Florida Bans CRT in Schools - Page 16 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15179234
Pants-of-dog wrote:You have failed to show that slavery was bot an important reason for many southern revolutionaries.


Hold on. So now you are changing the goalposts again, going from Nikole Hannah-Jones' claim that defending slavery from its impending abolition by Britain, to claiming some slave interests pushed for the revolution over the same prospects, to saying "many southern revolutionaries found slavery to be important"?

Pants-of-dog wrote:Your hypothetical teaching in civics class does not change the fact that you support the ban in history classes.


Yes, and I also support banning teaching literature in math classes. Boohoo.

Pants-of-dog wrote:So, in this case of banning these teaching materials in Florida, it is censorship.


Then so would be refusing to use the hypothetical history book I mentioned.
#15179242
If you teach history as it really is and don't dress it up with bullshit, there's kind of no need for CRT right? I believe Texas has also recently banned CRT.

As long as you teach American history objectively without the "rah rah USA" bullshit. Then I think it's pretty obvious that the US was built on a mountain of sin.
Last edited by Rancid on 02 Jul 2021 03:50, edited 1 time in total.
#15179245
Rancid wrote:If you teach history as it really is and don't dress it up with bullshit, there's kind of no need for CRT right? I believe Texas has also recently banned CRT.

As long as you teach American history objectively without the "rah rah USA" bullshit. Then I think it's pretty obvious that the US as built on a mountain of sin.


Right, teaching US history would entail of course addressing its original sins of slavery and Indian removal. But it would also entail the good things about the country, the US is the oldest Constitutional democracy in the world and it's not for no reason.
#15179264
wat0n wrote:Right, teaching US history would entail of course addressing its original sins of slavery and Indian removal. But it would also entail the good things about the country, the US is the oldest Constitutional democracy in the world and it's not for no reason.


Indeed, indeed. Take the good with the bad, is all I'm saying.

Let's also get real too, basically all nations are built on sin one way or another. :lol:
#15179276
wat0n wrote:Hold on. So now you are changing the goalposts again, going from Nikole Hannah-Jones' claim that defending slavery from its impending abolition by Britain, to claiming some slave interests pushed for the revolution over the same prospects, to saying "many southern revolutionaries found slavery to be important"?


No, you lost track of the conversation.

Yes, and I also support banning teaching literature in math classes. Boohoo.


And you apparently support banning a specific historical perspective in history class.
#15179279
Pants-of-dog wrote:No, you lost track of the conversation.


Do you agree with the claims I cited from Nikole Hannah-Jones?

Pants-of-dog wrote:And you apparently support banning a specific historical perspective in history class.


No. As long as the material used is factual, I don't have any issues with different perspectives.

Although I would also have to wonder if you would be OK with teaching perspectives that, for example, were apologist towards things like slavery.
#15179281
wat0n wrote:Do you agree with the claims I cited from Nikole Hannah-Jones?


Please specify the claims.

No. As long as the material used is factual, I don't have any issues with different perspectives.


Then you support allowing teachers to use the 1619 Project in history class.
#15179283
Pants-of-dog wrote:Please specify the claims.


Search for it ITT.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Then you support allowing teachers to use the 1619 Project in history class.


No, because it's not factual as several historians have pointed out. Unless of course they fixed their material, but this would undermine its core narrative.
#15179356
wat0n wrote:Search for it ITT.



No, because it's not factual as several historians have pointed out. Unless of course they fixed their material, but this would undermine its core narrative.


Since you have not shown it is counterfactual and you refuse to support your claims, this claim is dismissed as unsupported.

It seems you have no more arguments.

————————

Can anyone point to any negative impact that was caused by the material before it was banned? Has CRT actually done anything to anyone in Florida?
#15179357
Pants-of-dog wrote:Since you have not shown it is counterfactual and you refuse to support your claims, this claim is dismissed as unsupported.

It seems you have no more arguments.


Why do you keep ignoring the opinions by actual historians on the matter that I cited like those of Leslie M. Harris and Sean Wilentz?

I guess that once you have no arguments, the easiest way to deal with this fact is simple denial.
#15179359
@wat0n

Accusing me of being ignorant and lazy for not going back and rereading the whole thread to see what you think I missed is immature.

Please note that you have also not gone back and verified this, so you are belittling me for not doing something that you yourself refuse to do.

At this point, it seems clear that no one, including you, even knows what claims you are discussing.
#15179360
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

Accusing me of being ignorant and lazy for not going back and rereading the whole thread to see what you think I missed is immature.

Please note that you have also not gone back and verified this, so you are belittling me for not doing something that you yourself refuse to do.

At this point, it seems clear that no one, including you, even knows what claims you are discussing.


I don't have to "verify" anything here, for instance Wilentz in particular says there was little coverage of the Somerset case in the Thirteen Colonies and whatever coverage on it was fairly neutral. It's up to you to prove him wrong and that Nikole Hannah-Jones did not simply make things up along the way. You could try finding primary sources to make your points (but presented in a transparent way, not distorting them by doing things like cherry-picking like you did with one of the drafts of the DoI - something I exposed explicitly).

And yes, I'm fully aware what we're discussing: We're discussing if the 1619 Project is factually accurate or not. At least as originally presented in August 2019, and our discussion has been about the details on why is it or is it not accurate, along with some silly diversionary tactics on your end.

At last, I don't have to repost straight quotations you can easily find ITT.
#15179367
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

Please let me know if you have any arguments. Thank you.


I already did so too. Please let me know when you can actually address them and provide primary sources that falsify the accounts by academic historians like Leslie M. Harris and Sean Wilentz.
#15179379
This ban is now making sense in more than one way. A “political committee” for Ron DeSantis has received about $40 million US in donations since DeSantis started campaigning about this.

Apparently fanning racial tensions by portraying white people as victims pays well.
#15180077
@Rancid

Personally, I feel that in the absence of a union or tenure, teachers wouldn't be able to teach CRT. However, if they have a union or are tenured professors, they should teach CRT as it is part of legitimate academics to help students better understand the world they live in, at least, here in the United States. Teacher unions have announced they will defend teachers who teach CRT and face persecution or discrimination for doing so. In cases such as this, tenure and unions for teachers and professors are a good thing to have to enable them to teach honest history and honest academics.


Nicole Chavez of CNN wrote:As some states move toward banning critical race theory from public schools, the president of the second-largest teachers' union in the country has vowed to defend teachers against any backlash.

"Mark my words: Our union will defend any member who gets in trouble for teaching honest history," Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers told members Tuesday in a virtual address at the union's TEACH conference.

"Teaching the truth is not radical or wrong," Weingarten added.

The union's president said the organization has "a legal defense fund" and was preparing for litigation.

Her remarks come as the debate over critical race theory and schools has intensified in recent months. Republican lawmakers argue the area of study is based on Marxism and is a threat to the American way of life. But critical race theory, according to scholars who study it, explores the ways in which the history of inequality and racism in the United States has continued to impact American society today.

Legislators in more than a dozen states have proposed bills to ban critical race theory and some states already have banned educators from teaching it.
Oklahoma teachers were banned in May from teaching that "an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist or oppressive."

Meanwhile in Texas, a law going into effect on September 1 is set to ban educators from teaching that "slavery and racism are anything other than deviations from, betrayals of, or failures to live up to, the authentic founding principles of the United States."

Weingarten says CRT is not actually taught in K-12 schools, only in law school and college.

"But culture warriors are labeling any discussion of race, racism or discrimination as CRT to try to make it toxic. They are bullying teachers and trying to stop us from teaching students accurate history," the union president said.

"This harms students. These culture warriors want to deprive students of a robust understanding of our common history. This will put students at a disadvantage in life by knocking a big hole in their understanding of our country and the world," she added.

A recent survey conducted by the Association of American Educators indicates that the majority of teachers across the US have not incorporated critical race theory in their curriculum or are not planning to do so in the upcoming school year.

A total of 1,136 educators were surveyed last month and only 4.1% of respondents said they were mandated or required to teach CRT at this time, according to the survey.

Nearly 44% of respondents said they were in favor of having the option to add it to their lesson plans while 11% said they believe it should be required or mandated, the survey indicates.

Colin Sharkey, the association's executive director, said the national debate over CRT should be discussed in "real terms about what is actually being permitted or required by our districts, expected by our parents, taught by our educators, and experienced by our students."

"That means transparency, educator and parent engagement, and responsible reporting about a topic as important as addressing racism," Sharkey said in a statement.

Last month, a coalition of dozens of scholarly and educational groups released a joint statement opposing the legislative efforts against discussions of racism in schools and colleges, saying people of all ages deserve a "a free and open exchange about history."

"To ban the tools that enable those discussions is to deprive us all of the tools necessary for citizenship in the twenty-first century," the group said. "A white-washed view of history cannot change what happened in the past."



https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/07/us/criti ... index.html
#15265365
I know this is bumping an old thread, but I thought it's worthwhile to see what does current Florida Law - including what was passed in 2022, i.e. De Santis' law - ban teaching.

Firstly, consider what the law mandates teaching as far as CRT is concerned:

2022 Florida Statute, FL Stat § 1003.42 (2022) wrote:(2) Members of the instructional staff of the public schools, subject to the rules of the State Board of Education and the district school board, shall teach efficiently and faithfully, using the books and materials required that meet the highest standards for professionalism and historical accuracy, following the prescribed courses of study, and employing approved methods of instruction, the following:

...

(h) The history of African Americans, including the history of African peoples before the political conflicts that led to the development of slavery, the passage to America, the enslavement experience, abolition, and the history and contributions of Americans of the African diaspora to society. Students shall develop an understanding of the ramifications of prejudice, racism, and stereotyping on individual freedoms, and examine what it means to be a responsible and respectful person, for the purpose of encouraging tolerance of diversity in a pluralistic society and for nurturing and protecting democratic values and institutions. Instruction shall include the roles and contributions of individuals from all walks of life and their endeavors to learn and thrive throughout history as artists, scientists, educators, businesspeople, influential thinkers, members of the faith community, and political and governmental leaders and the courageous steps they took to fulfill the promise of democracy and unite the nation. Instructional materials shall include the vital contributions of African Americans to build and strengthen American society and celebrate the inspirational stories of African Americans who prospered, even in the most difficult circumstances. Instructional personnel may facilitate discussions and use curricula to address, in an age-appropriate manner, how the individual freedoms of persons have been infringed by slavery, racial oppression, racial segregation, and racial discrimination, as well as topics relating to the enactment and enforcement of laws resulting in racial oppression, racial segregation, and racial discrimination and how recognition of these freedoms has overturned these unjust laws. However, classroom instruction and curriculum may not be used to indoctrinate or persuade students to a particular point of view inconsistent with the principles enumerated in subsection (3) or the state academic standards. The department shall prepare and offer standards and curriculum for the instruction required by this paragraph and may seek input from the Commissioner of Education’s African American History Task Force.

...

(p) The study of Hispanic contributions to the United States.

(q) The study of women’s contributions to the United States.

...

(s) Civic and character education on the qualities and responsibilities of patriotism and citizenship, including kindness; respect for authority, life, liberty, and personal property; honesty; charity; racial, ethnic, and religious tolerance; and cooperation and, for grades 11 and 12, voting using the uniform primary and general election ballot described in s. 101.151(9).[/b]


What is, in fact, proscribed is the bolded part - instruction that doesn't abide by the principles of subsection 3. What are those principles? Here they are:

2022 Florida Statute, FL Stat § 1003.42 (2022) wrote:(3) The Legislature acknowledges the fundamental truth that all persons are equal before the law and have inalienable rights. Accordingly, instruction and supporting materials on the topics enumerated in this section must be consistent with the following principles of individual freedom:

(a) No person is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously, solely by virtue of his or her race or sex.

(b) No race is inherently superior to another race.

(c) No person should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, disability, or sex.

(d) Meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are not racist but fundamental to the right to pursue happiness and be rewarded for industry.

(e) A person, by virtue of his or her race or sex, does not bear responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex.

(f) A person should not be instructed that he or she must feel guilt, anguish, or other forms of psychological distress for actions, in which he or she played no part, committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex.

Instructional personnel may facilitate discussions and use curricula to address, in an age-appropriate manner, how the freedoms of persons have been infringed by sexism, slavery, racial oppression, racial segregation, and racial discrimination, including topics relating to the enactment and enforcement of laws resulting in sexism, racial oppression, racial segregation, and racial discrimination, including how recognition of these freedoms have overturned these unjust laws. However, classroom instruction and curriculum may not be used to indoctrinate or persuade students to a particular point of view inconsistent with the principles of this subsection or state academic standards.


https://law.justia.com/codes/florida/20 ... n-1003-42/

So, what's the problem with these principles?

Which of these specific principles do people like @Pants-of-dog, @Saeko, @Politics_Observer, @late or @SpecialOlympian disagree with?
#15265366
wat0n wrote:
So, what's the problem with these principles?

Which of these specific principles do people like @Pants-of-dog, @Saeko, @Politics_Observer, @late or @SpecialOlympian disagree with?



Its the lying, not the principles.
#15265367
late wrote:Its the lying, not the principles.


I think the law is quite clear about the requirements for instruction in the state. From what I can see, it is indeed legal to e.g. discuss systemic racism as part of instruction.

Would you be more specific about what lying do you disagree with? You mean the discussion about what CRT is?

Would you say the law as is bans CRT?
#15265378
DeSantis is openly censoring teachers and professors now.

https://www.propublica.org/article/desa ... professors

Perhaps the supporters of this law can explain to me why people should be legally barred from arguing that, for example, colour-blindness in race politics can actually mask and support racism.

How is that idea, or related ideas, so damaging to public discourse that they cannot be mentioned, but hate speech is protected?
  • 1
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 22
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

@JohnRawls Why do you think that? If you wer[…]

Isn't oil and electricity bought and sold like ev[…]

@Potemkin I heard this song in the Plaza Grande […]

I (still) have a dream

Even with those millions though. I will not be ab[…]