their own dream, in their own mind; they are in a completely different world from the one we live in. When we take something personally, we make the assumption that they know what is in our world, and we try to impose our world on their world.

Even when a situation seems so personal, even if others insult you directly, it has nothing to do with you. What they say, what they do, and the opinions they give are according to the agreements they have in their own minds…Taking things personally makes you easy prey for these predators, the black magicians. They can hook you easily with one little opinion and feed you whatever poison they want, and because you take it personally, you eat it up…

But if you do not take it personally, you are immune in the middle of hell. Immunity in the middle of hell is the gift of this agreement."

Miguel Ruiz
2nd Agreements

 

[Paul]

Yes. Why, just yesterday I changed my son's surname and encouraged my children to marry white people because of how insecure and self-loathing I am about my heritage.

Oh wait, that was another guy.

Realizing you're someone entirely driven by self-loathing, have very little actual knowledge, and are more repetitive than a merry-go-round doesn't make me insecure, it makes me perceptive.

ON a side note.

Please explain why marrying a white person is self hate.

Explain why it is OK to endure surname racism. Why is it wrong to change the name to avoid racism?

 

[Paul]

I was making an observation, not an argument. My observation is that when you admit to not knowing a lot about a topic, insisting on holding strong opinions makes you look foolish, and perhaps the best course of action is to see what others are saying, do some research, and educate yourself. Otherwise, you are just running your mouth and basking in your own ignorance.

You keep doing the same over and over again. If you have a better argument I suggest you present the argument. Anything else is bulldookie.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

ON a side note.

Please explain why marrying a white person is self hate.

Explain why it is OK to endure surname racism. Why is it wrong to change the name to avoid racism?

I'm not your therapist. I'm not going to sit here and try and help you through your obvious self-loathing. I'm not qualified to help people with those kinds of deep mental health issues.

I recommend you get one though. You really need it.

 

[Paul]

I'm not your therapist. I'm not going to sit here and try and help you through your obvious self-loathing. I'm not qualified to help people with those kinds of deep mental health issues.

I recommend you get one though. You really need it.

You said it was self hate to marry a white person. That means you have insight into this. Please state in your own words why marrying a white person equals self hate. Don't respond about my situation. You are free to speak in general terms. I would like to know why you think marrying a white person means self hate.

Why do you think changing the surname to avoid racism is self hate. You must have reasons to have that conclusion.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Explain why it is OK to endure surname racism. Why is it wrong to change the name to avoid racism?

Why not keep your surname and just not fall for ethnic name victimhood?