Hat tip Legal Insurrection
Last week, we were writing about the controversy at the UC Berkeley School of Law, where lefty groups of law students voiced their opposition to inviting supporters of Israel to speak on campus. I myself got so bent out of shape about it, I wrote a letter to UCB Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky (and he responded).
This week, it's the UCLA School of Law. Our friends at Legal Insurrection have an article about the shenanigans going on in Westwood. It seems those who are training the future lawyers of America are now actively tracking those who are opposed to the teaching of Critical Race Theory (CRT). It's called the Forward Tracking Project. My question is just who is it they are tracking? Apparently, they don't teach the First Amendment at UCLA Law.
The propagators and supporters of CRT say that their critics are a bunch of white racists who don't want their kids taught about the dark chapters in our history, such as slavery, Jim Crow, racism, and segregation. I take issue with that. I am against CRT, but I do think our younger generations should learn about these things as part of American history. They should also be taught about the Civil War, the Civil Rights Movement, and all the changes that have occurred over the course of just my lifetime.
The reason they need to be taught about our dark chapters is so that they don't happen again. However, I believe that the people who are pushing CRT have a different agenda. That is basically to divide the American people into different tribes who are all oppressed by whites. What better way to hasten the demise of our country?
CRT teaches things that go far beyond slavery and racism. The basic premise is that America was founded on slavery, and that white people are all privileged and irredeemably racist. In California, we now have an ethnic studies requirement for kids in high school. Beyond ethnic studies, this new requirement includes a lot of CRT. The original draft version was rejected rightly by Governor Gavin Newsom largely because it contained propaganda about Israel "oppressing" Palestinians and that Jews are merely privileged white people. Many Jewish parents and Jewish organizations were opposed to the draft for those very reasons. Their kids are facing enough anti-Semitism in school. This would have just added fuel to the fire. Unfortunately, Newsom signed a revised bill that leaves the barn door wide open for whatever our activist teachers want to teach.
Returning to UCLA, we have a law school that not only embraces CRT, but is now forming an organization of sorts apparently to ferret out people who are against CRT. Just who will wind up with their names in the UCLA Law School database? Will it be people and organizations who are actively fighting CRT? Will it be politicians? Will it be little ol' me? I am not an activist in this matter, but I am writing an article now against CRT and what this law school is doing.
Will it be parents?
Yes, parents who have gone to tell their local school boards they don't like the extracurricular indoctrination that their children are receiving. Parents who write letters of complaint to their schools and the school board. Who would have thought that one day the FBI would be investigating these parents as possible "domestic terrorists".
It appears from the links in the Legal Insurrection post that at least part of their database is open to the public. From what I could tell, it contains information on various state legislative actions pertaining to CRT. I would like to know if it contains or will contain names of private individuals.
If this endeavor is aimed at silencing people who have a different opinion on a serious issue and are voicing it, it is cause for concern. I believe that has something to do with the First Amendment. Maybe the learned law professors of UCLA have heard of it.
This really bears following.
13 comments:
As usual, you don't define critical race theory correctly.
There are good, legit criticisms of it, but you have to start by getting the facts right.
Are you going to report me the Forward Tracking Project?
I don't know anything about it. At worst, it's just as bad as the anti-CRT hysteria where people have been reporting teachers for supposedly teaching CRT and schools going on to teach "both sides" of the Holocaust.
Either way, you still don't let the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about stop you from having a strong opinion.
So tell me, Anonymous. You concede that there are "good, legitimate criticisms" of CRT. What are they?
The one criticism that I've heard, which takes into account what CRT actually is (and not this boogeyman version that you describe) is that CRT focuses solely on how race/racism has shaped policies in this country - policies that reverberate to this day. The problem is that while focusing on this issue, it doesn't leave room for other factors (like classism, for instance).
In other words, it's too limiting in its scope.
Of course, any responsible instructor who teaches CRT would allow for discussion of its weaknesses.
The funny thing is that I know a lot of educators (who don't teach at law school). None of them had even heard of CRT until they heard about the hysteria against it. Now they have to deal with parents accusing them of supposedly teaching it when they're doing nothing of the sort.
Race and racism shaped policies in the US-especially in the South- in the past. That began to change with the Civil Rights era. Today, race forms policies in ways at least perceived to be beneficial to minorities. I do not deny that slavery and Jim Crow have left a legacy since large pockets of black communities still suffer from lack of education, gangs, drugs, crime, and single-parent families. The schools are in the inner cities, but they have to cope with all the other things around them, hence, quality education is lacking.
Unfortunately, those who are teaching CRT and pushing it as an agenda are not encouraging discussion of its weaknesses. Students speak out against CRT in the classroom at their risk.
Most black conservatives are against CRT. It's not just hysterical whites who don't want their kids to learn about racism, slavery and Jim Crow. When it comes down to probalmes facing black Americas today, white racism is way down on the list. Something else that many if not most black conservatives will tell you.
You make the assertion about teachers who are supposedly teaching CRT and what they're agenda. From what I can see, it's conservative media telling us that's what they're doing without providing a whole lot of evidence for it. (And of course, the starting point is always by not defining CRT correctly in the first place.)
Black conservatives are against CRT? I wonder if their knowledge of it is as consistent as it is with white conservatives - which is "not much other than what right-wing media says".
While I don't think that one should immediately dismiss a black person who identifies as conservative, I have to wonder why you only seem to give them any credence when it comes to explaining the black experience in this country. Conservatives make up around 10% of African American voters.
Certainly they say things that make white people feel better about what's going on, but why dismiss what the other 90% might be saying out of hand? Seems a bit troublesome - especially when people like Candace Owens and Larry Elder say the same things that if a white person said it, you'd have no problem identifying them as a white supremacist. (Their whole discussion on "what about reparations for the slave owners" springs immediately to mind.)
On the contrary, I think there is plenty of documentation of CRT being introduced into schools. It';s not just "right-wing media". It's parents including many Jewish parents who are alarmed at the material pertaining to Israel as the identity of Jews simply as privileged whites. Are you bothering to research the spread of CRT or do you just rely on your favored media to rebut it?
Hopefully, the 10% of black conservatives will grow. It's not about "making whites feel good". It takes real courage to take the positions that people like Elder and Owens take. They are called Uncle Toms and insulted even by liberal whites. Many black conservatives reject CRT because they refuse to live their lives as "victims".
The fact that you bring up Israel into a discussion about CRT helps to prove my point. Israel has absolutely nothing to do with CRT. What are you even talking about?
And yes, there are parents who are "alarmed", but they're not alarmed at what's actually happening but what right-wing media is telling them that's happening. There are teachers who are dealing with accusations of teaching CRT when they have done nothing of the sort. (It's only taught in university law classes.)
Right-wing media has turned the term "CRT" into a boogeyman for anything that they don't like, whether it actually fits the description or not.
And yeah, I have bothered to research it. This is why I keep telling you that you're not even defining it correctly.
I also have to wonder what you think is meant by the term "privileged whites" because going by the way you use it, I don't think you do. I'm a white person, and I acknowledge my privilege. It doesn't mean that life is automatically easy for me or that non-white people are unable to get anywhere in the world. (It also doesn't mean that they're "victims", as nobody's even saying that.) My "privilege" simply means that there are things that I don't have to deal with as a white person that non-white people often have to put up with. I can just listen to them for examples. (Like a friend of mine who got called the n-word while shopping at Best Buy.)
It takes "real courage" to sympathize with slave holders? I'm sorry, but as to accusations of being an "Uncle Tom", if you're black and unable to see the moral difference between slaves and slaveholders, then what else are you but an Uncle Tom? That's literally the definition. It's like a Jewish person sympathizing with poor working conditions of a concentration camp guard.
I mean, have you seen the video that Owens did on the history of slavery for "Prager U"? It's some of the most obscene rewriting of history I've ever heard in my life.
And being a "victim" is the entire grift of Owens and Elder. They say completely irrational stuff and when criticized for it, they whine about their unfair treatment.
A big problem in this world is that people don't listen to others, and they often argue, not with what their opposition says, but what they THINK that they're saying. I see it happen on the left, but the problem is particularly bad on the right.
It doesn't even seem to matter how often you're told that you're arguing points that nobody's making. I don't know if it's stubbornness, a lack of humility, or what, but I wish that you'd at least be able to articulate what your opposition is actually saying and then debate THAT instead of these fictional scenarios that you're always swatting at.
Who is sympathizing with slaveholders?? Certainly not I. If you have quotes from Owens or Elder that they do, pls send them to me and I will check it out. Keep in mind that Elder has a very ironic way of arguing his points so it's possible it's been taken out of context, but I don't know until I see it.
You are right. Israel has nothing to do with CRT. At least it shouldn't have anything to do with it. But much of the propagation of CRT talks about Israel oppressing Palestinians. As I have stated before, Jews are considered nothing more than privileged whites even though Jews come in all colors. BLM and its founders, like Patrice Cullors, have expressed anti-Semitic ideas and also stand "in solidarity" with the Palestinians.
https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/black-lives-matters-jewish-problem-in-their-own-words/
I'm referring to the following, which Elder said (not being ironic or joking):
“When people talk about reparations, do they really want to have that conversation? Like it or not, slavery was legal,” Elder said. “Their legal property was taken away from them after the Civil War, so you could make an argument that the people that are owed reparations are not only just Black people but also the people whose ‘property’ was taken away after the end of the Civil War.”
https://reparationscomm.org/reparations-news/larry-elder-argues-slave-owners-are-owed-reparations-on-candace-owens-show/
There is absolutely no context that makes that anything less than horrific. If a white person lacked the moral clarity to understand the difference between what is legal versus what is moral in this context, that would be awful. For a black man? He ought to be ashamed of himself. I mean, what the Nazis did was legal too...should they have been compensated?
And of course, Owens did absolutely nothing to push back.
I'm sorry, but she's a grifter and a clown. It's funny how she downplays racism when she's on record (and this is how she first got the spotlight) for being a victim of racism when she was younger. She gets so much stuff spectacularly wrong and is part of the misinformation campaign against vaccines that has resulted in the deaths of thousands upon thousands of Americans.
Like I mentioned, I've seen her Prager U video on the history of slavery which is full of misinformation and practically bends over backward to downplay the atrocity that was the Atlantic Slave Trade. And let's not forget this little nugget of ignorance:
"I actually don't have any problems at all with the word 'nationalism'. I think that the definition gets poisoned by elitists that actually want globalism. Globalism is what I don't want, so when you think about whenever we say nationalism, the first thing people think about, at least in America, is Hitler. He was a national socialist. But if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, okay, fine. The problem is that he wanted, he had dreams outside of Germany. He wanted to globalize. He wanted everybody to be German, everybody to be speaking German. Everybody to look a different way. To me, that's not nationalism. In thinking about how we could go bad down the line, I don't really have an issue with nationalism. I really don't. I think that it's okay."
Again, I have no problem listening to different viewpoints, especially the minorities within the minorities. However, when the overwhelming majority of black people think that racism is still a major problem, but you dismiss them in favor of those who say something that makes you feel better, you have to wonder about that. I really wish that people like Elder and Owens were right. I would certainly sleep better if they were. But I have to ignore a whole lot of people who see things from a different perspective than me in order to do so.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/08/12/deep-divisions-in-americans-views-of-nations-racial-history-and-how-to-address-it/
As for your link, I have no problem believing that there's anti-Semitism coming from the left. I also condemn any anti-Semitism, no matter where it comes from, even if it's from people where I tend to agree with them on a lot of other stuff.
But you're conflating CRT and BLM. Also, I'd argue that the Black Livers Matter movement has outgrown its initial founder. For most people, it's simply a rallying cry that our country needs to wake up and value black people as much as they do white people. I imagine that most of them are unaware of who Cullors even is or what she has to say. "Black lives matter" means just that. It's not an endorsement of everything that she has to say.
I mean, I stand by lots of things that the founding fathers had to say. That doesn't make me pro-slavery, does it?
It was a comment that can be taken in different ways or twisted. Having listened to Elder for many years, I see his comment differently than you do. It was clumsy, but I think his argument was that it is a mistake to go down the reparations path. I would never have said it that way, but surely you don't think he was really defending slavery or slave owners.
I don't have the same familiarity with Owens except from what I have seen she is bright, fiery, and an able debater. This is a woman who goes into universities and faces down hostile audiences. That takes courage.
AS for BLM, I disagree that they have outgrown founder Patrise Cullors, who is living in luxury someone on the Calif coast if I am not mistaken. It is either her or her co-founder. Do not forget that it was BLM who marched in NY chanting slogans about killing cops and "frying them like bacon". The "night riders" who harassed Jews in a heavily Jewish part of LA during the summer of riots were BLM-inspired. Do not think there is no element of anti-Semitism in the BLM movement. At least one of their co-founders went to Israel and the West Bank invited by Palestinian activists.
As for the nationalism issue. In Europe, people we would call "patriots" are called nationalists in a pejorative sense. I consider myself both in spite of the fact that I have been in over 60 countries and lived in three of them. I love Thailand, ITaly and Germany, But the US is the one country I would die for. Globalism could be good or bad depending how it is defined or put into action. From what I see here, I don't like it. The EU is a classic example. They are robbing their member states of the sovereignty.
I think that what's abundantly clear, and it requires no twisting nor interpreting, is that Elder is equating the loss of one's freedom with the loss of one's property. Even if we completely remove the race issue from this (impossible, but just as a thought experiment), that is not the perspective of a person with any sense of moral clarity.
You also give too much credit to Owens. She's either an ignoramus or a liar (maybe both?) and I doubt that she even believes much of what she says. She's got her grift, and it's paying for her. She does speak with a lot of confidence though, which is often confused for intelligence. I also think that you might be giving too much importance to one's ability to debate. Debate is more performance art than anything else and is a really bad way to determine who has the facts on their side.
Regarding BLM, I guarantee you that for most people, it's a rallying cry in support of black people and has nothing to do with anti-Semitism. I mean, if we want to get into who inspires what, modern-day conservatives have a lot to answer for considering January 6 and various hate crimes (some of which also involve anti-Semitism). That doesn't mean that every conservative supports those things.
Post a Comment