Ron DeSantis has banned Critical race theory from being taught in the state of Florida.

Surely by now they must know why the only objection to this historical fact is from blogs or PragerU. Same with climate change or the 2020 election lie.

It's as if one side is objectively incorrect in these arguments.

@HoolaHoopMan: Right? Republicans should shrink in shame from these conversations because their leaders wrote documents clearly stating, "we're racists who have no qualms about oppressing minorities for power and money." They should never bring this up and hope it fades from living memory, but instead they give Democrats every opportunity to remind everyone of them.

Republicans, that's not going to stop. Every time you insist gerrymandering has no racial component or that systemic racism doesn't exist, someone will bring up those documents because they are undeniable proof. You can't win that argument. Not anymore.

Hm, meanwhile on the other side of the country in California, they're addressing what they perceive as a major issue in mathematics: systematic racism. Very interesting times.

Which reminds me...

@Stevo_the_gamer: Did you actually read that bill?

No, but the culture wars aggrievement nonsense sells. It's the same side of the coin with far left SJWs, who I equally laugh at. Both fixating on unimportant trash to whine about. Last decade it was the War on Christmas or some dumb shit. Earlier this year it was Dr.Suess and Mr.Potatoehead's dick lmao.

Yeah, sure they are. That's why you just had a klan member die in office in 2012, praised by all the DNC elites as a friend and mentor, and just elected someone who not only praised segregationalists, but has taken part in preventing the integration of schools by opposing busing bills.

That's a gross oversimplification and sugarcoating of something that basically wants to teach kids that white people are evil.

Look, we don't need this bullshit; by the time I was in middle school I knew Europeans killed off 90% of native americans, Americans killed off the other 9%, and slavery existed and civil rights are still being fought for.

This bias that people see isn't about race, it's about economics. Poor black people and poor white people have more in common with one another than poor white people do with rich white people. FOCUS ON WEALTH INEQUALITY, NOT RACE INEQUALITY.

I've read Introduction to Critical Race Theory.

It makes some good points and ties capitalism to it. But blaming an entire group for your problems is just pure racism and incredibly dangerous. I can see it leading to more violence if it is weaponized. Their logic and reasoning for justifying this neo-racism reminds me a lot like how people applied logic and reasoning during the fall of Rome or Salem Witch Trials. They are dehumanizing and holding people accountable for something they had no involvement in.

@mrbojangles25:

Poor black people and poor white people have more in common with one another than poor white people do with rich white people. FOCUS ON WEALTH INEQUALITY, NOT RACE INEQUALITY.

Damn straight!

Just about every law passed since 1968 has been made to give non whites an advantage. There is no systemic racism in this country anymore.

I am not a fan of CRT in the slightest.

There’s a difference between teaching about the history of racism in America and taking means to rectify injustices, vs. nurturing and encouraging a worldview predicated around it that is conducive to the propagation of the very thing it seeks to address.

We should not be teaching our youth that this country is fundamentally racist and rotten to its core. It will do more harm than good.

Don't make me laugh. The likes of you don't know squat about history. The contents of your comment tells it all. Not actual knowledge that triggers, but purely the premise of the hated enemy being against hogwash ideologically far closer to Nazism than american conservatism could ever be.

This is what the World SOCIALIST Web Site has to say about the 1619 project.

"In August, 2019, the New York Times launched its “1619 Project,” marking the 400th anniversary of the initial arrival of 20 African slaves at Point Comfort in Virginia, a British colony in North America.

The Times wrote that its project intended to “reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story we tell ourselves about who we are.” It included not only a special magazine edition that was freely distributed in hundreds of thousands of copies to schools and museums nationally, but a proposed teaching curriculum for teachers to use in their classrooms.

Despite the pretense of establishing the United States’ “true” foundation, the 1619 Project is a politically motivated falsification of history. It presents and interprets American history entirely through the prism of race and racial conflict.

The World Socialist Web Site published detailed refutations of the numerous falsifications contained in the Times project, and interviewed leading historians of the United States."

https://www.wsws.org/en/topics/event/1619

That first sentence alone counters any Godwin's Law you put in there.

They've done most of those things.

@eoten: No they haven’t. The right has done all of them.

Right Wing Conservative have, correct. Whether they called themselves Democrats or eventually Republicans. There is no planet where you are calling Southern Democrats of the 1900's on the left. Holy cow are you clueless on US Politics.

Typing this sarcastic reply doesn't alter the fact. You're factually wrong on this. It's like you're being as bad as a climate denier or flat earther because this is solid history and not debated.

'Racially conservative' attitudes led white Southerners to leave Democratic Party (journalistsresource.org)

Why did the Democratic and Republican parties switch platforms? | Live Science

How Republicans and the 'Southern Strategy' Won Over the Once Democratic South - HISTORY

All Politics is Local: How the South Became Republican (syr.edu)

@zaryia: Does it matter anymore?

True. This is almost as useless as climate "debates". I'll just laugh at him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1928_Okeechobee_hurricane#Racial_issues

link is to what i was talking about.

False. Systematic racism does not only stem from law. Try again.

I know more about history than you do. And my initial comment, since you have some reading comprehension issue here, goes to the constant use of words like propaganda and indoctrination by conservatives when they want to suppress education and knowledge and keep their base uneducated and voting for them.

Nothing you stated here changes that stance. I actually didn't address what they are whining about now because it's immaterial to the BS they continue to do.

But cry moar.

@Maroxad:

That first sentence alone counters any Godwin's Law you put in there.

A few things:

Godwin's law isn't a "law". It's an adage, or saying, based on an observation someone once made. So one doesn't "counter" it like you would an ad hominem, logical fallacy, strawman, etc. If that's what you're trying to get at.

This is the first sentence:

"Critical race theory (CRT), intellectual movement and loosely organized framework of legal analysis based on thepremise that race is not a natural, biologically grounded feature of physically distinct subgroups of human beings but a socially constructed (culturally invented) category that is used to oppress and exploit people of colour.

I assume you were trying to say that because it's "loosely organized", any comparisons to Nazi rhetoric are null and void?

Please stop using strawmen, or quote exactly where I said "racism doesn't exist".

@zaryia: Can you quote the specific parts of any of those articles that proves the Gerrymandering was done to specifically exclude by "race" and not by party affiliation?

What you linked most definitely proves Gerrymandering is real, and was done to maintain power. What's unprovable is whether any of it was done to specifically disenfranchise only one race of voter, rather than political party.

Even then, if a party knows full well that one particular race of people are far more likely to vote for the other guys, is it racism, or partisanship that drives a party to attempt to limit their effect on an election? Hilary ran on a platform heavily tailored to women, she could most certainly be considered sexist or Misandrist under this criteria, for merely trying to capture the vote of one particular demographic. In this case, women.

Essentially there's no way to know the actual criteria used for Gerrymandering.

If Black people were all for the Republican party, I can almost guarantee they would have Gerrymandered differently to instead raise the impact of the black vote. People with money and power always want more money and power. I'm sure some, maybe many of them are racist. But I can also be sure the desire to hold on to power at any cost, would have trumped any racism.

Regardless, Gerrymandering is clearly a harmful policy that needs to be fixed. We have a quasi similar problem in Canada, where it's quite possible for one party to only win 35% of the popular vote, but end up with a majority government anyhow, that can push it's agenda right over the remaining 65%.

Many people have this impression because of the definition you posted that you and I discussed earlier. Unfortunately, your argument about the nature of your preferred policies has become muddied with your initial comments about CRT using your own posted definition. That's why his response here has been a common theme throughout the thread.

It would be wise to attempt to refocus your argument and this thread - perhaps even separating out the discussion of the nature of your preferred policies out into it's own thread, which is a discussion that's probably worthy of one.

this is silly. i doubt you're going to find many explicitly racist laws on the books these days. however it is the application of the laws where racial biases present themselves.

take for example stand your ground laws where research has indicated:

"However, that does not begin to end the analysis. It is here that all the issues relating to the fairness of the American justice system on black Americans come to the fore, for in studying the parties to an SYG confrontation, this pattern emerged: In homicides where the shooter is black and the victim is white, those are ruled to be justified 1.2 percent of the time. In cases where the shooter is white and the victim is black those are ruled to be justified 11.2 percent of the time. Ten times more likely if the shooter is white and the victim is black, than if the shooter is black and the victim is white.81 In fact, despite the fact that a racial disparity already existed in justified shootings, i.e., if the shooter was white and victim black it was ruled to be justified 9.5% of the time, and the inverse was 1.1%., the disparity grows when Stand Your Ground is enacted."

so an already bonkers disparity between whether a killing is ruled justified when the shooter is white and the victim black and the reverse is magnified further by SYG laws.

disregarding SYG altogether though, its still blatantly obvious that if you're involved in a homicide statistically it's WAAAAY better to be a white person killing a black person than being a black person killing a white person.

you're killing is nearly 5x likely to be ruled justified if you're a white person killing a black person than the opposite.

data from: https://www.usccr.gov/pubs/2020/04-06-Stand-Your-Ground.pdf

The racial effects are real, and that's all that matters. Even if that isn't their intention to be specifically "racist" it is race based (it was for their top operative) and the results are negatively effecting a specific race. At that point we are arguing semantics rather than real life.

PatriciaOkontaRaceBasedPo.pdf (columbia.edu)

The Identification and Evaluation of Racial Gerrymandering on JSTOR

Reconsidering Racial and Partisan Gerrymandering (uchicago.edu)

But we can see in some situations they know exactly what they are doing,

He taught lawmakers how to use racial and partisan data to dilute Democratic votes. His maps preserved Republicans’ House majority over the next three elections and maintained GOP domination over most state legislatures.

Thomas Hofeller’s secret gerrymandering files are a nightmare for the GOP. (slate.com)

I don't have to try again the lefts argument on this is absolutely embarrassing. It is however a great way to get votes to make a group of people feel oppressed who haven't been oppressed for at least 50 years, and who have had an advantage for at least the past 30 years.

The left lives in reality. The right not so much, they still believe trump's lies. If we want to talk about great ways to get votes then how about the constant use of abortion by cons that disappears when they are elected? How about the use of fear by the cons? The outright lies?

@zaryia: I love how users here just completely ignore the information dumps from GOP leaders that others bring up in this thread. Silent's response immediately after yours completely contradicts the cited information within it and acts like it doesn't exist.

Yes you do.

The Identification and Evaluation of Racial Gerrymandering on JSTOR

Reconsidering Racial and Partisan Gerrymandering (uchicago.edu)

Thomas Hofeller’s secret gerrymandering files are a nightmare for the GOP. (slate.com)

How The Republican Push To Restrict Voting Could Affect Our Elections | FiveThirtyEight

No they don't, they are delusional and that delusion is driven by TDS. You couldn't even get through this thread without talking about him. But since your talking about him look how bad the media looks as of late? The Wuhan lab theory that was a supposed lie??? It's looking like it could actually be true. The story about Trump clearing protesters for a photo op? That was officially debunked..Then you have left wing media caught on tape admitting their lying.

You want to talk about the use of fear? Your party has successfully pushed a narrative where certain minority groups actually think the police are actively trying to hunt and kill them. You constantly bitch about the big bad threat of white supremacy eventhough the vast majority of violent crimes on this country are committed by a 13% of the population. You deny a culture war even exist because you in fact support all the far left policies being pushed. The left is so far beyond reality it's embarrassing at this point.

No I don't.

Political parties trying to stay in power has nothing to do with systemic racism. The left does the same shit and will also do whatever favors them to stay in power. There are no laws that stop you from voting because of your race.

When the left does the following I don't blame the right using gerrymandering.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/democrats-vote-against-motion-condemning-illegal-immigrant-voting.amp

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article235045622.html

https://lieu.house.gov/media-center/in-the-news/125-democrats-and-1-republican-vote-lower-voting-age-16

But that literally is systemic racism when they stay in power by reducing the vote of a certain race. You didn't disprove any of my links. You just gave a whataboutism on ageism that has nothing to do with this quote chain at all. Literally. In fact I think you just posted those links thinking no one would click them and see they have nothing to do with my the discussion.

I take that as a concession, mind you.

You have absolutely no clue what your talking about as usual. The voting laws apply to everyone regardless of race. My links are valid because the left does whatever they can to get the bottom of the barrel in our society to vote.

This is another classic example of you having no valid argument so you have decided to spin the thread off topic.

Do you support critical race theory a far left ideology?

I take it you won't refute my links. You lost this debate until you do that because they directly countered your claims. Bookmarked.

And some of these laws happen to disproportionately effect blacks. That is where the issues come. My link which you did not and could not refute shows this with racial gerrymandering. The Hofeller files show it's intentional (You won't touch this with a mile long pole, Republicans ignore this so bad). Here are other links on other methods,

Georgia’s Proposed Voting Restrictions Will Harm Black Voters Most | Brennan Center for Justice

The above article uses simple facts and statistics. Another,

Stacking the deck: How the GOP works to suppress minority voting | Berkeley News

and,

The Barriers That Keep Blacks and Latinos From Voting - The Atlantic

I think people expecting a racist to accept or even discuss CRT is absurd.

Not all of it. Parts of it that studies support and mass data support, yes.

I think the far left over blows systemic racism. While the far right thinking it's literally not real are also dumb as **** because facts and data show it is real.

Among them was a study in which he concluded that adding a citizenship question to census forms would be "advantageous to Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites."

Uhh..

@zaryia: I take it you won't refute my links. You lost this debate until you do that because they directly countered your claims. Bookmarked.

I don't have to because they are completely irrelevant to the topic. Yes please bookmark this so everyone can see how you spin arguments you can't win.

@zaryia: And some of these laws happen to disproportionately effect blacks. That is where the issues come. My link which you did not and could not prove shows this with racial gerrymandering. The Hofeller files show it's intentional (You won't touch this with a mile long pole, Republicans ignore this so bad). Here are other links on other methods,

Happen to.. there is nothing there that can't easily be changed regardless of your race. Are you implying black people can't figure out how to vote on another day other then Sunday? And blacks not capable of mailing their votes in on time? The fact you all compare this to Jim Crow era laws is absolutely laughable.

You are also taking examples of a few states and implying that represent the whole country. So since we are doing that let me give you a real example of systemic racism.

Forcing others to pay higher taxes for the sole benefit of one racial or ethnic group.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/rachelsandler/2020/06/13/california-assembly-passes-reparations-bill/amp/

This is a tongue in cheek joke, right? Suppressing the voting rights of minorities and thereby reducing their voice in self governance so that political parties can stay in power is a textbook (literally!) example of systemic racism. You've heard of poll taxes and literacy tests at polling locations, yes?

Except in reality it's not happening. Every peace of data we have shows minority voters voted in RECORD numbers. The Democrats literally have almost complete power now and your talking about voter supression? Nothing adds up to reality. But leave it to Democrats to focus on voter supression after RECORD turnout from the minority communities.

Yes you do.

They directly talk about the topic.

You're just typing this because your google search results came up dry to refute the links :)

Your opinions on how this problems should be fixed does not refute the factual citation I gave showing they are real.

PS,

Among them was a study in which he concluded that adding a citizenship question to census forms would be "advantageous to Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites."

@silentchief: We absolutely do! Reams of documentation from the implementers of the policy!

@zaryia:

They directly talk about the topic.

You're just typing this because your google search results came up dry to refute the links :)

No they don't. I never denied Republicans use gerrymandering the fact is The Democrats use it as well. Passing laws to pander to your demographic is nothing new and both sides do it. They still don't prove your point especially when the party you accuse of it has very little power in our current system and it's only effects a few states.

@zaryia:Your opinions on how this problems should be fixed does not refute the factual citation I gave showing they are real.

And your opinion on how incapable you think Black Americans are is irrelevant. Do you honestly compare these to Jim Crow era voting laws?

The reality is you are reaching here and you had to focus on voting laws on a few states because you know systemic racism is nonsense at this point.

Do you believe in representations ? Why did you ignore my link?

How is that relevant?

Democrats actively want to make whites a minority do you deny that?

Republicans are protecting their votes just as Democrats do.