Last week, I reported a poll in Educatuon Week, which found that half the public thinks that schools should not teach about racism today. With opinion polls, the results are influenced by many factors, including how the questions are worded. A poll by CBS got very different results.
Greg Sergeant writes in the Washington Post that Democrats should take heart from a CBS News poll: Most Americans oppose book banning. Democrats should stop being defensive.
He writes:
As Democrats debate the GOP’s all-culture-war-all-the-time campaign strategy, here’s a maxim worth remembering: If you’re wasting political bandwidth denying lies about yourselves, you’re losing.
A new CBS News poll offers data that should prod Democrats into rethinking these culture-war battles. It finds that surprisingly large majorities oppose banning books on history or race — and importantly, this is partly because teaching about our racial past makes students more understanding of others’ historical experiences.
The poll finds that 83 percent of Americans say books should never be banned for criticizing U.S. history; 85 percent oppose banning them for airing ideas you disagree with; and 87 percent oppose banning them for discussing race or depicting slavery.
What’s more, 76 percent of Americans say schools should be allowed to teach ideas and historical events that “might make some students uncomfortable.” And 68 percent say such teachings make people more understanding of what others went through, while 58 percent believe racism is still a serious problem today.
Finally, 66 percent say public schools either teach too little about the history of Black Americans (42 percent) or teach the right amount (24 percent). Yet 59 percent say we’ve made “a lot of real progress getting rid of racial discrimination” since the 1960s.
This hints at a way forward for Democrats. Notably, large majorities think both that we’ve made a good deal of racial progress and that we should be forthrightly confronting hard racial truths about our past and present, even if it makes students uncomfortable.
Culture warriors in the Republican Party want to ban all teaching about racism, in the past or present. They pass vague laws that are meant to intimidate teachers.
Their rhetorical game works this way: If you focus too much on the persistence of racial disparities in the present, you’re denying the racial progress that has taken place. You’re telling children that race still matters. You’re not telling a positive or uplifting story about our country. You’re saying America is irredeemable. You’re trying to make children hate our country, each other and themselves.
But this polling suggests many Americans doesn’t necessarily see things this way. Place proper emphasis on the idea that racial progress has been made, and it’s fine to highlight the problems that remain, even if it creates feelings of discomfort. It’s possible to tell a story that is in some ways about progress but also doesn’t whitewash our past.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“Culture warriors in the Republican Party want to ban all teaching about racism, in the past or present. They pass vague laws that are meant to intimidate teachers.”
Question: Do they really want to ban teaching about race? Or do they just want a different way to disrupt traditional public school so they can stick their greedy muzzles into the trough of public school money?
Yes, they want to ban the teaching of truth about race in America. They want a national “1776 Curriculum.” This was a major theme of the last Repugnican Coven, uh, Convention.
And, if they win in 2022 and 2024, it’s coming. The fundmentalist, exceptionalist, racist Hillsdale College curriculum will look mild compared to what they end up with.
YES, and there is much evidence that the goal is mostly to “rile up” voters: it is not a subject which makes a lot of sense when confronted directly, but it goes exactly to deep feelings of cultural and sexual supremacy/racism which can make people act out
I wonder if public school parents and families have noticed yet that none of this ginned anti-CRT panic has done anything of practical value for students who attend public schools.
It’s been great for a certain segment of Right wing politicians and operatives and a certain set of ed reformers who lobby for privatization of public schools, but public school students? All they got was screaming mobs in their schools, division in their communities, and a whole set of ridiculous new reporting regulations and requirements.
That they launched this political campaign just as schools were recovering from covid is all the proof anyone needs that it never had anything to do with “public school students” or “improving public schools”. Our schools and kids were just used as props for a broader ideological agenda, one that isn’t even relevant to them or their schools since they attend PUBLIC schools so therefore are not part of political campaigns to push vouchers.
The next time the traveling campaign circus comes to your school ask them what they plan to contribute to existing public schools. If the answer is “nothing”, as here, give the whole crew a hard pass.
A moderate approach seems sensible. I fear, however, that there are few moderates left in politics. Centrists are not moderates. They are a different form of corporate libertarians than Republicans, but are still out to attack public schools and teachers. This poll suggests that the public wants moderate sensibility, not extremism. The public wants public schools, and public schools with teachers leading the way. Politicians should step aside from the debates about what and how to teach, and simply fund the public institution that the public needs and wants.
The problem is that one party is fundamentally opposed to anything public. One party has a plan that is called no plan. One party is waging culture war since Brown V BOE. Dixiecrat’s becoming Republicans.
“Politicians should step aside ” a bit of both sides- ism. I don’t see Democratic politicians designing the curriculum’s that are being objected to. Those decisions were made by academics and school boards. True some were appointed by Democrats. But which Democrats ran for office on a platform calling for teaching diversity or reforming the way we teach history to actually reflect history…
Mother Jones (March-April 2022) “…right wing activists hellbent on transforming Catholic Church…’liberal Catholics have no plan’ “.
The article explains the magnitude of the political problem for those who don’t want the clock turned back on the rights of people who are not right wing, not white, not male,…
Linda
It is not confined to the Church.
“That relentlessly critical portrayal of the pope doesn’t represent the majority of US Catholics, 82 percent of whom, according to a Pew Research poll, have favorable impressions of Francis.”
Sounds pretty much like the above polling. Catherine Stewart (although it could have been Sarah Posner in Unholy ) points out that the religious right feels that with a hardcore dedicated 10% they can seize power. Tracing it back to Gobbles or some other Nazi . (The problem with Audio Books on my walks , you can’t highlight for later reference )
The answer is to motivate the 80%. To do that requires leadership and perhaps a bit of demagoguery of your own. Or at least knowing how to use language.
Years ago districts and teachers were responsible for most of the instruction and library selections. In NY the state got involved in testing everyone in the late 1970s. They started requiring tests and more requiring more mandates. It is the state’s responsibility to provide public education, but it has become so politicized that it is destructive and counter productive. Students should not receive an education based on how much money billionaires donate to political campaigns. The interests of students and communities should come first.
You’re onto it right there. Top down curriculum and methods mandates based on a lack of respect for the professional judgment of teachers are the problem, exacerbated by standardized testing, and caused by the big scheme to privatize and eventually eliminate public education. The current debate was caused by the Billionaire Boys and Girls Club decades ago, and is fed by them today. They want public schools to be perceived as places of danger, where your children will be saddled with burned out bad apples, brainwashed, coerced, bullied, disrespected, mass murdered…
Getting rid of standardization and privatization would perhaps solve nearly everything and heal many wounds.
I do think most people are moderate and sensible. They want public schools, with public school teachers teaching as they see fit as professionals, without political activism in classrooms. American history taught honestly, including the full history of slavery and the slave trade, the Civil War, reconstruction, Jim Crow, the civil rights movement and the civil rights act. I don’t know a single person in real life who would object to any of that. But the caveat of “without political activism” is real and serious.
I doubt very much that your kids got any “political activism” in the public schools that you so despised. I certainly haven’t seen it and I have been a public school parent for a long time.
And I have talked to friends and relatives in other cities’ public schools and their kids are not experiencing this “real and serious” problem that seems to bother the same people who hate the 1619 Project.
The faux fear that you have that exposing children to the 1619 Project is a horrible thing and must be stopped is a reflection of your own biases about what YOU consider to be the “proper” American history.
Somehow folks didn’t care one iota about all the flaws in what their kids were being taught in history for many decades because those flaws weren’t important to them. But suddenly, when it is Nikole Hannah-Jones, those very same folks denounce her and the 1619 Project and exaggerate even the tiniest flaws as making that history far too dangerous for their kids to be exposed to.
The lie that students are getting “political activism” is fake and a joke. Tucker Carlson promotes that view and there is never any evidence except a single power point slide in some DEI presentation.
I think most parents don’t care that other people’s 4 year olds might have to wear masks, either. The ones that do often are the same folks that don’t worry about the man
^^manner in which those kids are treated in no-excuses charters. But they care about masks.
(My kid just came home and says many kids still plan to wear masks for a while. No doubt your perspective would be that they are all brainwashed by real and serious political activism.)
I should remind you that I only skim your comments. So you probably don’t need to write a novel in response to every one of my comments.
FLERP!,
I should remind you that these kinds of replies you write just confirm you are reading what I wrote. There is no need to, of course, but I am glad you are! (PS, no need to reply to this!) Thanks for reading!
I should remind myself that brevity is the soul of wit.
LCT,
If only public school teachers could be moderate and sensible but instead we have this real and serious problem where public school teachers include political activism in their lessons.
flerp! has certainly made a convincing case for why good Republicans are passing laws to stop that real and serious danger to students found in so many public schools. As a parent, I appreciate reading that even the teachers here are legitimizing that Republican concern about the lessons of political activism that teachers are giving.
Thank you. I now see it is a real and serious problem.
I don’t think LCT recognized your sarcasm
I don’t have time to read everything you write and I have no idea what you’re talking about. The fact is that while long comments are sometimes appropriate, when they are pervasive they lose the attention of the audience. If I allow one student in my class to dominate my time, the rest of the class loses its will to participate and eventually, to even pay any attention at all.
I got the sarcasm. I was playing a little chess, sacrificing a pawn of teaching politics to pursue the queen of succinct composition.
LCT,
Snarkiness is succinct. Apologies for thinking I should support what I say with argument. I absolutely acknowledge I am too long-winded, but I find it odd that some folks are more offended by a long-winded post they can easily ignore than a short post that is snarky, attacking, and is backed up by no facts or argument at all.
A long/longish post can often be “long winded” or “informative”, depending on the attitude of the reader, regarding the subject matter within.
If someone is open to you and your ideas; they will often be happy to read your writings. Might even seek you out. Even if the writer gets a bit carried away; the reader still maintains interest.
If that same someone is already very familiar with the point(s) in your post; he or she might just skim through or just move on.
Someone who often does not agree with your slants will be much more difficult to reach with a long post, regardless of its’ merit(s). If the purpose is to reach an adversarial audience, it’s always best to keep it short and simple to begin with and hope for a continuation of the dialogue from there.
It is recognized that I am being critical.
LCT,
I don’t understand why you would focus your criticism on the length of my posts, and not on what flerp! actually wrote about the “real and serious” problem that teachers are infusing their classrooms with political activism. You do realize that is exactly why parents support Republicans passing laws to restrict what teachers can teach, don’t you?
Flerp asked teachers a couple weeks ago to give examples of teaching about race in current events. I gave an example of a recent lesson I taught, something sensibly moderate. The example seemed to satisfy Flerp but did not change Flerp’s perception. I disagree with the perception, but I understand it. Dealing with misperception requires patience. I endeavor to improve my ability to know when and how to be diplomatic. Sometimes, it’s best to just listen and acknowledge. Flerp’s perception of teaching is different than your practice of arguing every point with lengthy discussion. That’s a behavior that does not require patience. It requires honest feedback. I know that just as Flerp and I respect each other, you and I respect each other, and can work together to hone our tact.
LCT,
All I can say is that legitimizing the pro-ed reform/”anti-CRT” people as honest actors in this debate is why so many Americans believe them.
Here is another saying . “The best defense is a good offense”. Of course Democrats with few exceptions have run from the culture wars instead of fighting them.
“83 percent of Americans say books should never be banned for criticizing U.S. history; 85 percent oppose banning them for airing ideas you disagree with; and 87 percent oppose banning them for discussing race or depicting slavery.”
And Democratic “moderates” cower in fear afraid to offend the 15%+- .
“This hints at a way forward for Democrats.”
They’ll run in the opposite direction.
“Place proper emphasis on the idea that racial progress has been made, and it’s fine to highlight the problems that remain, even if it creates feelings of discomfort. It’s possible to tell a story that is in some ways about progress but also doesn’t whitewash our past.”
So, I go open, in Kindle, Ibram X. Kendi’s Stamped (For Kids). Search for “progress.” Get only two hits.
Page 120: “To tell an accurate story about the progress of Black people in the United States means looking at the whole group, not just a few individuals. And it means looking at all the systems in the nation—such as education, housing, and employment—to see if they’re truly working for everyone, not just for some. It means not looking for an easy way to deny that racism is still very real. It means, instead, doing the work of antiracists to ensure freedom and equality exist for all.”
Here, Kendi demands we must find, in a pure, fixed, non-varying sense, “that racism is still very real.” Then, given that, we must find that no “systems in the nation” are in any ways or to any extents “truly working for everyone.” Then, given that, we must conclude no racial progress has been made and, indeed, cannot be made.
Pages 124-125: “For many people, President Obama was a symbol of hope and progress. But by now you know that people aren’t always just one way (like I’ve been saying this whole time). People can be complicated and contradictory (been saying that, too). Barack Obama, like leaders before him, such as Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, W. E. B. Du Bois, and Booker T. Washington, had moments when he expressed antiracist thoughts. But, under pressure, he also fell back on assimilationist ideas. And just as with Black leaders before him, assimilation didn’t work.”
Here, if Kendi’s “assimilationist ideas” rhetoric isn’t a plain, clear, putdown and attack on “racial progress,” then it’s hard to imagine what would be.
Nothing about Kendi portends acknowledging any “story that is in some ways about progress but also doesn’t whitewash out past.” Kendi, et al., need a consistent, uniform, perpetual whitewashed past in order for foment and legitimize their separate, distinctly blackwashed past as a counter-narrative. There is no sense of their wanting to help bring into existence any manner of unified narrative of “racial progress.”
Kendi makes it reasonable to understand—not to mean to agree with—why competitive, anti-CRT pushback happens.
I see that CRT is an instantiation of Critical Theory ideology that requires raw, unhinged, disruptive, revolutionary change for the sake of change, not to make progress, and that Ibram X. Kendi is an activation of CRT, in our K-12 educational systems.
We really should stop saying “CRT [ideology] isn’t be taught in our schools.” It is. And it will have long-lasting inhibiting and destructive effects, if for no other reason it promotes and sustains the lie that “race is real.”
Race as a biological construct is unreal. Race as a cultural construct definitely isn’t, and that’s the point. Systematic racism is real. Blacks pay higher mortgage rates than do whites with exactly the same credit scores. Blacks are much more likely to be arrested when stopped for the same vehicular violations. They are far more likely to be tried for the same crimes. If convicted, they get longer sentences. And so on.
Indeed, racism, systemic and otherwise, is real. We think it and make it real in and by our wildly varying, Left and Right behaviors, so it exists. Then, racism produces the race fiction, which can be nothing but a cultural construct and is real only in that sense. But ultimate truth is that race is a lie. We, like Kendi and similar others, will keep legitimating the lie as long as we keep shying away from ultimate truth and not wanting to have so-called “hard conversations” about that.
Bob,
This is what I see in many young people today. They are far less conscious of race than their elders. They seem to have far more multicultural and diverse friend groups.
But they are far more aware of racism. I don’t think that is a contradiction. I believe it is because they don’t see their friends as one race or another that they are far more inclined to notice the disparities in treatment and perception that society has when it comes to race.
If people that profess not to see “race” never notice the racism, it is probably because they might have implicit biases that make them believe that the different treatment that someone of another race experiences is “deserved” and has nothing to do with their race.
I think young people may not have the same implicit bias that the unequal treatment is “deserved”. And they notice it and object.
So they were more likely to object to those who told them that shootings of unarmed African Americans never had anything to do with their race.
I recently taught English, Speech, Theatre, and Film in a South Florida high school. I was astonished and incredibly pleased at the lack of racism among these students (with a few exceptions). They freely made good friends and dated across racial lines. This experience gave me a lot of hope.
My father doesn’t drop the N-bomb these days as much as he used to. He sure is making “progress.”
Love it.
Yes, indeed. That’s progress.
Define progress. Well I guess lynching no longer being acceptable counts for something .
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/06/04/economic-divide-black-households/
And then this a little dated but probably unchanged.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/06/incarceration-gap-between-whites-and-blacks-widens/
In the 1960s “the fellow that didn’t do anything but drive a tractor will say, “That’s not right. That’s not fair.” ” today he is label to say fake news!!
What’s progress? Within the context of the paragraph quoted, I take progress to mean at least one individual of any so-called race whose thinking produces less racism to any degree or extent. See LetThemLearn’s reply above. It gives an example of progress.
Ed Johnson….I don’t think that CRT is actually being taught in public schools, but some of its tenets are being incorporated into the DEI/SEL curriculums that are being developed by ed de-formers. Not much put out by the de-formers is logical or appropriate (never has been) since these folks have no teaching experience, no knowledge of what really goes on in classrooms, or the impact that their nonsense has on youth.
Let the pile on begin….I don’t care!
Yes, agreed. I only ask to consider that Kendi is an “activation” of CRT and, as such, is indeed in our schools–Black schools, in particular. And showing up in SEL, which should be a grave concern. I’ve always seen SEL being one side of the coin and police in schools the other side.
Ed Johnson,
You quoted this statement:
“To tell an accurate story about the progress of Black people in the United States means looking at the whole group, not just a few individuals. And it means looking at all the systems in the nation—such as education, housing, and employment—to see if they’re truly working for everyone, not just for some. It means not looking for an easy way to deny that racism is still very real. It means, instead, doing the work of antiracists to ensure freedom and equality exist for all.”
I agree with this paragraph. You disagree and have a real problem with it. Apparently you believe that to tell an accurate story about the progress of Black people, teachers should look at a few individuals and NOT look at all the systems in the nation? You think we should deny racism is real? You think we should not ensure freedom and equality exists for all?
That’s fine if you believe that.
But what is not fine is for you to invent your own white analysis of what that paragraph means that you don’t provide any evidence to support except that you think that’s what it must mean.
It means what it says. If you don’t agree, then own it.
I believe racism is still very real. You don’t. But you provide no evidence to support that. You ignore what Kendi says in favor of what you – a white person – decides Kendi means.
And maybe that supports what Kendi is saying most of all.
White people immediately attack the idea that this country is racist by invoking that “progress has been made”. That is two separate things.
(“Progress being made” in 1920s Germany didn’t mean there was no longer antisemitism.)
You are the one who believes that no racial progress can be made – not Kendi. But I do think it’s possible that Kendi means that no racial progress can be made as long as “enlightened” white people continue to deny racism that exists because they focus more on “progress” than on racism.
Your comment to me is exactly why Kendi is so important. I know you don’t believe you have any implicit racism whatsoever. But your comment is your comment. All of us have implicit biases but in denying them, we are stopping progress from being made. And then too many of us blame those who call us out for causing racism! Or for saying there is no way to make progress when the view reflected in your comment make it very hard to make progress.
I find young people are far more willing to understand this — they don’t immediately get ultra defensive (“I can’t be racist, how dare you call me racist”) the way many adults do.
Ah, NYC public school parent, I didn’t know I was white. But now that I do, thanks to you, knowing that will make the rest of day out in the yard preparing ground to sow grass seed a heck of a lot more enjoyable, as I break into laughing by AO ever now and then.
Other than that, I said nothing you claim I said. Obviously, you simply took liberty to bash what you concluded was a white person, for surely a person of color would agree wholeheartedly with Kendi’s folly.
cx: “… laughing my AO …”
Ed Johnson…. All I’ve got to say is that some black people I know say “That S–t is Whack!” about some of Kendi’s writings/views/theories etc. I’ve never read any of his work and only hear what makes it into the soundbites/clickbait of MSM. I don’t/won’t comment on any of it. I think we ALL need to be nicer to one another and stop the name calling so that real change can happen.
Ed, in fairness, it’s a reasonable assumption, because almost every person who’s ever commented here is white. Which does raise the question of why anyone would think this is a competent forum for the discussion of race.
Ed Johnson,
I apologize for assuming you were white. I acknowledge my own implicit racism in that assumption. Making real progress – in my opinion – depends on all of us acknowledging our own implicit biases when they are pointed out.
“People can be complicated and contradictory (been saying that, too). Barack Obama, like leaders before him, such as Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, W. E. B. Du Bois, and Booker T. Washington, had moments when he expressed antiracist thoughts. But, under pressure, he also fell back on assimilationist ideas. And just as with Black leaders before him, assimilation didn’t work.”
Ed Johnson, regardless of what race you are, I believe you have a knee jerk reaction to Kendi and you are assuming he is saying something he isn’t.
It reminds me of some other people’s (not your own) knee jerk reaction when critics of To Kill A Mockingbird pointed out what was implicitly racist about that book.
There was a rush to condemn the folks trying to point out the implicit racism in the book. By people who were absolutely positive that this book that was held up as the literary standard of life in the south could not possibly be racist.
They wouldn’t listen to what the critics said because they decided they already knew what the critics said and already knew it was absolutely false.
I had that reaction at first, and then I took the time to listen to what the critics were saying, instead of deciding I already knew what they were saying. And it turns out that the folks who were pointing out the implicit racism in To Kill a Mockingbird were making extremely good points, and instead of making counter arguments, the people defending TKAM just attacked the critics.
TKAM reflects the implicit biases of someone who is white. That doesn’t mean it should be banned. But it does mean it should be taught with some care. And should be presented as a book written by an author who was implicitly racist, instead of being presented as an example of a book written by someone who isn’t racist at all.
One doesn’t have to agree with every single sentence that Kendi writes to see that he makes many excellent points. But like Nikole Hannah-Jones, he is being held to a standard of perfection that white authors don’t have to meet. White white authors like Harper Lee (or white historians), only the good points are noticed and the flaws are minimized. With Nikole Hannah Jones and Kendi, the few more questionable conclusions are magnified to discredit the entire work — the rest of the work is completely dismissed.
^^^ typo:
“WITH white authors like Harper Lee (or white historians), only the good points are noticed and the flaws are minimized…”
The historian would properly seek to divide the history of racism into periods of development. I have my ideas:
The period of enslavement: Age of exploration and the development of plantation agriculture, the transcendence of sugar culture and Caribbean plantations, the beginning of slavery in the British Colonies relating to Tobacco, Rice, indigo
The Entrenchment of Slavery in Southeast United States: Cotton culture, the spread of cotton culture around the world and slavery’s different forms, militant behavior as a result of slavery and slave revolts, moral justification in the face of the rise of abolitionism in England and the US, the American Civil War, Reconstruction
The Period of White Supremacy: Exclusionary laws in various places directed at the growth of multicultural migration, Imperialism worldwide, Social Darwinism, The Eugenics movement, Immigration restrictions based on ethnicity, The rise of anti-Semitism in Czarist Russia under the later Czars, The Dreyfus Affair, Jim Crow, The rise of the pseudoscience of race. World War II.
The Period of Racial struggle and potential reconciliation: Growing recognition of ethnic equality, The Founding of nations worldwide made from European imperial boundaries. The American Civil Rights movement, Retrenchment and the return of racial hostility
Wish I had time to write that book. Another lifetime, perhaps.
Roy,
Please find time to write that history book.
Kendo is a race polemicist and certainly is situated in the lineage of critical race theory. I believe most people want the full history of our country taught, “warts and all.” But I don’t think most people want teachers to present Kendi’s perspective to students as if it’s not a highly debatable perspective.
Kendi. Not sure how autocorrect came up with that one.
Isn’t that very similar to the criticism you make about Nikole Hannah-Jones and the 1619 Project?
But if I am wrong, feel free to correct me.
I don’t know. Review your Flerp Archives and get back to us on it.
FLERP!,
The fact that you have completely trashed the 1619 Project and Nikole Hannah-Jones on here puts your extreme attacks on Kendi into perspective. You believe that your very negative opinion of the 1619 Project is without bias. I think it speaks for itself.
It is not surprising that the same people who believe that Nikole Hannah-Jones should only be taught with a disclaimer about her book not being real history should despise Kendi so much.
So yes, the people who hate the 1619 Project also hate Kendi. Duly noted. I would expect that.
And I don’t have to look in any flerp! archives because you posted so frequently and vehemently against the 1619 Project and frankly, since I admire NHJ and the 1619 Project your extreme criticism was memorable. And it is a fact you aren’t denying, as anyone reading this can see for themselves. Why not just own it?
Test
Ed, remember that in his college years, Kendi thought white people might be aliens. Like, literally.
“Conservatives have settled on two prominent people of colour to accuse of indoctrinating American children: Nikole Hannah-Jones, a journalist who oversaw the 1619 Project, and Ibram X Kendi, author of the influential book How to Be an Antiracist.”
“The offensive is being cheered on by rightwing media outlets such as Fox News, and Washington thinktanks such as the Heritage Foundation, which stoke outrage against Kendi and critical race theory as purveyors of dangerous and divisive ideas.
The 38-year-old academic reflects: “It’s been regular and constant in terms of personally being targeted in ways it’s difficult for me to swallow because oftentimes it’s people completely misrepresenting me and my work. And then people who haven’t read my work, or who haven’t seen me speak about what it means to be antiracist, just then go along with what people are saying.”
“And now you have people who claim they’re not white nationalists arguing that those of us who are identifying and recognising the existence of structural racism are actually saying that white people are inherently evil or bad or racist when that’s not what we’re saying. We’re saying what’s inherently bad is racism.””
^^From The Guardian, June 12, 2021
“Interview: ‘There’s a concerted backlash’: Ibram X Kendi on antiracism under attack”
I suggest anyone who wants to understand the vicious attacks against Kendi and Nikole Hannah-Jones read it.
That’s a lot of words, but as a counterpoint: Kendi actually did believe in college that white people may be aliens.
I won’t mention what white people believe about black people, other than to say “sub-human.”
I may have a narrower range of white friends than you do, but I don’t know anyone who believes black people are sub-human.
I also don’t know anyone who thinks white people, or blacks people, could possibly be aliens.
I would submit that anyone who, at an adult age, actually considers the possibility that white people are aliens should never be taken seriously on any matters of consequence.
Tell me you are a racist without telling me you are a racist.
“I would submit that anyone who, in college, briefly claims to have believed something absurd that was briefly replaced with a less absurd belief, should never be taken seriously on any matters of consequence”…. regardless if that person was awarded the National Book Award after authoring a well-regarded book written years before the right wing decided to make him and Nikole Hannah-Jones appealing targets to racist white folks who always set an extremely high bar that white folks he admires so much don’t have to meet.
Anyone think flerp has perused every sentence of the youthful writings of every white person who he admires to makes sure they never said anything absurd that will make him discredit that person for the rest of their life?
I guess it’s okay to be an 18 year old who decides to permanently smear the reputation of a young woman by mentioning her by name and claiming to be an alumnus of her “club” many times in his yearbook. After all, publicly – and permanently – smearing the reputation of a young woman in a yearbook is not disqualifying. It’s not a big deal.
But making a silly comment about once believing white people are aliens in a college op ed as a teen is clearly very bad and means that person should have a lifetime ban from “ever being taken seriously”.
Talk about cancel culture. White people exempt of course, since what they wrote in high school or college – even if it is designed to intentionally destroy a young woman – is fine.
National Book Award winner must be cancelled because he wrote about once believing something ridiculous as a college student. He didn’t destroy a young woman’s reputation in a yearbook because he was an awful person with no sense of right or wrong. He wrote something silly. So he must never be taken seriously again.
Tell me you are racist without telling me you are racist.
NYCPSP, you’ve called me a racist many, many times before. You don’t need to vomit up another 500 silly words to say it again.
FLERP!,
I thought you were too busy holding Kendi and Nikole Hannah-Jones to impossibly high standards that no white scholar or historian has to meet to read my posts or respond.
It’s good to have alternative polling. However, Greg Sergeant should refrain from using Buchanan’s spin, “culture warriors.” Right wing Catholics and evangelical protestants oppose women’s and LGBTQ rights. The source of attacks against public schools should be accurately identified. Conservative Catholics lead the school choice campaign through their state Catholic Conferences. It’s Ryan Girdusky who founded the 1776 PAC.
If, as reported, there was only one question about religion in the EdWeek-posted poll, why?
Asking people if they are born again Christians, yes or no, leaves out an awful lot of territory. The 74 seemed to like that one question’s correlation. Further review of the construction of the poll that Will reported about seems warranted.
The minority is well funded/organized and ruthless beneath its cover of religious and moralistic values.
What we’re seeing is the beginnings of a potential Fahrenheit 451/ The Handmaid’s Tale.
It’s no joke. NPR guest was saying that 10 years ago we would shrug off the Christian Right. Not anymore.
Have to oppose and resist.
Interesting and important article:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/12/ibram-x-kendi-antiracism-backlash-interview