By Christopher Harper

Amid the debate over teaching critical race theory or CRT, I decided to search for how a K-12 curriculum would look.

I found a website for Learning for Justice, an organization founded by the Southern Poverty Law Center. See https://www.learningforjustice.org/

Many people should recognize the law center as a leader in the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s. The organization maintains that more than 500,000 individuals access the teaching materials on a continuing basis. 

Under “A Framework for Teaching American Slavery,” Learning for Justice argues that “most students leave high school without an adequate understanding of the role slavery played in the development of the United States—or how its legacies still influence us today. In an effort to remedy this, we developed a comprehensive guide for teaching and learning this critical topic at all grade levels.” Note: I would argue that most students leave high school without an adequate understanding of anything to do with U.S. history.

The “Teaching Hard History” curriculum for kindergarten through 12th grade includes 10 basic tenets:

1. Slavery, which Europeans practiced before they invaded the Americas, was important to all colonial powers and existed in all North American colonies. Note: Many Black African countries also engaged in slavery–as did the many empires, such as the Romans.

2. Slavery and the slave trade were central to the development and growth of the colonial economies and what is now the United States. Note: Not all colonial economies depended on slaves.

3. Protections for slavery were embedded in the founding documents; enslavers dominated the federal government, Supreme Court, and Senate from 1787 through 1860. Note: There was a lot of other good stuff in the founding documents.

4. Slavery was an institution of power designed to create profit for the enslavers and break the will of the enslaved and was a relentless quest for profit abetted by racism. Note: I wouldn’t disagree with this statement.

5. Enslaved people resisted the efforts of their enslavers to reduce them to commodities in both revolutionary and everyday ways. Note: I learned about John Brown in the 1960s in high school. I assume his rebellion and others are still taught in schools.

6. The experience of slavery varied depending on time, location, crop, labor performed, size of slaveholding, and gender. Note: I couldn’t disagree with this statement, although I’m not sure what exactly it means in terms of a school curriculum.

7. Slavery was the central cause of the Civil War. Note: I would hope that all students, like me in the 1960s, learns this truism.

8. Slavery shaped the fundamental beliefs of Americans about race and whiteness, and white supremacy was both a product and legacy of slavery. Note: I would call this statement a gross generalization.

9. Enslaved and freed people worked to maintain cultural traditions while building new ones that sustain communities and impact the larger world. Note: I don’t know, but it’s probably true.

10. By knowing how to read and interpret the sources that tell the story of American slavery, we gain insight into some of what enslaving and enslaved Americans aspired to, created, thought, and desired. Note: It would seem better to address current issues than these historical ones.

The organization provides various materials, including lesson plans, videos, podcasts, and consultations with critical race theory proponents, to teach students about these issues. 

Education Week, which broadly supports critical race theory in schools, provides some background about the debate over the inclusion of CRT into schools.  

“Critical race theory emerged out of postmodernist thought, which tends to be skeptical of the idea of universal values, objective knowledge, individual merit, Enlightenment rationalism, and liberalism—tenets that conservatives tend to hold dear,” EdWeek’s Stephen Sawchuk wrote recently. “In history, the debates have focused on the balance among patriotism and American exceptionalism, on one hand, and the country’s history of exclusion and violence towards Indigenous people and the enslavement of African Americans on the other—between its ideals and its practices.” See https://www.edweek.org/leadership/what-is-critical-race-theory-and-why-is-it-under-attack/2021/05

That seems to me to be a fair assessment of precisely what the debate is about. I would fall on the side of promoting universal values, objective knowledge, and individual merit. I’m not so sure about Enlightenment rationalism and liberalism. I would hope the first set of values are not only held by conservatives.

As you might have heard Robert E. Lee’s statue in Charlottesville Virginia was taken down to the cheers of liberals delighted to stand up and fight against the evils of slavery from 1865 and against the long dead men who fought for the confederacy who pose no threat to them while of course excusing and/or defending and/or ignoring slavery in China and Africa because such opposition might carry political or financial risk to themselves.

But while the left cheers this I found a little throw away line in a piece at the Clairmont review of books that I found most interesting it comes at the end of this paragraph:

Lee would be pardoned under a general amnesty at Christmas 1868, by which time Grant was president-elect. And yet Lee’s full civil liberties had not been restored when he died in 1870. In October 1865 he had signed an oath of allegiance to the United States, upon Grant’s reassurance and urging, but it disappeared. The vindictive Johnson had apparently pocketed it, and it was discovered only in the 1970s. In 1975, Gerald Ford signed legislation posthumously restoring all Lee’s citizenship rights. The margin of the vote tells us something about where Lee’s reputation stood even in that heavily “countercultural” age: it passed the Senate unanimously and the House by a vote of 407 to ten.

emphasis mine

I take note of this because there are two members of the current Government who were part of the Senate which delivered that unanimous vote to restore Lee’s rights in 1975

The first is the current Senior Senator from the very blue state of Vermont Patrick Leahy

The 2nd is the Current President of the United States Joe Biden

knowing this I put out a tweet Sunday on the subject:

I suspect like METOO & blackface the rules against don’t apply when Democrats are involved.

Five Fast one liners on Cuba

Posted: July 12, 2021 by datechguy in Uncategorized
Tags:

Does anyone seriously believe this Administration is with the people against the communists?

Are we going to see the Biden Administration send the Capital Police to help the Cuban Police contain the protests?

There are reports that the Communist Government is sending plain clothes people door to door to arrest dissidents, I presume the Biden Administration is taking notes.

Perhaps the Cuban government will offer to allow free elections and bring in Dominion machines with Democrat operatives to run them.

Can you imagine what a difference it would be if Trump was in office today?

Let’s Be Blunt: We All Know

Posted: July 12, 2021 by datechguy in Uncategorized

Malone: [stopping at a post office] Well, here we are.

Ness: What are we doing here?

Malone: Liquor raid.

Ness: [looking at the police station across the street that they just came from] Here?

Malone: Mr. Ness, everybody knows where the booze is. The problem isn’t finding it, the problem is who wants to cross Capone.

The Untouchables 1987

At NEO site she has a post with a question that is a topic of conversation among people I know:

What might the now-ongoing audits show?

It’s the wrong question just like it’s the post has the wrong title

What if the 2020 election audits end up revealing that Trump was actually the winner?

The actual question is:

What do we do when the audits prove that Trump was actually the winner of the election.

We need to stop playing this game. If the left thought for one moment that this election was clean and was won fairly they would have been all over themselves to put out audits, the media would be all over themselves to cover them, on Facebook and twitter and Instagram all of the tech platformed would be pushing for this data to be out there and praising the transparency and fairness of these Democrat stongholds. They would revel in their chance to proclaim to the entire country indeed to all the world that not only was the election clean but those who are saying otherwise are liars, fraudsters, grifters.

Instead they have fought tooth and nail to prevent these audits while at the same time saying there is no proof that there was anything untoward. It’s like the cigarette lobby insisting that there was no proof that smoking was dangerous in the 80’s.

The real danger to the left and the establishment isn’t that the audits will show that Trump was the winner. They know this is the case. The danger is that they will establish the methods that the left has been using for years to steal elections on the city state and local level, methods that members of the establishment right were quite willing to allow to happen as long as it didn’t threaten them.

You see once this is all out in the open and people can no longer deny or pretend they don’t know about then they have an excuse for inaction, as illustrated by this exchange between Sir Humphrey & Minister Jim Hacker when he found out about arms going to terrorists.

Sir Humphrey Appleby: So minister may we drop this matter of the arms sales?

Minister Jim Hacker: No we may not. I’m going to tell the Prime Minister personally, make an appointment Bernard. This is the sort of thing the prime minister wants to know about.

Sir Humphrey Appleby: I assure you minister this is the type of thing the Prime Minister desperately doesn’t want to know about

and his explanation to Hacker’s permanent private secretary.

Bernard: So what do we believe in?

Sir Humphrey: At this moment Bernard We believe in stopping the minister from speaking to the Prime Minister.

Bernard: But why?

Sir Humphrey: Because once the Prime Minister knows there will have to be an inquiry, like Watergate. The investigation of a trivial break-in lead to one ghastly revelation after another and finally to the downfall of a president. The golden rule is don’t lift lids off cans of worms.

Yes Minister The Whiskey Priest 1982

Once these things are established then the question will become:

What are you going to do about it?

And that’s when the shit hits the fan for a lot of career pols and civil servants whose job is to supposedly prevent this type of fraud:

How many state and local officials owe their positions to fixed elections or to appointments made after same. How many local contracts, local patronage jobs, local, state or even federal contracts worth millions are directed as a result of these things. How many useless relatives, friends, hangers on and incompetents are making a good living from their ability to feed at the public trough whose meals might be disrupted by these things being revealed? And if they are happening in WI, and PA, and GA and AZ the question becomes are they happening elsewhere? How blue are the deep blue states? Do people actually buy all this crap that been shoveled out from them or are they just silent or resigned to what’s going on and in fear of being called names?

This is the real question and it’s bigger when you consider this story about the RNC throwing Trump under the bus while pretending otherwise.

It’s like dealing with an army of Sir Humphrey’s. It’s not about policies , it’s not about what’s best, it’s what can we raise the most money on to feather our nests.

And so the question stands? WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?