Texas LT. Gov. Calls for End of Tenure due to CLT

[Diogenes]

RE: Experts who study things.

https://www.amazon.com/Hate-Crime-Hoax-Lefts-Campaign/dp/1621577783

What's this... a cherry pie recipe book?
Must be with all that cherrypicking of data.

[ergative]

This is bullshit. Critical Race Theory isn't being taught in elementary or secondary schools ... .

Then there's no problem if it's forbidden there. :-)

It's inefficient, which alone should suffice for you to think it's a bad idea.

But it's also clearly a pretext to ban teaching aspects of US history which fragile parents might find distressing. And that kind of state censorship is exactly what free speech heroes are supposed to oppose.

Right. The problem is not the wording of the law, necessarily, but how it's being applied. If everyone agrees that 'critical race theory' includes curriculum like 'slavery was a bad thing that white Americans did' then they're going to apply these laws to make trouble for historical curriculum that is being taught in primary and secondary school--curriculum that really should include concepts like 'slavery was a bad thing that white Americans did'. It's like the Comstock act, which allowed such a broad definition of 'obscenity' that people could arrest you for doing 'obscene' things like sending information about birth control through the mail.

When we complain about people not knowing what CRT actually is, we're complaining about the racism that causes these nutjobs to appropriate useful labels to uphold bigotry. Well, and also because we care about precision in language and accurate terminology, but we're capable of doing two things at once.

[mahagonny]

RE: Experts who study things.

https://www.amazon.com/Hate-Crime-Hoax-Lefts-Campaign/dp/1621577783

What's this... a cherry pie recipe book?
Must be with all that cherrypicking of data.

I'd be glad to read a review of the book when you have time, Diogenes. It's on my reading list. (Haven't gotten around to it yet). Sometimes I get interested in things because they bring out fragility reactions like yours from the progressives, who love difficult conversations. Or sometimes I just get interested because I've seen the author on youtube and they sound sensible. From what I understand of Dr. Reilly's book thus far, he decided to study hate crime hoaxes. That's what academics do, study things.

ETA:

Right. The problem is not the wording of the law, necessarily, but how it's being applied. If everyone agrees that 'critical race theory' includes curriculum like 'slavery was a bad thing that white Americans did' then they're going to apply these laws to make trouble for historical curriculum that is being taught in primary and secondary school--curriculum that really should include concepts like 'slavery was a bad thing that white Americans did'. It's like the Comstock act, which allowed such a broad definition of 'obscenity' that people could arrest you for doing 'obscene' things like sending information about birth control through the mail.

You could already teach  'slavery was a bad thing that white Americans did' and nobody minded. I learned that in the 1970's in ninth grade social studies. It was powerful, and the need for it was understood. Nobody got mad. Group confessions of our sinful propensities were done on Sundays, in church, by those who choose them as part of their religion. Not in public school, and not mandated by government.
The new laws (crude tools the way some of them are written, sure) being enacted and how they might get applied are the foreseeable result of nutty activism from the left. I don't know what the solution is. But the left created the problem, and better people than them are going to have to work with it.
For a little perspective: sorting kids into groups of 'oppressor' and 'victim' is  self-esteem extinguisher. You can't do that and claim you're striking a blow for freedom. Nor can you dictate to teachers through politically partisan unions and administrators that every subject now needs to be taught with woke sensibility and agenda and claim you are defending academic freedom.

[waterboy]

Seems to me that when we teach "slavery was a bad thing that white Americans did" - folks DO mind.

[mahagonny]

Seems to me that when we teach "slavery was a bad thing that white Americans did" - folks DO mind.

Why don't you ask them what they mind? I'd bet dollars to donuts it's the things I described, not the teaching of history.
Of course now we are at a stage where academic unions and higher education are distrusted, and liberals are hated by most of America. That's one reason I stopped being one.
So the conversations never go well from the outset.

[dismalist]

This is bullshit. Critical Race Theory isn't being taught in elementary or secondary schools ... .

Then there's no problem if it's forbidden there. :-)

Right. The problem is not the wording of the law, necessarily, but how it's being applied. If everyone agrees that 'critical race theory' includes curriculum like 'slavery was a bad thing that white Americans did' then they're going to apply these laws to make trouble for historical curriculum that is being taught in primary and secondary school--curriculum that really should include concepts like 'slavery was a bad thing that white Americans did'. It's like the Comstock act, which allowed such a broad definition of 'obscenity' that people could arrest you for doing 'obscene' things like sending information about birth control through the mail.

When we complain about people not knowing what CRT actually is, we're complaining about the racism that causes these nutjobs to appropriate useful labels to uphold bigotry. Well, and also because we care about precision in language and accurate terminology, but we're capable of doing two things at once.

And Justice Potter Stewart famously stated that while he couldn't define hard core pornography, he knew it when he saw it! Of course, that leaves open that different people have different definitions of whatever. Which is fine. Uniformity is neither necessary nor desirable. Variety of opinion is.

And if the the CRT prohibition in Texas public universities became law, there are still private institutions that can teach what the customers want. 

[ergative]

This is bullshit. Critical Race Theory isn't being taught in elementary or secondary schools ... .

Then there's no problem if it's forbidden there. :-)

Right. The problem is not the wording of the law, necessarily, but how it's being applied. If everyone agrees that 'critical race theory' includes curriculum like 'slavery was a bad thing that white Americans did' then they're going to apply these laws to make trouble for historical curriculum that is being taught in primary and secondary school--curriculum that really should include concepts like 'slavery was a bad thing that white Americans did'. It's like the Comstock act, which allowed such a broad definition of 'obscenity' that people could arrest you for doing 'obscene' things like sending information about birth control through the mail.

When we complain about people not knowing what CRT actually is, we're complaining about the racism that causes these nutjobs to appropriate useful labels to uphold bigotry. Well, and also because we care about precision in language and accurate terminology, but we're capable of doing two things at once.

And Justice Potter Stewart famously stated that while he couldn't define hard core pornography, he knew it when he saw it! Of course, that leaves open that different people have different definitions of whatever. Which is fine. Uniformity is neither necessary nor desirable. Variety of opinion is.

And if the the CRT prohibition in Texas public universities became law, there are still private institutions that can teach what the customers want.

Isn't that quote an example of terrible jurisprudence, though? I'm not arguing for uniformity of opinion. I'm arguing for clearly interpretable laws that can be applied on a foundation more solid than, 'I dunno, looks pretty dirty to me.'

[Wahoo Redux]

And if the the CRT prohibition in Texas public universities became law, there are still private institutions that can teach what the customers want.

Weeeellll...that still doesn't erase the issue of a bad law crafted for political purposes that constricts intelligent discussion and teaching of a very real problem facing the United States.

And it seems like a slippery slope to me.

[mahagonny]

And if the the CRT prohibition in Texas public universities became law, there are still private institutions that can teach what the customers want.

Weeeellll...that still doesn't erase the issue of a bad law crafted for political purposes that constricts intelligent discussion and teaching of a very real problem facing the United States.

And it seems like a slippery slope to me.

Crafted for the purpose of preventing public school teaching positions from attracting educators with a streak of sadism in their personality.

[marshwiggle]

RE: Experts who study things.

https://www.amazon.com/Hate-Crime-Hoax-Lefts-Campaign/dp/1621577783

What's this... a cherry pie recipe book?
Must be with all that cherrypicking of data.

If the point of the analysis is to specifically point out examples of faked hate crimes, then selecting the cases that fit is precisely the point. That doesn't imply that every event identified as a hate crime is fake, but it does suggest care is required in identifying which is which. It's especially important if politicians, the media, etc. heavily report, react to, etc. the fake ones, and don't make any sort of correction when the truth comes out.

[mahagonny]

RE: Experts who study things.

https://www.amazon.com/Hate-Crime-Hoax-Lefts-Campaign/dp/1621577783

What's this... a cherry pie recipe book?
Must be with all that cherrypicking of data.

If the point of the analysis is to specifically point out examples of faked hate crimes, then selecting the cases that fit is precisely the point. That doesn't imply that every event identified as a hate crime is fake, but it does suggest care is required in identifying which is which. It's especially important if politicians, the media, etc. heavily report, react to, etc. the fake ones, and don't make any sort of correction when the truth comes out.

This may help....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDqy85KhALE

I still have doubts about the 'broken glass in the mailbox' in Greenfield IN (population 23,006) reported by the Wooten son.

[Mobius]

If you think eliminating tenure will stop the radicalizing of academia, well...

[mahagonny]

More...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4Z2M3E3p3M

ETA: Wilfred Reilly is black       https://www.amren.com/features/2019/03/black-scholar-unmasks-a-fundamental-lie-of-race-relations/

Wilfred Reilly is white       https://celebpie.com/dr-wilfred-reilly/

[dismalist]

This is bullshit. Critical Race Theory isn't being taught in elementary or secondary schools ... .

Then there's no problem if it's forbidden there. :-)

Right. The problem is not the wording of the law, necessarily, but how it's being applied. If everyone agrees that 'critical race theory' includes curriculum like 'slavery was a bad thing that white Americans did' then they're going to apply these laws to make trouble for historical curriculum that is being taught in primary and secondary school--curriculum that really should include concepts like 'slavery was a bad thing that white Americans did'. It's like the Comstock act, which allowed such a broad definition of 'obscenity' that people could arrest you for doing 'obscene' things like sending information about birth control through the mail.

When we complain about people not knowing what CRT actually is, we're complaining about the racism that causes these nutjobs to appropriate useful labels to uphold bigotry. Well, and also because we care about precision in language and accurate terminology, but we're capable of doing two things at once.

And Justice Potter Stewart famously stated that while he couldn't define hard core pornography, he knew it when he saw it! Of course, that leaves open that different people have different definitions of whatever. Which is fine. Uniformity is neither necessary nor desirable. Variety of opinion is.

And if the the CRT prohibition in Texas public universities became law, there are still private institutions that can teach what the customers want.

Isn't that quote an example of terrible jurisprudence, though? I'm not arguing for uniformity of opinion. I'm arguing for clearly interpretable laws that can be applied on a foundation more solid than, 'I dunno, looks pretty dirty to me.'

That's what we live by.

[mahagonny]

If you think eliminating tenure will stop the radicalizing of academia, well...

So radicalizing academia is a good thing, I guess. That's exactly the attitude that turns people off.