The respected Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) designated “Moms for Liberty” as an extremist group, along with a number of other astroturf anti-government organizations that popped up during the pandemic to protest masks and vaccines.
In its annual report on hate groups, SPLC named Moms for Liberty and 11 other “parent”groups as extremists who feed on racism, misogyny, homophobia, and bigotry:
Moms for Liberty joins the ranks of groups including the Oath Keepers, the Three Percenters and the United Constitutional Patriots, a self-styled militia that “patrols” the U.S.-Mexico border.
Other astroturf “parent” groups were identified as extremist by SPLC:
The 12 “parent’s rights” groups labeled by the SPLC as extremist groups: Moms for Liberty; Moms for America; Army of Parents; Courage is a Habit; Education First Alliance; Education Veritas; No Left Turn in Education; Parents Against CRT (PACT); Parents Defending Education; Parents Rights in Education; Purple for Parents Indiana and Parents Involved in Education.
Will Carless wrote in USA Today that Moms for Liberty “pitched itself as a potent grassroots movement of outraged parents, many of whom weren’t active in school politics until COVID-19 restrictions forced them to pay attention. It has sprouted local chapters in at least 40 states, claims more than 100,000 members and has the ear of the Republican establishment: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has championed their efforts to restrict teaching about race in schools and universities. Critics in Florida slam the group for turning schools into a political battlefield.”
Both DeSantis and Trump will address the annual conference of this two-year-old organization of hate-mongers.
Moms for Liberty and the other organizations are being designated as “anti-government extremist groups,” based on longstanding criteria, explained SPLC Intelligence Project Director Susan Corke. Corke said the grassroots conservative groups are part of a new front in the battle against inclusivity in schools, though they are drawing from ideas rooted in age-old white supremacy.
“[The movement] is primarily aimed at not wanting to include our hard history, topics of racism, and a very strong push against teaching anything having to do with LGBTQ topics in schools,” Corke said. ”We saw this as a very deliberate strategy to go to the local level…”
Despite the national profile, these organizations spread conspiracy theories and operate on the myth that educators are engaged in “Marxist indoctrination” of the nation’s children by imbuing them with dangerous ideas about equality and sexuality, the SPLC said.
While the movement may be reasonably new, it is founded on the same traditional racist, misogynist and homophobic views that brought people out to protest the desegregation of schools in the 1950s and ’60s, the SPLC argues.
Moms for Liberty does not report the names of its funders.

The SPLC is “respected” by far Left polemicists who support using any and all tactics to smear their opponents, no matter how unscrupulous those tactics are. For any any readers whose minds are open to evidence, the linked op-ed below is worth reading. The links embedded in the op-ed are even more worthwhile, showing that many liberals have also become uncomfortable with how the SPLC operates.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/08/17/southern-poverty-law-center-hate-groups-scam-column/2022301001/
LikeLike
This is an opinion piece written by a member of the Family Research Council, which itself is a far-right purveyor of fear and misinformation.
LikeLike
She’s also on the board of the Capitol Hill Pregnancy Center, according to the Federalist Society.
LikeLike
Every American should be off-the charts outraged at the Koch network subverting democracy.
American Independent News posted, “Dark Money Funding Anti-Trans Groups.” The article describes Heritage Foundation’s Sarah Parshall Perry, American Principles Project, co-founded by Robert P George (co-author of the Manhattan Declaration), Leonard Leo and Moms for Liberty, among others.
In hindsight, historians will identify the most significant tactical/strategic failure of the defenders of the common goods. They ignored the actions of politicized right wing Catholics.
If Diane’s readers select one article to read today it should be, “Today is the last day for NPR in the Rio Grande Valley…after 2:00 pm, 88 FM will start to run Catholic talk radio programming.” (5-30-2019) Catholic-dominated New Orleans is the first city to lose all public schools.
Jefferson warned, in every age, in every country, the priest aligns with the despot.
LikeLike
What a load of right wing crap.
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/alliance-defending-freedom
LikeLike
Lynn,
I am not impressed by an article that quotes hate groups and extremists who don’t like SPLC. The Famiky Research Council is a far-right anti-gay group funded by the DeVos family and other hateful people.
LikeLike
I worked with the SPLC to fight David Duke in 1989 and was lobbied often by representatives of the Family Research Council a few years later as a congressional staffer. It was obvious then who they were and they haven’t changed their stripes in the more than 30 years that I have observed in each. FRC and allies like the Concerned Women for America (excuse me while I hack) peddled lies then about using fetal tissue for profit–claiming women were getting pregnant in order to have their tissue harvested for pay–and that federal laws would allow abortion clinics to be put into any public elementary or secondary school. Lying is an essential element of who they are. The SPLC exposes truth, even uncomfortable ones, and have the record to prove it.
LikeLike
When you visit SPLC in Montgomery, AL, you have to go through metal detectors. They have had numerous crosses burned in front of their offices as well as a fire bombing of the building. They are warriors for justice.
LikeLike
As I expected, no one bothered to read the embedded links that show how the SPLC has shredded its credibility over the years. They promiscuously label anyone who disagrees with them as racist, sexist, haters, etc. Many well-informed liberals – not this blog’s host and readers – know that fact.
LikeLike
Lynn,
You mean, “liberal” in the sense of the Koch’s campus Centers for Liberal Democracy? (Why should anyone accept Lynn Rubin’s description of who a “liberal” is?)
The breakdown between parties is not made clear by liberal vs. conservative nomenclature. The separation is “by and for the people” vs. the oligarchy of Gates, Koch, Uihlein, Art Pope, etc.
The people at this blog believe taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society. We believe society is advanced by democratically elected boards, by public libraries, by taxes levied on non-profits that are the real welfare queens, like legacy admission colleges, professional sports franchises, politicized Churches, pseudo non-partisan spin tanks, etc.
LikeLike
lol
LikeLike
Why does the Family Research Council — which based on this ignorant rant and citing them by implication as credible — feel compelled to make lying, gross distortion, or use falsified data and information as essential tactics to further its policy objectives? Every one of their policy objectives is steeping in racism, sexism, hate, and cruelty in service of creating winners (them) and losers (everyone else). Every single one. It speaks volumes when anyone would cite them as a respected source for anything.
LikeLike
Lynn,
I read the embedded links. They all cite other extremist hate groups.
LikeLike
Ms. Ravitch,
Current Affairs is an extremist hate group? Admit it: you read few if any of the embedded links.
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/03/the-southern-poverty-law-center-is-everything-thats-wrong-with-liberalism
LikeLike
Lynn,
That was a very well-written, well-researched article by a reasonable writer. The leadership at SPLC has changed since the article was written five years ago, so hopefully the problems Nathan Robinson identified have been corrected.
Moms for Liberty is an extremist group who popped up two years ago with millions to spend. They focus on disrupting school board meetings, harassing school officials, fighting public health precautions, attacking gays, attacking honest teaching of US history and Black history, demonizing the tiny number of trans children, and preaching hated for anyone who is not white and straight.
I wonder what Nathan Robinson would say about these foot-soldiers for hatefulness?
LikeLike
Admit it, Lynn. You’ve never read anything by Diane Ravitch that hasn’t been predigested and prepared for your specific consumption. I am so sick and tired of these idiots reading one thing that confirms their bigotries and delusions and then claiming they are well read. Like these morons in the cult who have “studied” an issue. Please.
LikeLike
Anyone who thinks that the SPLC is a “far Left” organization is a Reichwing nutcase.
LikeLike
I’ll post another longer article to help cure the problem of low information that is rampant on this blog.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/28/morris-dees-splc-trump-southern-poverty-law-center-215312/
LikeLike
Haaaaaa. OMG. Hilarious, Ms. Rubin.
LikeLike
This post is spot-on ! Moms for Liberty is not focused on improving public education…they are focused on creating chaos and divisiveness to destroy public education ! Moms for Liberty is WHITE SUPREMACY in full bloom !!!!
LikeLike
LikeLiked by 1 person
Brilliant, Greg!
LikeLike
Moms for Liberty are a tool to unleash a bunch of screaming Harpies on boards of education and public schools. The charade draws the attention of mainstream media which is free advertising for right wing extremists whose goal is to undermine and discredit public education.
LikeLike
…except that the greater visibility they have, the more the Moms for Liberty appear to the public, to be, a hollow front for an evil, divisive group of self-serving funders.
LikeLike
Pretty much nailed it there, RT. Bunch of extremely backward fundamentalist White supremacist nationalist nutcases.
Hello, ladies for taking away everyone else’s liberties. Wake TF up. It’s the freaking 21st century.
LikeLike
Why weren’t parents complaining about library books and boards of education during my long career in public education? …Because the Koch network is funding this propagandistic charade.
LikeLike
But they were. I worked in the textbook industry. We were CONSTANTLY dealing with these backward, provincial fundy kooks. One company I worked with had a health text rejected in Texas because it contained the line “Humans and other mammals lactate.” They were very upset about the reference to lactation. But what really got them was the suggestion that humans were mammals. LOL. Animals. (You know, Humans, members of the kingdom Animalia and the class Mammalia). I had a superintendent in Missouri pack up all the literature anthologies he had just received (from a project that I had led) because the 11th-grade book contained James Thurber’s “The Secret Life of Walter Mitty,” which had in it this line: “They’re so damn cocky, thought Walter Mitty, walking along Main Street; they think they know everything.” James Thurber!!!!! For crying out freaking loud!!!! A couple examples out of many, but each cost the company that produced the books millions in lost sales.
LikeLike
In Florida the new law requires libraries to purge certain titles on their “hit list.” Some of the titles have been in school libraries for more than twenty years when nobody complained because it was not politically expedient to do so. The complaints are contrived theater of the absurd. These extremists want to put public education always on the defensive.
LikeLike
This does not seem so brilliant to me. Please be honest in your analysis of the work these mothers are doing as they answer their calling to protect their children. These mothers are reading from materials that are presented to their children by teachers.
LikeLike
Moms for Liberty is an extremist group that is funded by Koch and other hate-mongers.
LikeLike
From my view, I see signs that Koch is out to destroy the US, step by step. Creating division is not a new tactic for enemies of the nation. Putin has a record of employing the tactic. The article at Vox, 4-27-2023, “How Ron DeSantis transformed into an anti-public health crusader,” doesn’t identify Koch but, Covid 19 became a manufactured flash point for division. We should look at the Koch fronts and surmise that DeSantis is a danger to the United States.
The religious end-of-times messaging is too convenient for opportunists looking to destroy democracy.
LikeLike
By all means, let’s let the most backward among us, based on their fundy superstititons, decide what can and cannot be read in school. What will be left? The collected essays of Josh Hawley? The poetry of Donald Trump?
My feller Christian educators. Please make shore thet the followin’ peeces of filth SHOT THROUGH WITH PORNOGRAPHY is removed imediately frum yore curriculums and liberries, as per Mums for Liberty to Enforce Fundy Values on Everybody Else, as well as Gobernur and presidenshul candydate Ron Ron DeSalubrious:
1984, Anna Karenina, Animal Farm, As I Lay Dying, The Awakening, Beloved, The Bible, Brave New World, Candide, Catch-22, The Canterbury Tales, Diary of a Young Girl, A Farewell to Arms, For Whom the Bell Tolls, Go Tell It on the Mountain, Gone with the Wind, The Grapes of Wrath, The Great Gatsby, Gulliver’s Travels, Hamlet, The Iliad, Invisible Man, Leaves of Grass, Native Son, The Odyssey, Of Mice and Men, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Paradise Lost, Romeo and Juliet, The Scarlet Letter, A Separate Peace, Sister Carrie, Slaughterhouse-Five, Song of Solomon, Sons and Lovers, Sophie’s Choice, The Spoon River Anthology, The Sun Also Rises, Their Eyes Were Watching God, “To His Coy Mistress,” To Kill a Mockingbird, War and Peace, and Wuthering Heights.
A sugestion: Make uh copie uv this here list en distribute it to ALL yore parints and studundts wuth a warnin’ not under eny circumstances to reed or alow to be red any of this nasty stuff.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And those same parents’ kids go to school and listen on their iphones to Kodac Black, Lil Kim, Cam’ron, Cardi B, and 2LiveCrew. LOL. It’s no accident that the correlation between a) fundamentalist Christian churches and b) teenage pregnancy is SO HIGH.
LikeLike
What’s that you hear?
It’s the voice of my Invisible Daddy Friend in the Sky giving me a calling!
Wow! What does it say?
Go forth and protect those kids from Romeo and Juliet!!! And Maus!!!
Have you read those?
No. But they must be real bad.
LikeLike
Sorry. I guess that would be the voice of the Invisible Sky Daddy Friend.
LikeLike
Please be honest and define what you define as protecting children through these policies. Just exactly how is that done and what are the threats? Does this astroturf organization compare to a real “Moms” organization like this one that actually is grassroots-driven and working to protect children.
LikeLike
Bravo, Greg!
LikeLike
These “Moms” (sic) for Liberty are not actually moms, at least not moms of kids in the schools they attack.
LikeLike
“Dort, wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man am Ende auch Menschen.”
“Where they burn books, they will, in the end, burn human beings too.”
–Heinrich Heine, Almansor (a play, 1821)
LikeLike
Thanks for the quote, Bob.
LikeLike
“Problems in Higher Ed,” was a program on 4-13-2023, at the University of Wis.’s Koch-funded Center for the Study of Liberal Democracy ( IMO, a colossal fraud in naming). The topic was CRT.
The speakers included the subject of an exposé at American Independent about anti-trans groups, Sarah Parshall Perry (Koch’s Heritage Foundation), Robert Maranto of the University of Ark’s Dept. of Ed Reform who edits the Journal of School Choice (formerly taught at Villa Nova) and, Johnathan Butcher of the Heritage Foundation who was appointed by a Republican governor of S.C. to an organization for statewide approval of charter schools.
The political attack against commonly-held goods and valuers would diminish significantly if the influence of the Koch network and the U.S. Republican Catholic Church was eradicated.
The growth in right wing political action by the Church can be traced back to response to John Paul II’s call for evangelization.
There are more than 50 Catholic radio stations in the U.S. Relevant Radio, out of Wisconsin, is the nation’s largest independent Catholic radio network.
The Brooklyn Diocese has the DeSales Media
Group as its technology and communications
arm which made possible the radio station in
NYC. They “publish news and info with a Catholic point of view.”
Religious sects that stand in opposition to White over Black, men over women, straight over gay and co-mingled church and state are in the minority. Therefore, most sects pose a threat to democracy when they act
in the public square.
LikeLike
This will change no minds. I just checked, and SLPC has over 1,200 entities on its list of hate groups. Every year there are more.
LikeLike
I was just going over their various lists. The overwhelming majority appear to be avowedly white nationalist groups, which makes sense. I don’t think groups like Moms for Liberty and the like belong in company like that — you do get a lot of wing nuts and aggressive rhetoric, but it seems more like a conservative activist movement than an “extremist group.
Maybe my initial comment was too blunt. But I’ve kind of written the SLPC off after the Maajid Nawaz debacle.
LikeLike
Would that be about one entity for every 300,000 Americans?
LikeLike
Ohio has about 12,000,000 residents,. The statistic you cite indicates the state would have about 40, give or take, extremist groups- sounds about right? I presume Oathkeepers has lots of members as compared to a David Koresh type of crowd. I don’t know if Timothy McVeigh’s cell qualifies for inclusion or if the SPLC list is purged regularly when groups disband.
LikeLike
All good questions. I suspect SLPC does not conduct a full re-review every entity on the list each year.
LikeLike
Nor would there be a reason- let a group like The Three Percenters resurrect their own image if they’ve changed. It’ll get noticed and, both Sourcewatch and SPLC will post a note about it. Unlike the right wing, they aren’t inveterate liars.
LikeLike
Wikipedia describes Oathkeepers as an organization of grift. The identified funding of Moms for Liberty positions the group in a more dangerous big picture, category for the United States.
LikeLike
s/”The respected Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)”/”The highly biased liberal activist organization Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)”/g
LikeLike
What’s your opinion about the observation that the right wing boils down to White over Black, men over women, straight over gay and, the religious right over all other sects? Too close for comfort?
LikeLike
The “right wing” doesn’t “boil down” to anything coherently… I honestly don’t have a clue what you mean by using race bating language and virtually zero detail to describe what you are trying to claim… People are constantly trying to greatly oversimplify things disingenuously in order to make false assertions or outright fallacious arguments. This comment of yours is an example of that.
LikeLike
I’d say that the rightwing, as typified by Trump and DeSantis, it’s most visible leaders, is fueled by grievance, anger and hatred. They hate gays. They despise abd fear the minuscule number of kids who are trans. They hate drag queens, who are actually very amusing performers. They are racist but try to mask their racism under euphemisms. They are terrified of honest teaching about Black history and US history, because the truth makes them uncomfortable. They eagerly censor and ban books that focus sympathetically on those they hate. They believe in parental rights, but only for the parents of straight white Christian children. I can give you evidence if you need it. Trump is not as conspicuously homophobic as DeSantis. He has has gay friends. But he’s made an art of dog whistling his racism.
LikeLike
Liz explains your false take of “rightwing” or conservative “hate” (another fallacy) in this excellent YAF video:
LikeLike
Young Americans for Fredom is a far-right group. Why do they hate the 1% of kids who are transgender? There is no such thing as an “ideology of transgender.” What do they say about Jews and Blacks?
LikeLike
Did you watch the video? She answers all of your false questions and assertions right at the beginning.
LikeLike
You are one sick, gullible person if you think there is anything intellectually consistent in this tripe. Once again confirms my point about how the right tries to eliminate meaning in all language. For example, a cult leader calling people who disagree with her views that literally have no scientific or verifiable assertions. They are literally pulled out of her wazoo. One wonders what horrors these people must have once endured to be so willing to spew hate and lies.
LikeLike
ac,
People with similar views to yours and YAF, etc. can gaslight. But, those around them (and, you), know the truth.
LikeLike
@Linda I’m curious how it is that you think you even know the truth… By listening to what radical leftist organizations such as the SPLC, and having them re-affirm what you already believed to be true? The only way to get to the truth is to have all the information, or as much as humanly possible, from both sides of the argument. The overwhelming majority of conservative minded people and families in America aren’t even a little bit racist. They see the world as color blind, they reject the left’s notion that there is unconscious bias because of course humans are much more nuanced and complex than any critical theory has established. We love ALL people (of course there are fringe cases of extremism). All humans are made in the image of God and have intrinsic value. The reality is we are very liberal minded people (in the traditional you-do-you sense) and we just want a world with objective morals, not the Godless view that so many on the left have adopted.
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 For myself (a Catholic), the whole intellectual history of the Church is drenched in the call towards self-reflection which, in today’s terms, means to understand that, from a psychological point of view, most of us tend to have unconscious biases that we are supposed to be thoughtful about in order to at least make them conscious and to self-expunge if need be. In my view, we need to do more of that kind of thinking rather than less.
That’s just one question I would raise about from your note. But not today. CBK
LikeLike
acjohnson– I watched most of the video. I.e., got the gist of her main points, and watched Q&A too.
The things I like: her delivery is friendly and respectful. She listens carefully to questions. No ranting. (You couldn’t get more opposite than, say, Ann Coulter). She is clearly sympathetic to trans/ non-binary—that could be seen as patronizing, but she’s not hate-filled in the slightest. I also liked this: although it doesn’t come out until Q&A session, she has done her homework on studies, and cites research that is pro & con her opinions. Also, she is not categorical– e.g., rather than just painting queer ideology as “Marxist,” as though it were a swear-word, she explains the historical connections to Marxism as she sees it.
What I don’t like:
1. Very simplistic and binary approach. E.g., in her opening, “Someone is lying to you: it’s either this side [conservatism] or this side [queer ideology]” – et al.
2. Her whole approach to trans, for me, is way too close to the 30’s-‘80s view of gay: if you feel [fill in blank – today it’s “uncomfortable in your body”], this is a mental problem, and you need psychological therapy. She fools you, in a way, by coming across as no problem with gay, yes you’re born that way—then uses trans-affirming medical treatments to assert there’s no way that makes sense in God’s plan for you, you’ll live to rue it, etc.
3. She actually characterized the Master Bakery case as requiring the baker to “celebrate” something that was against his religion.
Mezza-mezza: she has an approach to DEI that is somewhat nuanced. I liked her point that you have to focus on the impacts/ results of the policy to assess it properly—not just the nice-sounding words. She almost got to the flaws (but didn’t). This turned out to be just an intro to a statement on liberals re-defining abstract words so as to “own” truth, which is a first step toward authoritarianism. Which is rich, as we are seeing a helluva lotta that from conservative wanna-be authoritarians, not so much from the progressive side…
LikeLike
@bethree5 Glad to hear you watched it. The main thing that struck me was how she showed the side of conservatism that I believe resonates with virtually all of the Bible believing/affirming population of conservatives (not the fake ones of course, but the ones that intrinsically live what the Bible has to say to the best of their ability…).
That is to say, we don’t hate anyone. God shows us what sin is and there is an enormous amount of truth that the trans cult is indoctrinating their followers (along with the mainstream public minds these days…). It doesn’t have to be a binary worldview either…
I don’t want to participate in tribalism personally… But conservatives are vastly “normal” people who love and respect one another and want to fight for the rights of all people without the coercion, condemnation, intolerance and manipulation that seems to be happening all around us…
Why does Diane and others on this blog seem to believe so dogmatically that all/many/most conservatives are basically nazis? If you actually believe that I am sorry but you are not living in the real world.
LikeLike
I don’t think all/most conservatives are Nazis. You won’t find a quote in any of the thousands of posts I have written to back up this smear. I have said repeatedly that DeSantis is a fascist. He censors books, bans the teaching of honest history, demonizes powerless groups, picks fights with the state’s biggest employer in hopes. Of bullying a private corporation to bend to his will. If you don’t think he’s a fascist, that’s your right.
LikeLike
acjohnson @ 8:19pm– Well, if I tell you I grew up in John Bircher territory, in a Republican family, and was wide open to voting either Rep or Dem as a young adult, would you believe it? No question I was a flaming liberal in college due to VietNam war, but that didn’t make me close-minded. Watergate didn’t help, but I was always interested in examining Rep candidates because I was fiscally conservative, like my parents. We couldn’t vote until age 21 then, and by age 25 I lived in NYC– swiftly realized if I didn’t register as Dem, I’d have nobody to vote for in primaries, so I did.
It was Reagan and his admin who turned me against conservatism— he very directly included “conservative” in his Republican brand, but twisted its meaning into a religio-cultural war against the poor, women, blacks, while simultaneously breaking with fiscal conservatives by multiplying natl debt fourfold, while paring back every fetter on capitalism as he raced to return us to the sort of laissez-faire version that resulted in the Great Depression.
Politics today nonpluses me, & I’m sorry you’ve had to grow up in this iteration that folds in culture war. I lived in the Midwest for a few yrs back in ‘70s, & found it suffocating that they avoided discussing politics & religion, being accustomed to robust & rowdy debates in my Northeastern family clan, where nobody walked away mad. [NYC was a better place for me, later, where that was normal] But I understood it. My own grandfather was the clan outlier—a reactionary, angry racist, & we had to learn to do the same in that immediate family circle. Today it’s as if all those places that needed to & did tactfully stifle such discussion have let that tiger loose. It’s dispiriting and awful.
LikeLike
ac
I listen to conservatives when I am with them and I read analyses based on information gathered about the differences between Democrats and Republicans. The input aligns. One field studied is rational thinking vs. emotional decision- making based on party affiliation.
Republicans, including 60-80+ percent of the religious right, selected Donald Trump, with his many serious character flaws (possibly criminal), to represent them. The best gaslighter can not spin that differently. And, no one should ignore which party attracts racists, sexists and homophobes.
Last week, at a lunch that included a Christian conservative, I expressed my concern about the potential loss of my voting rights as a woman. SCOTUS justices lied about “settled law” in Roe v. Wade in order to be confirmed so, it isn’t a reach for religious, patriarchy-sympathizers to take away other rights. The Christian woman replied to me, “Men wouldn’t let that happen.” I’ve observed while working in poling places and it’s been documented in other places, occasions where men badger their wives and demand to go into the polling booths with them. Rhetorically, can you think of men (including pastors and priests) who would seem likely to coerce votes for the GOP? Btw- Bishop Hebda claimed the right to prohibit his priests from voting in the presidential Democratic primary.
Last week, I also spent time with a White conservative man who was adamant that people be judged not by race or sex, positioning himself pridefully as not racist or sexist. Then, we exchanged personal stories about times we had both witnessed racist and sexist situations at work. The obvious conclusion is that he is comfortable while receiving entitlement but, limits his perception of himself as not racist, because he thinks he doesn’t have society’s prejudices. His is a an emotional response not an analytical one. Btw- there is U.S. research showing via video that consistently, across demographic groups (regardless of party affiliation), subjects pull the trigger of a gun aimed at a Black man faster than one aimed at a White person. It provides validation that we collectively are racist.
I’m curious, would you belong to a Church that taught men were lesser then women because the deity only wanted women as disciples? Rhetorically, what would you feel if SCOTUS had a majority who concurred with the church?
LikeLike
@Linda
“there is U.S. research showing via video that consistently, across demographic groups (regardless of party affiliation), subjects pull the trigger of a gun aimed at a Black man faster than one aimed at a White person. It provides validation that we collectively are racist.”
Even if that were true, what goal do you think DEI and implicit bias training are achieving to help solve it? The “science” behind the methodologies to deal with this is deeply flawed and based on assumptions. Essentially when the training is taken, many fail, then they learn what the test “wants” for “correct” answers, and then they pass the test… but do you really think it is making things better?
I believe it is just stoking fires in the hearts of people. What we need is to acknowledge that people are complicated and Love each other self-lessly… We need to lead by positive example and let people know that we trust them to use their brain… Not use coercion, manipulation and heavy handed top-down authoritarian programs and divisive language to convince others they are implicitly and inherently biased against others they they have no ill will towards…
Here’s a good critique on this type of training. I’ve watched it twice myself.
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 I don’t read Linda’s notes, but I read yours, which had a blurb from hers. FYI, Linda is well known here for her absence of citations.
On the other hand, you say: “The ‘science’ behind the methodologies to deal with this is deeply flawed and based on assumptions. Essentially when the training is taken, many fail, then they learn what the test ‘wants’ for ‘correct’ answers, and then they pass the test… but do you really think it is making things better?”
Yes, I do “think it is making things better.” And you are doing it again: judging an entire body of work and its institutional implementations by negative-only critique which, even if true, misses the larger “picture.” From what I can tell about your own methodology, you are into a kind of welfare-mom ideology. That is, if you find a welfare mom skimming the system, kill the whole program (because that’s what you want to do anyway).
“Deeply flawed”? I have to wonder what you have against self-reflection . . . guess what, you failed <–(that’s meant to be a joke).
However, such programs are based on–exposing to oneself one’s own long-term hidden biases that we actually think WITH, and where it’s up to us to grow from it. Testing is really superfluous for such needed outcomes because no one can make or test for someone actually and authentically self-reflecting insofar as human beings can both be mistaken and lie.
Theory and its implementation, however, are two different concerns and either can be wrong-headed without “infecting” the other. But you are right that, if testing is based only on checking the right boxes and writing down the “right” answers, or on being graded/pass/fail, or on “gotcha” techniques, then its pedagogy and implementation are on the wrong track from the get-go.
But like you, I’d have to see that to know it as wholly true. If you’ve gotten this far: I think I’ll leave this conversation, having the sense that I am probably wasting my time. CBK
LikeLike
ac,
Are you gaslighting about love so that you can distract?
The two questions I asked you (one implied) about entitlement- it’s ok as long as your demographic group benefits?
In answer to your question, the political left offered a solution, the 1619 Project. The political right replicates its long term pattern with the redistricting in the Merrill v. Milligan SCOTUS case aimed at denying Black people the power of their votes. Republicans robbed Ohioans of their voting rights with gerrymandering. The worst Democratic politician is better than the best Republican politician.
Catherine- Learn to do a key word search if you want info or to validate claims. It would prevent you from positioning yourself as a petty person.
LikeLike
Of course they are biased…in favor of the marginalized!
LikeLike
@Catherine Blanche King like all things in life, there is a balance to be sought… Of course many people have bias that they are unaware of, but using the “virtuism” of American and globalist corporations to push DEI agendas, putting people into people groups (ie. the dogma of white privilege for example) and taking a highly biased and godless worldview (in an attempt to convince others they are unknowingly participation in unseen oppressive forces) is so radical, delusional and disagreeable that it is causing more harm amongst the average population than good.
People do not need to be deprogrammed and reprogrammed by corporate society; they need to be Loved into an empathetic and compassionate state of being in which they begin to treat others the way they would want to be treated themselves. As a catholic you should see that loving your neighbor as you love yourself doesn’t include psychological manipulation and dogmatic belief in such worldly ideas… Jesus said we can serve Him by serving the “least of these”… How is this not enough for someone with a Biblical worldview to live and make a difference in their culture/society?
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 writes, “As a catholic you should see that loving your neighbor as you love yourself doesn’t include psychological manipulation and dogmatic belief in such worldly ideas… etc.”
I think either you have gone “off the rails,” so to speak; or you are answering someone else’s thread. For instance, I referred to self-reflection, not “psychological manipulation.” In fact, I don’t recognize anything that looks like a related response to my own note in any of what you have written. And you probably look like red meat to some here. Go in peace. CBK
LikeLike
@Catherine Blanche King, no I think you’re just experiencing the effects of the limitations of having a conversation with a stranger in the comments section of a blog… What I am saying is that so many people weaponize the liberal and marxist ideologies of today (trans agenda, racisim, marginalization, etc) against normal every day Americans in a very pathological and coercive sort of way (ie. unconscious bias training for example) that is causing division. Not responding specifically to what you said, nor am I going off the rails, just making observations.
LikeLike
What you describe as the “liberal and Marxist ideologies of today” is actually the Republican agenda.
There have trans people for many years. Why is it suddenly a big issue? Not because something new happened but because the GOP agenda requires fear and enemies. Scapegoats. Why suddenly is there a panic about trans kids? Nothing changed. They are a useful distraction from the substantive GOP agenda: tax cuts for the richest. Would you vote for a candidate who promised to lower taxes on billionaires? I don’t think so. So they won’t talk about that. Instead they will hoodwink you by creating fear of trans kids, fear of Black peoples, fear that the country is overrun with Hispanics. And while you are worrying, they will quietly pass tax cuts for billionaires.
Think about it: where in Marxism is there a single word about trans people? Cite your source.
LikeLike
@dianeravitch
“There have trans people for many years. Why is it suddenly a big issue?”
https://districtadministration.com/nearly-25-of-high-school-students-now-identify-as-lgbtq-heres-why-that-matters/
This has become basically the same thing as cutting or eating disorders such as anorexia/bulimia amongst our youth (mainly teenage girls). This is why it is “suddenly” a big issue.
Also the fact that the American Pediatric Association supports “gender-affirming care” but not “eating-disorder affirming care” or “self-mutilation affirming care” should be a big red flag for you as well.
LikeLike
I just had a thought… If calling out marxism/leninism is just some jedi mind trick of the Republican agenda, what was “defund the police” about? Is that something that liberals or leftists were actually in support of…?
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 So you are arguing with . . . . someone else, and not with me or what I said in my note? That sounds like “off the rails” polemics to me. Oh, well. CBK
LikeLike
@Catherine Blanche King
“acjohnson1985 So you are arguing with . . . . someone else”
Arguing? Where?
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 Okay . . . not “arguing.” Try “engaging in a discussion.” But I think you knew that already. CBK
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 How about “engaging in a discussion.” But you knew that already. CBK (My other note went to moderation.)
LikeLike
acjohnson1985– I agree with much of your thought here, but think you are blowing DEI up into something more than it is. IMHO, it’s just affirmative action 2.0. Perhaps you are too young [judging from your photo 😉] to remember it, but I certainly benefited from it as a woman 50 yrs ago.
I still had to infiltrate corporate work with typing & shorthand skills, but my [unrelated] degree allowed me to move into tech work in an all-male world, tripling secretarial salary within 2 yrs– because it was a global corp that needed affirmative action “points.” I saw African-Americans move into that engrg/ constr corp as well during those years (though not in the same numbers).
Then at some point it was shut off, or decelerated. There were “enough” women, “enough” racial minorities in middle/ upper-middle-class work that previously couldn’t get in the door. But it wasn’t enough, and now we begin correcting that.
And it has to start with education, both K12 & college.
No wealthy OECD nation can sit around with a third or more of its children/ young adults floundering in below-ave schools/ colleges/ jobs while the world races on, and expect to compete.
Our biggest challenge is our gross income inequality [higher rich-poor gap than any peer OECD nation]– poor kids are more expensive teach, we’ve got way more than ave, and states slash ed budgets regularly. So DEI is a sort-of back-door approach, requires lots of in-school remedial supports, and will only chip away at the issue. But we have to at least chip away at it.
LikeLike
Deeee-santis obviously is in no way a fascist. Fascism is the merging and aligning of the government with corporate power and then using that power to make progressive changes (kinda sounds like covid policies IMO). He is using his political power to restore conservative values in his institutions where possible… He is anti-collectivist which very much precludes him from the evils of fascism especially in the sense of nazism (national socialism). Also he’s not a very good authoritarian since nearly half the state of Florida doesn’t seem to like his policies very much…
So in your estimation are the conservatives that support Desantis generally fascist? If I vote for Desantis does that make me in favor of fascism? Would that make me a fascist then? I generally think what Desantis is doing to protect children in schools especially is very honorable and puts the focus on truth in our culture rather than some sort of tribalist new-age ideology that is clearly going the way of some sort of fad or hipster cultish belief (specifically speaking about the belief that people can be born in the wrong body)
LikeLike
Diane acjohnson1985 Writes: *”Deeee-santis obviously is in no way a fascist. Fascism is the merging and aligning of the government with corporate power and then using that power to make progressive changes (kinda sounds like covid policies IMO). He is using his political power to restore conservative values in his institutions where possible… He is anti-collectivist which very much precludes him from the evils of fascism especially in the sense of nazism (national socialism). . . . *
OMG. OR, methinks we have a troll. CBK
LikeLike
@Catherine Blanche King troll? you watched most of that YEF video and agreed with much of it… I’m just trying to have conversations with people who have different bias than me…
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 I didn’t watch the video. That was someone else who responded. Names are easy to overlook, however, when people are not face to face. CBK
LikeLike
ugh… that was @bethree5… my bad. You should give it a watch too 😉 Also I’m not a troll, this is what we need to be willing to do. Break down perceived social barriers even when it is difficult, embarrassing, etc.
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 I doubt there is one person here who has NOT mis-qued on who read what here.
On the trans-thing, I am fully with Diane’s view here, especially about protection of rights. CBK
LikeLike
Do you believe that children should be learning about trans and gay ideology/beliefs in education as early as Kindergarten or up through 8th grade? There are some serious moral issues with the normalizing of homosexuality and transgenderism for someone who claims to be a Christian.
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 I think teaching about ANY sexual issue IS age-stage sensitive. However, from how I understand it, trans concerns are less about “sex” or sexual relationships (and too often wrongly thought of as ONLY that) than about gender identity, which we know now is “identifiable” very early on in many children’s lives.
If that’s the case (and it is), in early trans situations, the unbending and severely punitive social rejections OF children BY children and others that can occur, say, in schools, can be devastating in many ways . . . this we also know now, if we didn’t know it before all this idiocy burst onto the national scene.
The wonders of Nathan Lane notwithstanding, closets (so to speak) are dark and forbidding places, especially for children at early stages of their development. Personally, my heart goes out to them and to their parents and families. And the treatment of their rights issues is, politically, downright scary.
That’s only a brief development of the “argument” (i.e., discussion) as I understand it. There is much more “out there” to read about it; but for most, like a white racist doesn’t read anything by a black person if they can help it, so goes reading about trans or gay experiences by those who cannot question their own biased and neanderthal values, or “walk in another’s shoes.”
And I am not claiming perfection or blamelessness on anyone’s or group’s part; e.g., sexual perversion exists and can exist in any group. What that means is that I do not believe “perversion” necessarily relates to trans or gay (by whatever name).
BTW, your questioning my faith situation in such a way puts YOUR Christianity on trial, not mine. But because you are apparently much younger than I, I will chalk it off to your lack of experience. I think, fundamentally, God gave me a mind to think things through (as we sometimes are invited to do on this blog); I try to use it well, as you should. I love the Bible and read it often. But I don’t euthanize myself over it. CBK
LikeLike
@Catherine Blanche King Since God gave you a mind to “think things through”, I’m curios why you have bought into the false premise of “gender identity”? What proof is there that “gender identity” is any thing more than a delusion of a sinful or pleasure seeking mind? Or a coping mechanism in dealing with PTSD? Having others affirm a “new identity” definitely sounds like something a rebellious youth could hijack for their own gain and manipulation of others… Heck I’d go as far as to say if I knew that was an option as a teenager I probably would have transitioned myself sadly…
Or perhaps a social contagion of the child’s experience in society or their classroom? Or perhaps the child has autism/aspergers? Or perhaps the child has been molested/sexualized at a very young age?…
Do you simply overlook any/all of these concerns when someone claims that their child has gender dysphoria? How much counseling should one advocate for before turning the multi-national juggernaut pharmaceutical industry for live altering prescriptions and possibly surgeries? Weeks? Months? Years?
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 There has been much research and many studies about such issues, and from what I understand of it, it’s much more nuanced than most understand. I suggest you set your judgments aside for awhile (you can always get them back) and look for some insights in a slow study of your own. Maybe Diane can recommend some readings. (Hate radio or TV, however, is not a good or authentic source of information. There is a whole different level of research and informed narratives out there that is now available to anyone who wants to take the time to read it.)
From my own psychological, philosophical, and political viewpoint, I think the research deserves a good perusal before judgments are passed especially when some of those judgments may be ill-informed and, for some, closed as tight as a tick, and so quite dogmatic.
Also, I think each case is different as is each social situation. I’ve seen many well-written true stories, however, of individuals who are living through the social problems associated with trans/and/gay, and so two things come from that kind of reading. First, that such reading helps us to at least understand, WE cannot know what we do not know, and we should not judge prematurely.
And second, your scenario treatment reeks of distrust in those who personally are going through such situations. (Firebrand political awareness without a habit of reflective understanding is nothing less than dangerous; and “collaboration” only with like minds is crock collaboration.)
Certainly, there may be less adult decision making than needed, and with fallout over a lifetime; and the intrusion of capitalist concerns is despicable. Some things, however, are none of our business; and certainly we or our religious leaders should not try to impose our control over others, and especially not when based on old and untransformed (by new knowledge and so biased) ideologies. CBK
LikeLike
@Catherine Blanche King
“And second, your scenario treatment reeks of distrust in those who personally are going through such situations. (Firebrand political awareness without a habit of reflective understanding is nothing less than dangerous; and “collaboration” only with like minds is crock collaboration.)”
Is this really the entirety of your response regarding all of the clear and obvious risks assumed dealing with a child with gender dysphoria?
You NOT ONCE conceded on a single one of my concerns… Not a single one? I personally have witnessed several cases of detransitioned children (now adults) who say basically verbatim all of these other disorders are ignored by counselors/therapists that ultimate go with “gender affirming” care…
Your lack of willingness to budge even an inch and acknowledge these potential and probable underlying conditions/comorbidities shows an amazing about of “tuning a blind eye” on your part… Of course young people are going to deceive, even if it is a small percentage (which I highly doubt)… Based on the way your are talking and projecting yourself, you seem like some sort of leftist influencer, probably on the Leninist side of the spectrum of communism, and are trying to see how far you can take this slight of hand trick…
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 writes to me: “Is this really the entirety of your response regarding all of the clear and obvious risks assumed dealing with a child with gender dysphoria?”
Yes. As a general rule, I take a longer view, which means that I don’t define a whole movement towards a better understanding of X (in this case, human development around the trans/gay issue) by singular problems that occur as we make sometimes painful transitions from the old to the new, as real as those problems are. It’s how history works. I am far from endorsing relativism, but I dropped my narrowminded and short-term absolutism a long time ago.
The other point is that, in our time (which is, and is not, like so many other times) this and other “outrageous” issues are being dangled as “red meat” . . . diversions by those who care nothing about the issues themselves. THAT’s just another example of Putin-type manipulation; and in this case of tweaking to inflame religious ideologies, it’s a case of the manipulators manipulating other kinds of manipulators.
At its heart, I have perhaps an overly optimistic faith in democracy (which can be judged “overly optimistic” only after the fact) and the dynamic forces of the principles that illuminate it; and so in people’s ability to reach beyond their present horizon as they work through these kinds of problems in their own contexts as the larger movements go forward, even you. CBK
LikeLike
😞
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 There was no more than a 10 second time span between my “send” and your response. You could not have done a thorough reading, (sigh . . . .)
We are having “June Gloom” here in California . . . mostly cloudy and wonderfully cool all day; but I fear the summer heat is waiting just around the corner. If I were a firefighter, I would volunteer to go to Canada. CBK
LikeLike
@Catherine Blanche King
“There was no more than a 10 second time span between my “send” and your response”
3 minutes to be exact… And yes I read it thoroughly… Twice.
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 It wasn’t even ten seconds actually, unless you somehow transcended time. But FWIW I’m glad you read it anyway. CBK
LikeLike
acjohnson1985 My response went to moderation. CBK
LikeLike
CBK, nothing in moderation.
LikeLike
Diane thanks for looking. THIS TIME, it showed up on the site really quickly. It’s a mystery. CBK
LikeLike
acjohnson– responding to your 8:59pm post farther down in general comments, so I can get more margin room…
LikeLike
ac-
The party of business deregulation and lower business taxes is the Republican Party.
Has it occurred to you that corporations know they can manipulate people like you to vote GOP by their promotion of the things you don’t like?
Progressive Democrats could get wins for the 90% against the richest 0.1% like they did during FDR’s Social Gospel period. They could cap insulin prices for children. They could change the statistic that 1 in 5 American children live in poverty, many with working parents.
Ask yourself why they can’t? And, who wins?
LikeLike
ac
Nobody should assume that rank and file Republicans have brains as long as 63% of them believe the 2020 presidential election was stolen. Of the 63%, 48% base their opinion solely on suspicion. Contrast that with the Court’s decision against Gore which was accepted by Democrats.
Rules, but not for thee.
LikeLike
acjohnson— re: 6/8 8:59pm comment. Let me start by saying I very much appreciate you coming on here to challenge views and engage in a robust discussion. Many of us here are so used to each other over the years that we speak in a sort of shorthand that encompasses our past close following/ discussions of ed issues, as well as our understanding of where each other comes from. That does not by any means indicate we are a monolith—far from it. Observe: when some come on like a ton of bricks in extreme terms in response to one of Diane’s posts, others remain silent. That can mean they disagree, or think those posts are too out-there, but haven’t the energy that day to engage in the fine points. Or just didn’t tune into the blog that day.
I for example, though I characterize myself as a “flaming liberal,” do not think of myself as a progressive. I have always found progressives—much like the far right of the political spectrum—too interested in imposing prescriptive laws on society, in the mistaken belief they know what’s best for all, often overreaching, and oblivious to the inevitable backfires & unintended consequences. OTOH, I will back progressive legislators if they are the only ones out there fighting the good fight, calling out the other side for outrages that endanger our democracy.
Now to particulars. From your 8:59pm post: “so many people weaponize the liberal and marxist ideologies of today (trans agenda, racisim, marginalization, etc) against normal every day Americans in a very pathological and coercive sort of way (ie. unconscious bias training for example) that is causing division…”
Let’s pick out “and Marxist.” [full disclosure: I am just a layman with a weak background in history/ philosophy, so others feel free to correct me.] One might conclude when you say “liberal and Marxist” that you are equating the two, perhaps seeking to impugn the liberal POV by calling it Marxist.
Marxism is a very specific political philosophy, which has a bit of overlap with American liberalism, but not a lot. American liberals have no interest in govt owning the means of production so we won’t even go there. Marxism promotes a workers’ revolution, where the proletariat runs the govt. US liberals like me simply want to see strong unions protecting working conditions, as a balance against mgt profit-only goals.
The only real overlap I see with Marxism: there is an understanding there that those in lower classes are held down by the structure of the society—that it is not due to their lack of intelligence or work ethic. This means that the US idea of “meritocracy” is false.
“Unconscious bias training” is a very specific claim/ complaint, and you cite it as though it were rampant in current society, and an abomination. It is a corporate HR process that has been around since the 1980’s. Many studies showed that it improved corporate teamwork—and productivity– so it proliferated.
As is typical of corporate concepts, it trickled down into public education within a few decades. Some of those trickle-downs have had horrendous effects of pubschool ed—e.g., the long-obsolete MBO [Management by Objectives], which spawned NCLB stds-aligned assessment “accountability systems.” But this one is anodyne, when applied to ed staff training. When applied to students in classrooms, maybe not so anodyne! But pubschsystems have learned from the overreaches of some districts’ errors— e.g. white privilege bingo & similar.
Really: this kind of thing happens in public schools! A fad/whim comes along, and gets corrected. So what?
LikeLike
@bethree5
” It is a corporate HR process that has been around since the 1980’s.”
I see no evidence of this. I’ve been in the workforce for 20 years, I haven’t once come across it until 2022…
I think you are probably talking about a different type of training and saying it is the same as today, which of course it isn’t. I am specifically talking about training that uses skin color (“white” privilege) to divide people.
LikeLike
This article summarizes the training I’m referring to and its history: https://theconversation.com/what-the-history-of-diversity-training-reveals-about-its-future-143984
LikeLike
Thank you for that link, Bethree. The article is really informative.
LikeLike
@bethree5 While I appreciate the article and find its racist rhetoric to be highly disagreeable (if not out-right hate speech)
Quote from the article:
“That’s not to say individual change doesn’t matter, or that training can’t help white people address their own unconscious racial biases.”
…wow… so sad people actually think this way… What an amazingly racist thing to say…
…anyways… In this op-ed, it doesn’t support your claim that SPECIFICALLY “unconscious bias” training (or sometimes called “implicit bias”) has “been around since the 1980’s.” as a corporate HR process…
The article is about the history of diversity training… It makes mention of unconscious bias training, but what this article is attempting to apologetically explain away, is the criticism against this NEW training… but it doesn’t anywhere reveal that this type of training has been around since the 80’s…
Actually this article does quite the opposite… It is clearly explaining the author’s rational or opinion as to why it is need as a net new ADDITION to diversity training, which I whole heatedly disagree with.
LikeLike
What are Moms for Liberty gonna do about dangerous Child Labor Laws? Or are these moms fine with this since it’s NOT their children?
https://www.epi.org/blog/iowa-governor-signs-one-of-the-most-dangerous-rollbacks-of-child-labor-laws-in-the-country-14-states-have-now-introduced-bills-putting-children-at-risk/?mc_cid=92fe46404f&mc_eid=3142a4d4ad
LikeLike