An Anti-Critical Race Theorist Says “CRT Assigns Guilt”

Free AI web copilot to create summaries, insights and extended knowledge, download it at here

1221

Abstract

set of facts. I think that U.S. history should be taught to all American students, without shading, so that American citizens will understand how the country we live in came to be this way. History lessons informed by Critical Race Theory can provide students with a solid foundation for understanding the world; and may help them make better choices about what kinds of citizens they want to be in the future.Recently, a reader left a comment stating, "I have no problem teaching history. I do have a problem when it assigns guilt."What followed started as a friendly back and forth between myself and the commenter, which ended up demonstrating just how frustrating it is to engage an anti-CRT commenter in a conversation of any substance.I repeatedly tried to coax the commenter into articulating their position. This effort was a fruitless endeavor. Although I asked the commenter multiple times to state the basis for his opinions, he never provided a single CRT reference upon which he founded his views. To focus our conversation on facts, I offered an example of a history lesson that a CRT-Trained instructor might teach to primary/secondary students. I

Options

nstead of drowning in talking points, I attempted to engage the commenter with facts and substance. In response, the commenter asked me to agree that the basis of CRT is Marxism, again with no CRT reference demonstrating the source of his opinion.The ensuing conversation is an exercise in futility. I repeatedly tried to get the commenter to discuss any fact about any CRT concept. Instead, the commenter kept name-dropping conservative writers whose "viewpoints" he insisted must be included in all social sciences teaching. During our exchange, he offered no examples of their positions on CRT, denied that he is a conservative, and denied any knowledge about the origins of the conservative talking points he was parroting.I invite you to read my original article <a href="https://readmedium.com/260-000-white-men-fought-and-died-to-preserve-the-right-to-own-human-beings-as-slaves-df35680996ac">here</a> and delve into the comment section <a href="https://readmedium.com/i-have-no-problem-teaching-history-i-do-have-a-problem-when-it-assigns-guilt-49caa1b11eea">here</a>. It is a fascinating view into the mind of a modern American who is anti-CRT.</article></body>

An Anti-Critical Race Theorist Makes His Best Case for "CRT Assigns Guilt"

A while back, I published an article referencing CRT with the title Another Big Lie, 600,000 white men died in a War to End Slavery. The article was my reaction to a statement that I heard a conservative commenter make about the American Civil War. I intended to show how subtle changes in language can change the meaning and purpose of even a simple history lesson and stress how important it is for us to teach our children a complete and truthful history, starting with a full set of facts. I think that U.S. history should be taught to all American students, without shading, so that American citizens will understand how the country we live in came to be this way. History lessons informed by Critical Race Theory can provide students with a solid foundation for understanding the world; and may help them make better choices about what kinds of citizens they want to be in the future.

Recently, a reader left a comment stating, "I have no problem teaching history. I do have a problem when it assigns guilt."

What followed started as a friendly back and forth between myself and the commenter, which ended up demonstrating just how frustrating it is to engage an anti-CRT commenter in a conversation of any substance.

I repeatedly tried to coax the commenter into articulating their position. This effort was a fruitless endeavor. Although I asked the commenter multiple times to state the basis for his opinions, he never provided a single CRT reference upon which he founded his views. To focus our conversation on facts, I offered an example of a history lesson that a CRT-Trained instructor might teach to primary/secondary students. Instead of drowning in talking points, I attempted to engage the commenter with facts and substance. In response, the commenter asked me to agree that the basis of CRT is Marxism, again with no CRT reference demonstrating the source of his opinion.

The ensuing conversation is an exercise in futility. I repeatedly tried to get the commenter to discuss any fact about any CRT concept. Instead, the commenter kept name-dropping conservative writers whose "viewpoints" he insisted must be included in all social sciences teaching. During our exchange, he offered no examples of their positions on CRT, denied that he is a conservative, and denied any knowledge about the origins of the conservative talking points he was parroting.

I invite you to read my original article here and delve into the comment section here. It is a fascinating view into the mind of a modern American who is anti-CRT.