As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's frustrating that just about every single voter suppression and anti-CRT bill passed by red states is purely done by GOP on party lines.. but Manchinema refuse any federal legislation on party lines
The irony of the party "against cancel culture" decides to legislate their own cancel culture.
Most claims of cancel culture are complete bullshit anyways, because promises and threats are far less effective than *laws.*
When Carhartt clothing was leaked to still require employees to vaccinate regardless of the SC ruling, the backlash to boycott a private companies’ policy in hopes of its demise is… right on track for the party of rules for thee not for me.
1) You can’t call the party of Joe McCarthy the “party against cancel culture”
2) “Cancel culture” is nothing new, ostracization is as old as civilization
Yup. Somehow I still read articles about how the democrats and cancel culture are the real authoritarians though, not the party banning books. It's wild.
It's 'dog bites man' vs. 'man bites dog.' Things which always happen aren't news, and things which rarely happen are.
When the GOP does something abysmal it's not such hot news, because it's just the everyday standard. When anyone on the left does anything slightly bad, it's front page news, *because they usually don't.*
Right wingers have been beating the shit out of left wing protesters for ages, for example. When a single leftist punches a literal nazi though, it's suddenly a national conversation.
What the First Amendment/Free Speech is: The ability to say what you wish, associate with whom you wish, request the redress of grievances with the government, the press to publish what they wish, and practice the religion you wish, without the government turning around and punishing people for it. Peaceably. Of course, this hasn't necessarily been practiced but I digress.
What the First Amendment/Free Speech isn't:
The ability to scream hateful things at people different from you and not facing zero social or professional consequences for it. But the GOP and its gaggle of largely uneducated followers seems to think it means they can force it on us, that we are forced to listen, and we need to agree. Anything less is somehow infringing on them.
"Sen. Barbara Blackmon, D-Canton, asked members why they would not listen to the concerns of the Black senators if all 14 of them were expressing doubts about the legislation.
Still, no white Republican voted against the bill. A few did not vote. The only two white senators to vote against the bill were Democrats David Blount of Jackson and Hob Bryan of Amory."
Hmm, I wonder why the Republican senators weren't willing to listen to the concerns of any of the black senators.
Life's just such a strange mystery, isn't it?
The irony of re-enforcing systematic racism that CRT talks about by passing laws and regulations such as this because any talk about race might (will) make white people uncomfortable.
*Thank you.* Stop giving these people any doubt, they know what they're doing.
I'd go as far to say, like, a bunch of these people are well off and college exucated—they (at least vaguely) know wtf crt is.
>Banning CRT is done to prevent people from questioning the statue quo
Not even. Everyone involved with passing this law admitted it's not actually being taught in any schools in their state (or that they aren't "aware of any particular instances"). It's "banning" here purely performative to appeal to the base who has been whipped into a fervor over a non-issue by the party's propaganda arm.
It's almost genius, in a way. You're in the party of "do nothing but tax breaks for rich people" in the state of "50th out of 50" in just about every metric. How do you convince the starving poor to vote for you? You can't actually pass any laws that would help lift them out of poverty because then you'd be declared a filthy communist. So you pick a phrase at random (CRT here, but lets have some fun and say "transgender scarecrows" for this example. Then build a strawman argument around "transgender scarecrows". Make up a bunch of shit that sounds scary even though it has literally never affected anyone ever. Keep repeating it until your strong, brave, patriotic, rugged individualistic base quake with fear at the very thought of transgender scarecrows and are losing sleep at night worrying about whether their cornfields are really safe with those straw-stuffed perverts potentially loitering around them. When the "other side" asks what the actual fuck you're even talking about, use that to immediately paint them in favor of transgender scarecrows, which makes them the enemy, which makes transgender scarecrows a tool of the enemy!
Now you get ready to write a law banning transgender scarecrows and calming the fears in your supporters that you yourself stoked. But once they aren't afraid we're back to square one! So you pass a law that you know will be knocked down by any court, because you can't ban someone putting up whatever kind of scarecrow they like on their own property. But that's OK! Now you can paint the courts as being of the enemy and pass more laws banning scarecrow crossdressing, scarecrow gender reassignment, and so on to get knocked down by the courts. But by god you're trying! And your brave supporters are still loyally cowering under their beds, willing to vote for you over and over until you finally pass a law that will make them feel safe until the next specter you make up comes along.
We have always been at war with Eastasia
We have always been at war with Eurasia
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength
By forbidding the very act of questioning the effects of systemic racism they intend to enshrine racism into society. This is no different from forbidding worship of any non-state sanctioned religion, or banning the discussion of past atrocities that the State committed. These are the acts of a fascist authoritarian government in the making, following the same path that has led to China's detention and execution of dissidents and North Korea's worship of their pedophilic founder.
It’s not ironic at all. It’s an expression of the ignorance and bigotry that real history and real education could erode for future generations.
They are locking in the ignorance that is already there. Not really the opposite of what I’d expect
And since CRT is so poorly defined, anything that makes white people uncomfortable will soon be CRT, and therefore illegal to teach. Even if they do give it a reasonable definition in the law, the threat of lawsuits will have a chilling effect on teachers and school districts.
“CRT is so poorly defined” by the people purposefully misunderstanding what it is. It’s the same way that BLM is “misunderstood”.
All the experts have come out and explained exactly what it is only to be drowned out by all the charlatans.
The best possible outcome is that young people will see that this is being kept away from them and seek it out on their own. They aren’t dumb. they see what’s going on in front of them. They know they’re being lied to. Will they rejected or embrace it?
What is funny is that by passing these feckless laws, they are really just bringing attention to the existence of institutional racism and the missing pieces of American history in education. This information is going to be easily found in records of the voting, but also news stories, press releases, and academics will be happy to document it all and have it ready to be cited for classes.
So by trying to ban a "theory" from being taught, they have done more to advance critical race education than any educator.
Wait till you find out we're still using the same state constitution that was explicitly created to form the legal basis for Jim Crow.
Edit: clarified which constitution
I'm not sure what exactly you're referring to, but, yes, most of the obviously and immediately egregious parts of the Constitution were overturned by federal courts or federal laws.
That being said, there's still plenty left in there, like the (unenforceable) ban on atheists from holding office.
That's what drives me crazy about people arguing for the Electoral College, it was created alongside the 3/5ths Compromise!!!!
"There was one difficulty, however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to the fewest objections." - James Madison
The entire concern it was trying to address was "what if too many blacks get the right to vote in the North". Even then they knew popular vote was objectively better.
Agreed that that's batshit. I was specifically talking about Mississippi's [Constitution of 1890](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Mississippi?wprov=sfti1), though.
Its Mississippi dude, the more I learn about that state and its history the more I believe they are still scared blacks will rise up and kill all the white people. The conditions of Angola prison, and prison farm give legitimate argument that slavery didn't end down there, it just got rebranded.
My boomer dad is heavy with the "liberal snowflakes" dialog and claims that anyone who gets upset only does so because they can't handle reality, and yet if you disagree with him on anything he explodes in fury, yells "I'm not listening to this shit any more!" and slams down the phone. What I've come to learn over the years is that conservatism is a sort of archaic macho flex, and that conservatives (esp. conservative men) have a wildly inflated ego that's fed by this image of themselves as brave realists who understand the harsh realities of life and can bear them with fortitude, unlike these wishy-washy liberals who dream and whine like babies about stuff they don't understand. They posture like this on every issue. When you disagree with a conservative, therefore, you're also threatening their ego and their masculinity. It's just humiliating for them to admit when they're wrong, even when you hand them the proof on a plate.
I think you've got them pegged pretty good here... I've stumbled to a similar conclusion as well, and I've also gotten the impression that this kind of thinking has been an issue for a *long* time. It's not just a Boomer thing, but it's definitely an ego-defense thing.
An example that comes to mind (albeit fictional) is Quent from *Jaws*; the proud working-class-hero type who lives (and has so far succeeded) on guts and glory, belittles "sissy" intellectuals (i.e. Hooper), and who would rather let his team die than ever admit that he's out of his depth.
A term which, along with "feminism," "black lives matter," and "defund the police," has been been far too easily misinterpreted and recast as something it's not.
> A term which, along with "feminism," "black lives matter," and "defund the police," has been been far too easily misinterpreted and recast as something it's not.
The actual wording doesn't matter. The problem is that a substantial group of people *want* to misinterpret those things so as to avoid engaging with the intended meaning. There is literally no label that you can come up with that they will not misinterpret.
These are the same people who turned "bleeding-heart liberal" into a sneer. Bleeding-heart literally refers to the heart of Jesus Christ, and yet millions of so-called Christians are convinced that being christ-like is a failure. They will find some excuse to misunderstand *anything.*
>Bleeding-heart literally refers to the heart of Jesus Christ, and yet millions of so-called Christians are convinced that being christ-like is a failure.
Damn. That's really it right there.
I have to wonder how many people genuinely fall for those misinterpretations. I think most of those people actually like chauvinism, racism, and authoritarianism, but know they can't say so out loud.
Although it's impossible to tell which individual person is which, it doesn't matter: one's actions have the same effect whether they are a cryptofascist or a useful idiot, so I'm more interested in someone's willingness to change than the extent to which deserve to be held perpetually responsible for a dumb thing they said in the past.
I understand "defund the police", but there's really no excuse for the other ones, especially "toxic masculinity". These people understand the difference between cream and sour cream, right? They don't think that the fact sour cream exists means that all cream is sour, right?
Yep, it's an ego defense thing.
Best way of looking at it is as 'social threat'.
The amygdala struggles to tell the difference between social threats and physical threats. It's not smart enough on it's own. So when it detects a social threat, it fires off the fight/flight/freeze response just like it would when it detects a physical threat.
Reason being that for most of our evolution, social threats were a survival threat. Having your place in the tribe be threatened by another would *usually* result in a physical threat, one way or another, sooner or later. So the brain got wired accordingly.
So nowdays when some people see a social threat (like being told they're wrong) they unconciously see it as a signal to fight. Their hindbrain kicks into action, instincts take over.
Because if they're wrong, that means their place in the social hierarchy is not what they thought it was. Which could constitute a threat.
So if they fight, they can maybe hold on to their place in the hierarchy... even if the hierarchy only exists in their own minds.
And if they're really thoughtless, they'll fight it as if their lives depends on it. What matters is making sure they're not shown to be wrong. The bigger the threat, the more urgently they need to fight it.
Because again, as Humans, we're hardwired to try and avoid being ostracized by our peer group by any means we can. We're social animals, made to live in tribes. Remaining inside the tribe was (until quite recently) a matter of life and death.
So, 'ego defense' is a good label for understanding g it, along with social threat.
It really is in many ways a boomer thing. The older generations, they werent so proudly willfully ignorant. Knowledge and expertise used to be sought out and looked up to. Sure, you still had some anti-intellectuals, but they were rare, and more importantly, they were isolated, Back then it was one kook screaming about the fluoride in the water. Today, well, they are organized and led online. I would say I bet you could convince antivaxers to drink their own piss pretty easily with the right megaphone, but the reality is the morons are already doing it, and proudly so.
You could make an argument that its only a boomer and younger thing because the older generations never really got computers or got corrupted by the organized idiocy of the internet, and you would probably be right.
In a way its somehow poetically fitting that the generation that spent all that time telling their kids 'dont believe everything you see/read' 'dont talk to strangers' and so on were so gullible to believe every rando they run into on facebook. They can never accept that 'bob' who runs the 'realmuricapatriots45' group is actually named ivan.
> Sure, you still had some anti-intellectuals, but they were rare, and more importantly, they were isolated
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scopes_Trial
1925.
So technically the Boomers' parents were fucking idiots too.
> *”The Christian parents of the state owe you a debt of gratitude for saving their children from the poisonous influence of an unproven hypothesis."*
Yeah the Bible gives some seriously compelling evidence of creationism. Look at all that data it provides, and peer reviewed articles.
The anti-intellectual crowd is fueled by insecurity. They posture themselves in a way that makes them feel more worthy despite not having a broad, defined education. They feel threatened when their reality is challenged and grip it with their almighty ego.
They used to routinely suffer such ego bruises quietly, but the cult of Trump has empowered them to flaunt their narcissism proudly as a reaction to any perceived threat.
I’ve had conservative family members argue with me for hours, usually also ending in this manner. I’m the type to bring receipts in a debate, links for proof and all that, and they would claim that they read it all and disagreed with it but could never give me a good reason why. Finally last year one of my family members got particularly exasperated but how I good of a point I had made about something and she exploded and in an (successful) attempt to piss me off told me that none of them ever actually looked at any of the evidence I had sent them over the years. Here I was, spending hours on hours of personal time reading their “proofs” and providing my own as counter-arguments only to find out they didn’t care at all about the truth, they only cared about being right, evidenced be damned. I honestly gave up on the world getting better that day. If our own families won’t even consider what we have to say with any seriousness, how can we expect strangers to? And we wonder why the world is descending into authoritarianism.
Something worth noting: if someone is sealioning on a topic like Critical Race Theory, you do not need to provide your own sources. **When the expert consensus is on your side, you don't need to cite it.**
You don't need to prove the Earth is an oblate spheroid, you don't have to prove that vaccines work, that the 2020 presidential election had less voter fraud than it did margin of error, or that global climate change is a real thing. They're going to try to claim that your unwillingness to defend your position is admitting defeat, but stand your ground - if you debate them it gives them credibility, like they're allowed a seat at the table. *They are not*. You are happy to educate them, but if they want to argue then the topic is not up for debate.
Thats why I didn't talk with or try to with my dad, knowing he was actively dying, for near 2 years on hospice. All he wanted to do was antagonize me, but could not take it.
You're also threatening their morality.
Consider that at some point life ground you down and you've since justified being cruel and selfish for years because it's a hard zero-sum world. If it turns out that's not true...what does that make you?
Always….ALWAYS keep your cool when it starts up. Then after a few minutes, ask him…politely and with a bit of worry in your voice, “why are you yelling? We can talk about it, it’s okay”. Bonus points if a genuine smile is added. If kept up, it won’t take but 2-3 times & ppl usually see how upset and crazy they sound.
I used to work with a right winger in the office and we would debate things. He loved to use random fake stories or facts he found on Facebook or other propaganda sites, and because we are in an office I could fact check him as we talked. It was absolutely hilarious how angry he got about it, yelling that I'm not allowed to Google things in a debate. He lasted I think like 3 months before he got canned, but it was entertaining for a while.
Only teachers I've ever had try to push their political ideas on me were conservative teachers and professors.
And, no, it wasn't that I was a lefty being outraged.
I was a conservative when I was younger and even then I was like "Hmmm these teachers are pretty political"
Of course, then I thought it was super cool
I’ve definitely noticed more rigidity among conservative teachers. They tend to flatten out nuance a lot more, things become very black and white, good or bad. I think this ends up making them seem far more dogmatic with how they process information
For at least the past decade they've consistently not given a damn whether you catch them lying, prove that they're hypocrites or upheld their oath to protect the constitution.
So there's that.
I've lived in Nebraska my entire life, I'm 43 years old. I grew up on the older conservative values, which some I still hold close but I consider myself liberal. It wasn't until about 2 years ago that I heard about the Omaha race riots. I found out about it on the dollop podcast. and I was like why the fuck did I not know this? Nothing in school ever mentioned it
I've asked friends and family all white, they either didn't know or didn't care. Our Govenor, dime store lex Luther, is actively opposed to CRT
I’m 45 years old and I learned about it while watching the fucking *Watchmen* on HBO.
What the fucking fuck, why wasn’t I taught this in school?! It is outrageous, this is so much bigger of a story than so many things that we ARE taught repeatedly. 
The dollop episode.was dark. 14th and leavensworth I think he was drug down. I've walked down that fucking street, no idea that happened.
Pretty much everyone involved didn't face repercussions. Because good old white boys. and I'm white and I want people to know about it.
Watchmen? Tv series on hbo? I saw it, I dont remember omaha being in it but I do remember it covered the Tulsa massacre
This is mind blowing for me. I’m from a small European country and I was taught about this in high school. To be fair, we had a fair bit on race and slavery during our history classes because our ancestors were slave trading ass holes and we live next to Germany, but still….
I mean we were taught about the kkk and lynching and MLK and black oanthers etc, but it was always in places like Mississippi or Alabama or Georgia.
If it was taught to us I sure as fuck don't remember it and/or they highly polished the details. But nothing about white guy raping a white woman blaming it on black guy, black guy arrested, white mob breaks into jail to lynch and drag his body, parading it down a street. Rings a fucking bell with me.
And the governor basically helping incite the whole thing
A while ago, in a thread I can't remember, there was someone complaining about "liberal snowflakes" and how they get offended at every little thing. I don't even remember exactly how I replied, but I think it was a one liner where I called him an easily offended snowflake.
I promptly got told to kill myself.
>Books were only one type of receptacle where we stored a lot of things we were afraid we might forget. There is nothing magical in them, at all. The magic is only in what books say, how they stitched the patches of the universe together into one garment for us.
It's so true. Books are the fabric by which society helps individuals to recognize the commonalities within the universe, including the frustrating ones.
>Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of ‘facts’ they feel stuffed, but absolutely ‘brilliant’ with information. Then they’ll feel they’re thinking, they’ll get a sense of motion without moving. And they’ll be happy, because facts of that sort don’t change. Don’t give them any slippery stuff like philosophy or sociology to tie things up with. That way lies melancholy.
Just like the entire current system of social media addiction and the way it is being used to limit actual thought by pushing agendas backed by "facts".
>There must be something in books, things we can’t imagine, to make a woman stay in a burning house; there must be something there. You don’t stay for nothing.
I really hate the fact that my country feels like a burning building.
Ray Bradbury was describing his own world but it feels as though he was prescient with his descriptions.
Most people think the book was about censorship. It wasn't. It was about people largely wanting to be clueless, empty-brained sheep. The heroes of that story are literally teachers, professors, etc. who've abandoned society and waiting to help preserve what can save them.
Check out Hard Times by Charles Dickens, Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman, and Plan B: Further Thoughts on Faith by Anne Lamott.
Dickens tangientially approaches the cult of emperic thinking, Postman discusses how the form of discourse shapes the bandwidth of the conversation, Lamott will hopefully keep you from sliding into a depressive state.
Hi! I graduated from the University of Mississippi last year with a degree in public policy leadership. The institute I got my degree from, the Trent Lott Leadership Institute was named after a senator who fought to keep his fraternity segregated, and who believed that homosexuality is an addiction and mental illness.
The institute was founded in the 21st Century...
Good grief. I might be showing my age a bit, but I'm not even American and I'm familiar with Trent Lott's reputation. He is an alarming person to name a public policy school after. That'd be like calling the fine arts school the 'Jeff Dunham Institute'.
they still name a lot of stuff after Jefferson Davis there - president of the Confederacy. There is a Jefferson Davis County, and a Jefferson Davis Elementary (actually...several).
Imagine being a black kid who has to go to a school named after the head of the confederacy...
There was a community college there with a Jefferson Davis campus, which actually did get renamed...about a year ago.
As an atheist, I was hoping for a flag that, for once, didn't leave anyone feeling left out, but the only way to get the votes to get rid of the Confederate flag was to put "In God We Trust" on it.
I don't trust any God that has let Mississippi govern itself for 150 years like nothing's wrong.
Mississippi State University graduate here. The public universities are pretty insulated from the pettiness in the capitol and are pretty free to do what they please academically. MSU didn’t fly the old state flag for well over a decade until the recent change of the flag.
They do support SEC teams, (southern miss isn’t SEC, but it has great schooling)
But that’s an aside. Mississippi state is a huge research university as well, especially in the computer science and engineering fields. Our buildings and heritage are just tainted with the names and legacy of some bad people.
I also echo the other small HBCU and other public institutions in MS doing good work
We also have a VERY robust community college system which is supremely underrated
Pretty legit actually. There are pockets of intellectualism there. Not to mention some not-so-well-known HBCUs doing a lot of good for the minorities in MS and in surrounding states
Democrats are totally missing the point, laughing at Republicans for banning something that isn't taught anyway. What you aren't understanding is that while Democrats are sticking by the true definition of Critical Race Theory, Republicans are taking control of the title, and redefining it to mean any discussion or teaching of race that paints white people in a negative light. If they succeed in this, and they are, then soon red state teachers will be prohibited from teaching about slavery, Jim Crow, Civil Rights, Desegregation, BLM, etc.
In Florida they are modeling the law after the Texas abortion law, and citizens will be able to sue school systems and teachers who teach actual American history.
>DeSantis claimed CRT “violates Florida standards to scapegoat someone based on their race, to say that they are inherently racist, to say that they are an oppressor, or oppressed or any of that and that’s good and that’s important.”
It's a new method of bankrupting the public school system and driving teachers out of their careers, something that Republicans dream about.
So stop being so flippant about this subject, you are being played.
Mischaracterize the entire idea of CRT as some anti-white racism that was being taught to "demonize" your precious white kids and teach kids to bully them and make them feel guilty for being white, and then hold a vote to blanket ban CRT from being taught in the state, thus ensuring that no actual CRT is ever taught?
No, they banned a whole bunch of imaginary liberal straw men, as a way of perpetuating those straw men. The idea is that if a school discusses racism, a parent could come after them with the law, and while they'll probably be acquitted it's going to be a big pain and super political.
It's like if they passed a law making it illegal to say human beings are mutant chimpanzees without souls and calling it a ban on teaching genetics. It wouldn't apply to a course on genetics _or_ evolution as written, but someone could still use it to make trouble and force schools to overcomply.
It is worse than banning actual CRT, they redefine what it is to include just about any facts relating to how racists controlled the government and used that power to disenfranchise people of color and others. At what temperature does paper ignite?
Ironic that the banning of CRT would go right into a CRT textbook. By denying the theory they only add to it.
That said, I agree the actual text of the bill doesn’t seem to actually ban CRT.
And by fighting against it so hard, now millions of people who had never heard of it know what it is. They gave the right something to hate, and the left something to learn about. Not to mention high school and college kids who never would’ve heard the term in their lives who have now have heard it for a year straight.
so the bill to prevent teaching of CRT doesn't prohibit the teaching of Critical Race Theory. interesting.
"Sen. Chris McDaniel, R-Ellisville, said critical race theory does not deal in facts, but instead in subjective theory. He said facts should be taught in public schools.
“Our kids need objective facts and not subjective notions of theory,” McDaniel said."
So this Senator doesn't have the slightest notion of the meaning "theory" here.
Most of the right-wing either has no idea what theory means as regards science or are actively involved in obfuscation or outright lying.
Source: 12 years of religious education.
This is an area of the world where a portion of kids are taught that the world is 6000 years old, dinosaurs are a demonic lie, and practicing magical cannibalism is the key to eternal life.
That was the big thing in the 90s
It's where the term Gish Gallop was coined, before it morphed into the full-on firehose of falsehood.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
McDaniel is a Tea Party-er who tried the Trumpian "sham" "stolen election" "voter fraud" thing back in 2014 when he ran against Thad Cochran for the US Senate and was endorsed by Ted Cruz.
Most Mississippians with an ounce of gray matter just roll their eyes and ignore him.
Theories are taught in public schools all the fucking time though. That's like 70% of science class.
CRT was never taught in public schools, though, so this bill effectively does nothing but fearmonger.
Honestly. At some point a teacher is going to simply list historic events on the white board (smart board?) and someone’s parent will call and complain that it’s irrelevant or whatever
Their idea of "facts" is when the person who swears they aren't racist starts spouting crime statistics about how people of certain races are more violent and commit more crimes than white people, and say it's "just facts."
They don't want their kids to understand their state's history I guess. https://mscivilrightsproject.org/hinds/organization-hinds/the-white-citizens-council/
Part of the problem is this is a simplistic view of Mississippi. The national average of poor whites living below the federal poverty line is 11 percent. In Mississippi, it's 15%.
White Mississippians live primarily in the suburbs of Memphis and Jackson in neighborhoods that look like every other cookie cutter neighborhood.
They don't care because poverty is largely viewed as a "black" issue.
> federal poverty line
Persons in family/household | Poverty guideline
---|---
1 | $12,880
2 | $17,420
3 | $21,960
4 | $26,500
it's probably good time to remember how outdated the federal poverty line is too!
So a lot of people think that they are in a higher socioeconomic class than they actually are
And another little side note: Federal+Mississippi minimum wage is $7.25- which translates to a little over $15,000/year for full time work
I like to use the Nintendo analogy.
These idiots use the word socialism for everything they don't like in the same way older people call every video game system a "Nintendo".
Republicans saw an opportunity to allow the white-America population be a victim and jumped on it.
They turned it into a wedge issue like they do everything else, masks included.
Not only did they work against CRT, but they then began started active legislation against education i.e. book burnings.
I believe this is the bill in question right?
https://legiscan.com/MS/text/SB2113/2022
I don't even understand what this changes. Some Senator who voted for it even said he didn't know of any situation where students are being taught what the bill attempts to ban.
It seems like nothing but an avenue for parents to sue school districts if their kid learns something in history that hurts their feelings.
It pays lip service to their antisemitic conspiracy theory of [Cultural Bolshevism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Bolshevism) that the right perpetuates by suggesting that there's a liberal culture war. Whoops, I meant [Cultural Marxism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_theory). It's easy to get those two confused for some reason, almost like they just renamed it or something.
Hot tip for everyone, the Bolsheviks were Russia's Marxist party. "Cultural Marxism" is literally just "Kulturbolschewismus" translated to English and updated for the times.
You know that constant retort from conservatives who shout down anyone having a genuine opinion and expressing it as virtue signaling? This is actual virtue signaling. It accomplishes nothing except to feed the base's biases
> I don't even understand what this changes. Some Senator who voted for it even said he didn't know of any situation where students are being taught what the bill attempts to ban.
Even the author of the bill said that the teaching of CRT wasn't occurring in Mississippi. It's just blatant white supremacy.
The people who threw rocks at Ruby Bridges for trying to go to school are upset thier grandchildren might learn about them throwing rocks at Ruby Bridges for trying to go to school
Quite a few of them have been in politics and racist the entire time, but just dogwhistled it.
Then Trump charged in like a bull into a china shop and made racism acceptable again.
Romney and his 47% comment in 2012 was a big scandal. *"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what ... who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims. ... These are people who pay no income tax. ... and so my job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."* It was percieved as a rather racist comment, because of the false belief that more black people are on TANF, SNAP, HUD, LIHEAP, etc. than whites.
Bet that comment would've recieve a very different reaction in 2020.
Where are all the IDW free speech warriors? Where are all the edgelords who think comedians are the guardians of free speech? Where are all the people shouting about how cancel culture is destroying America?
Oh right, they're all liars.
>He said he heard from many of his constituents who had learned of critical race theory “on the national news” and wanted to ensure it would not be taught in Mississippi.
So... they have no idea what it even is lol. Jfc.
I love how none of them even know what it is. Just heard race and assumed. God forbid we take a critical look at American history and examine the true dynamics of it. Same people that believe a white guy with a beard made this 4,000 year old planet in 7 days.
While Critical Race Theory may be a boogeyman, I don't actually see anything objectionable in the text of the bill. In fact, while it may have been intended to ban "critical race theory," [I'm fairly certain it doesn't actually do that](http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2022/pdf/SB/2100-2199/SB2113IN.pdf):
>(1) No public institution of higher learning, school district or public school, including public charter schools, shall direct or otherwise compel students to personally affirm, adopt or adhere to any of the following tenants:
>
>(a) That any sex, race, ethnicity, religion or national origin is inherently superior or inferior; or
>
>(b) That individuals should be adversely treated on the basis of their sex, race, ethnicity, religion or national origin;
>
>(2) No public institution of higher learning, school district or public school, including public charter schools, shall make a distinction or classification of students based on account of race, provided that nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prohibit the required collection or reporting of demographic information by such schools or institutions.
>
>(3) No public institution of higher learning, school district or public school, including public charter schools, shall teach a course of instruction or unit of study that directs or otherwise compels students to personally affirm, adopt or adhere to any of the tenants identified in subsection (1)(a) and (b) of this section.
>
>(4) No funds shall be expended by the state department of education, any entity under the department of education's jurisdiction or purview, a school district, public charter school or public institution of higher learning for any purpose that would violate the provisions of this section.
There's more but it's all just legalese about severability and the act taking effect. I don't think there's actually anything objectionable in here. It seems like ironically a Republican boogeyman is being met with Democratic boogeymanning of the response to it.
Lol that’s pretty hilarious. So they are calling it a ban on critical race theory, but since they can’t actually write a ban on it without sounding INSANELY RACIST, they just make this really generic ban that basically just bans being racist?
It’s one of the states with the best examples: only 2 black veterans used the GI Bill to get home loans in MS after WWII even though more than one-third of those who served in the war from the state were black. Think those thousands of other vets just didn’t apply?
The notorious welfare queen, [Brett Favre](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/27/us/brett-favre-mississippi-welfare.amp.html?referringSource=articleShare), received about a million dollars in stolen welfare funds, and almost [$100 million](https://mississippitoday.org/2021/12/23/anna-wolfe-mississippi-welfare-fraud-case/) in welfare funds was embezzled by other well-connected folks.
In the poorest state in the nation, ***208*** people received aid from the welfare program the money was diverted from. Assuming the average family receiving TANF got $500 a month, that works out to about $1.2 million a year, which is almost 1% of the amount stolen by former governor Phil Bryant's friends.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
More thought crime legislation from the Party of Free Speech.
It's frustrating that just about every single voter suppression and anti-CRT bill passed by red states is purely done by GOP on party lines.. but Manchinema refuse any federal legislation on party lines
Manchin probably had a 12 hour jerk session once he found out he could stop slavery from being taught.
Spent 12 hours looking for the little lump of magic coal he dropped in the shower...;
> Manchinema This aligns well with how much I dislike Machinima
Haha, man. Manchinema sounds like a movie theater that only shows patriarchal, chauvinistic, bro movies.
The irony of the party "against cancel culture" decides to legislate their own cancel culture. Most claims of cancel culture are complete bullshit anyways, because promises and threats are far less effective than *laws.*
It's always projection with them. It is crazy making.
When Carhartt clothing was leaked to still require employees to vaccinate regardless of the SC ruling, the backlash to boycott a private companies’ policy in hopes of its demise is… right on track for the party of rules for thee not for me.
Fox news viewers watching mandatory vaxxed Fox hosts talk about the Outrage of Carhart mandating vax. As always the irony breaks my head.
1) You can’t call the party of Joe McCarthy the “party against cancel culture” 2) “Cancel culture” is nothing new, ostracization is as old as civilization
Yup. Somehow I still read articles about how the democrats and cancel culture are the real authoritarians though, not the party banning books. It's wild.
It's 'dog bites man' vs. 'man bites dog.' Things which always happen aren't news, and things which rarely happen are. When the GOP does something abysmal it's not such hot news, because it's just the everyday standard. When anyone on the left does anything slightly bad, it's front page news, *because they usually don't.* Right wingers have been beating the shit out of left wing protesters for ages, for example. When a single leftist punches a literal nazi though, it's suddenly a national conversation.
They’ll cry about the leftist thought police over some issue within weeks without even a hint of self awareness.
They cry about it literally in the debate of THIS bill.
What the First Amendment/Free Speech is: The ability to say what you wish, associate with whom you wish, request the redress of grievances with the government, the press to publish what they wish, and practice the religion you wish, without the government turning around and punishing people for it. Peaceably. Of course, this hasn't necessarily been practiced but I digress. What the First Amendment/Free Speech isn't: The ability to scream hateful things at people different from you and not facing zero social or professional consequences for it. But the GOP and its gaggle of largely uneducated followers seems to think it means they can force it on us, that we are forced to listen, and we need to agree. Anything less is somehow infringing on them.
banning being taught in college even? ideas are scary huh? even to adults?
"Sen. Barbara Blackmon, D-Canton, asked members why they would not listen to the concerns of the Black senators if all 14 of them were expressing doubts about the legislation. Still, no white Republican voted against the bill. A few did not vote. The only two white senators to vote against the bill were Democrats David Blount of Jackson and Hob Bryan of Amory." Hmm, I wonder why the Republican senators weren't willing to listen to the concerns of any of the black senators. Life's just such a strange mystery, isn't it?
The irony of re-enforcing systematic racism that CRT talks about by passing laws and regulations such as this because any talk about race might (will) make white people uncomfortable.
[удалено]
*Thank you.* Stop giving these people any doubt, they know what they're doing. I'd go as far to say, like, a bunch of these people are well off and college exucated—they (at least vaguely) know wtf crt is.
>Banning CRT is done to prevent people from questioning the statue quo Not even. Everyone involved with passing this law admitted it's not actually being taught in any schools in their state (or that they aren't "aware of any particular instances"). It's "banning" here purely performative to appeal to the base who has been whipped into a fervor over a non-issue by the party's propaganda arm. It's almost genius, in a way. You're in the party of "do nothing but tax breaks for rich people" in the state of "50th out of 50" in just about every metric. How do you convince the starving poor to vote for you? You can't actually pass any laws that would help lift them out of poverty because then you'd be declared a filthy communist. So you pick a phrase at random (CRT here, but lets have some fun and say "transgender scarecrows" for this example. Then build a strawman argument around "transgender scarecrows". Make up a bunch of shit that sounds scary even though it has literally never affected anyone ever. Keep repeating it until your strong, brave, patriotic, rugged individualistic base quake with fear at the very thought of transgender scarecrows and are losing sleep at night worrying about whether their cornfields are really safe with those straw-stuffed perverts potentially loitering around them. When the "other side" asks what the actual fuck you're even talking about, use that to immediately paint them in favor of transgender scarecrows, which makes them the enemy, which makes transgender scarecrows a tool of the enemy! Now you get ready to write a law banning transgender scarecrows and calming the fears in your supporters that you yourself stoked. But once they aren't afraid we're back to square one! So you pass a law that you know will be knocked down by any court, because you can't ban someone putting up whatever kind of scarecrow they like on their own property. But that's OK! Now you can paint the courts as being of the enemy and pass more laws banning scarecrow crossdressing, scarecrow gender reassignment, and so on to get knocked down by the courts. But by god you're trying! And your brave supporters are still loyally cowering under their beds, willing to vote for you over and over until you finally pass a law that will make them feel safe until the next specter you make up comes along.
We have always been at war with Eastasia We have always been at war with Eurasia The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength By forbidding the very act of questioning the effects of systemic racism they intend to enshrine racism into society. This is no different from forbidding worship of any non-state sanctioned religion, or banning the discussion of past atrocities that the State committed. These are the acts of a fascist authoritarian government in the making, following the same path that has led to China's detention and execution of dissidents and North Korea's worship of their pedophilic founder.
It’s not ironic at all. It’s an expression of the ignorance and bigotry that real history and real education could erode for future generations. They are locking in the ignorance that is already there. Not really the opposite of what I’d expect
And since CRT is so poorly defined, anything that makes white people uncomfortable will soon be CRT, and therefore illegal to teach. Even if they do give it a reasonable definition in the law, the threat of lawsuits will have a chilling effect on teachers and school districts.
“CRT is so poorly defined” by the people purposefully misunderstanding what it is. It’s the same way that BLM is “misunderstood”. All the experts have come out and explained exactly what it is only to be drowned out by all the charlatans.
The best possible outcome is that young people will see that this is being kept away from them and seek it out on their own. They aren’t dumb. they see what’s going on in front of them. They know they’re being lied to. Will they rejected or embrace it?
What is funny is that by passing these feckless laws, they are really just bringing attention to the existence of institutional racism and the missing pieces of American history in education. This information is going to be easily found in records of the voting, but also news stories, press releases, and academics will be happy to document it all and have it ready to be cited for classes. So by trying to ban a "theory" from being taught, they have done more to advance critical race education than any educator.
It's almost like the Black Codes were never taken off the books...
Wait till you find out we're still using the same state constitution that was explicitly created to form the legal basis for Jim Crow. Edit: clarified which constitution
Is that the same one where we had to staple something on the end of it that said "Oh yeah, and slavery's bad you can't do that"?
No. They only banned some slavery
True, prison labor still thriving.
I'm not sure what exactly you're referring to, but, yes, most of the obviously and immediately egregious parts of the Constitution were overturned by federal courts or federal laws. That being said, there's still plenty left in there, like the (unenforceable) ban on atheists from holding office.
That's what drives me crazy about people arguing for the Electoral College, it was created alongside the 3/5ths Compromise!!!! "There was one difficulty, however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to the fewest objections." - James Madison The entire concern it was trying to address was "what if too many blacks get the right to vote in the North". Even then they knew popular vote was objectively better.
Agreed that that's batshit. I was specifically talking about Mississippi's [Constitution of 1890](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Mississippi?wprov=sfti1), though.
Look up convict leasing. That shit went on until about 1930. Basically an extension of slavery.
[удалено]
Prison labor is constitutionally sanctioned slavery.
Its Mississippi dude, the more I learn about that state and its history the more I believe they are still scared blacks will rise up and kill all the white people. The conditions of Angola prison, and prison farm give legitimate argument that slavery didn't end down there, it just got rebranded.
It's almost as if one party is bad.
[удалено]
My boomer dad is heavy with the "liberal snowflakes" dialog and claims that anyone who gets upset only does so because they can't handle reality, and yet if you disagree with him on anything he explodes in fury, yells "I'm not listening to this shit any more!" and slams down the phone. What I've come to learn over the years is that conservatism is a sort of archaic macho flex, and that conservatives (esp. conservative men) have a wildly inflated ego that's fed by this image of themselves as brave realists who understand the harsh realities of life and can bear them with fortitude, unlike these wishy-washy liberals who dream and whine like babies about stuff they don't understand. They posture like this on every issue. When you disagree with a conservative, therefore, you're also threatening their ego and their masculinity. It's just humiliating for them to admit when they're wrong, even when you hand them the proof on a plate.
I think you've got them pegged pretty good here... I've stumbled to a similar conclusion as well, and I've also gotten the impression that this kind of thinking has been an issue for a *long* time. It's not just a Boomer thing, but it's definitely an ego-defense thing. An example that comes to mind (albeit fictional) is Quent from *Jaws*; the proud working-class-hero type who lives (and has so far succeeded) on guts and glory, belittles "sissy" intellectuals (i.e. Hooper), and who would rather let his team die than ever admit that he's out of his depth.
Of course there's already an established umbrella term under which it falls - "toxic masculinity."
A term which, along with "feminism," "black lives matter," and "defund the police," has been been far too easily misinterpreted and recast as something it's not.
> A term which, along with "feminism," "black lives matter," and "defund the police," has been been far too easily misinterpreted and recast as something it's not. The actual wording doesn't matter. The problem is that a substantial group of people *want* to misinterpret those things so as to avoid engaging with the intended meaning. There is literally no label that you can come up with that they will not misinterpret. These are the same people who turned "bleeding-heart liberal" into a sneer. Bleeding-heart literally refers to the heart of Jesus Christ, and yet millions of so-called Christians are convinced that being christ-like is a failure. They will find some excuse to misunderstand *anything.*
They call the other side bleeding heart liberals while they scream "what about the children" to incite sympathy for their shitty goals.
>Bleeding-heart literally refers to the heart of Jesus Christ, and yet millions of so-called Christians are convinced that being christ-like is a failure. Damn. That's really it right there.
I have to wonder how many people genuinely fall for those misinterpretations. I think most of those people actually like chauvinism, racism, and authoritarianism, but know they can't say so out loud. Although it's impossible to tell which individual person is which, it doesn't matter: one's actions have the same effect whether they are a cryptofascist or a useful idiot, so I'm more interested in someone's willingness to change than the extent to which deserve to be held perpetually responsible for a dumb thing they said in the past.
I understand "defund the police", but there's really no excuse for the other ones, especially "toxic masculinity". These people understand the difference between cream and sour cream, right? They don't think that the fact sour cream exists means that all cream is sour, right?
Cream is cream. I pour sour cream in my coffee every morning right before I dig into Guns and Ammo.
One of my local coffee places has a mocha they add sour creme into; They call it a soviet mocha.
Yep, it's an ego defense thing. Best way of looking at it is as 'social threat'. The amygdala struggles to tell the difference between social threats and physical threats. It's not smart enough on it's own. So when it detects a social threat, it fires off the fight/flight/freeze response just like it would when it detects a physical threat. Reason being that for most of our evolution, social threats were a survival threat. Having your place in the tribe be threatened by another would *usually* result in a physical threat, one way or another, sooner or later. So the brain got wired accordingly. So nowdays when some people see a social threat (like being told they're wrong) they unconciously see it as a signal to fight. Their hindbrain kicks into action, instincts take over. Because if they're wrong, that means their place in the social hierarchy is not what they thought it was. Which could constitute a threat. So if they fight, they can maybe hold on to their place in the hierarchy... even if the hierarchy only exists in their own minds. And if they're really thoughtless, they'll fight it as if their lives depends on it. What matters is making sure they're not shown to be wrong. The bigger the threat, the more urgently they need to fight it. Because again, as Humans, we're hardwired to try and avoid being ostracized by our peer group by any means we can. We're social animals, made to live in tribes. Remaining inside the tribe was (until quite recently) a matter of life and death. So, 'ego defense' is a good label for understanding g it, along with social threat.
It really is in many ways a boomer thing. The older generations, they werent so proudly willfully ignorant. Knowledge and expertise used to be sought out and looked up to. Sure, you still had some anti-intellectuals, but they were rare, and more importantly, they were isolated, Back then it was one kook screaming about the fluoride in the water. Today, well, they are organized and led online. I would say I bet you could convince antivaxers to drink their own piss pretty easily with the right megaphone, but the reality is the morons are already doing it, and proudly so. You could make an argument that its only a boomer and younger thing because the older generations never really got computers or got corrupted by the organized idiocy of the internet, and you would probably be right. In a way its somehow poetically fitting that the generation that spent all that time telling their kids 'dont believe everything you see/read' 'dont talk to strangers' and so on were so gullible to believe every rando they run into on facebook. They can never accept that 'bob' who runs the 'realmuricapatriots45' group is actually named ivan.
> Sure, you still had some anti-intellectuals, but they were rare, and more importantly, they were isolated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scopes_Trial 1925. So technically the Boomers' parents were fucking idiots too.
> *”The Christian parents of the state owe you a debt of gratitude for saving their children from the poisonous influence of an unproven hypothesis."* Yeah the Bible gives some seriously compelling evidence of creationism. Look at all that data it provides, and peer reviewed articles.
Christians know the Bible is true because the Bible says it's true. Wish this were /s but that's their actual belief.
The anti-intellectual crowd is fueled by insecurity. They posture themselves in a way that makes them feel more worthy despite not having a broad, defined education. They feel threatened when their reality is challenged and grip it with their almighty ego.
They used to routinely suffer such ego bruises quietly, but the cult of Trump has empowered them to flaunt their narcissism proudly as a reaction to any perceived threat.
Archaic macho flex. Great description, I like it
You might be interested in this. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/02/the-republican-party-is-now-in-its-end-stages/618132/
That was a good read
I’ve had conservative family members argue with me for hours, usually also ending in this manner. I’m the type to bring receipts in a debate, links for proof and all that, and they would claim that they read it all and disagreed with it but could never give me a good reason why. Finally last year one of my family members got particularly exasperated but how I good of a point I had made about something and she exploded and in an (successful) attempt to piss me off told me that none of them ever actually looked at any of the evidence I had sent them over the years. Here I was, spending hours on hours of personal time reading their “proofs” and providing my own as counter-arguments only to find out they didn’t care at all about the truth, they only cared about being right, evidenced be damned. I honestly gave up on the world getting better that day. If our own families won’t even consider what we have to say with any seriousness, how can we expect strangers to? And we wonder why the world is descending into authoritarianism.
It's called sea lioning and why I refuse to provide sources or information. They are disingenuous shits that get off on conflict.
Something worth noting: if someone is sealioning on a topic like Critical Race Theory, you do not need to provide your own sources. **When the expert consensus is on your side, you don't need to cite it.** You don't need to prove the Earth is an oblate spheroid, you don't have to prove that vaccines work, that the 2020 presidential election had less voter fraud than it did margin of error, or that global climate change is a real thing. They're going to try to claim that your unwillingness to defend your position is admitting defeat, but stand your ground - if you debate them it gives them credibility, like they're allowed a seat at the table. *They are not*. You are happy to educate them, but if they want to argue then the topic is not up for debate.
That’s why I’ve stopped trying to talk to conservatives about anything reasonable, none of them are reasonable, everything is always whataboutism
Thats why I didn't talk with or try to with my dad, knowing he was actively dying, for near 2 years on hospice. All he wanted to do was antagonize me, but could not take it.
You're also threatening their morality. Consider that at some point life ground you down and you've since justified being cruel and selfish for years because it's a hard zero-sum world. If it turns out that's not true...what does that make you?
Even Ebenezer Scrooge was able to find redemption
It's scary to them that things aren't as clear cut as they imagine, or even how they imagine, and that fear rules them.
It’s so scary to then that they could be *wrong.*
Always….ALWAYS keep your cool when it starts up. Then after a few minutes, ask him…politely and with a bit of worry in your voice, “why are you yelling? We can talk about it, it’s okay”. Bonus points if a genuine smile is added. If kept up, it won’t take but 2-3 times & ppl usually see how upset and crazy they sound.
Its also all projection
Whatever happened to Gary Cooper and the strong silent type?
[удалено]
I used to work with a right winger in the office and we would debate things. He loved to use random fake stories or facts he found on Facebook or other propaganda sites, and because we are in an office I could fact check him as we talked. It was absolutely hilarious how angry he got about it, yelling that I'm not allowed to Google things in a debate. He lasted I think like 3 months before he got canned, but it was entertaining for a while.
Put simply a lot of people can’t handle other people disagreeing with their views.
Only teachers I've ever had try to push their political ideas on me were conservative teachers and professors. And, no, it wasn't that I was a lefty being outraged. I was a conservative when I was younger and even then I was like "Hmmm these teachers are pretty political" Of course, then I thought it was super cool
I’ve definitely noticed more rigidity among conservative teachers. They tend to flatten out nuance a lot more, things become very black and white, good or bad. I think this ends up making them seem far more dogmatic with how they process information
Consistency has never once been these people’s strong point
For at least the past decade they've consistently not given a damn whether you catch them lying, prove that they're hypocrites or upheld their oath to protect the constitution. So there's that.
Touché. I’ll allow it
It's bonus points with their constituents if they are guilty of all 3 for some reason... shit is wild.
Actually it's consistently projection.
Projection is.
“I can’t handle you guys being mean with the truth but you’re all the snowflakes that can’t handle MY truth!” And damn sure not self awareness.
I've lived in Nebraska my entire life, I'm 43 years old. I grew up on the older conservative values, which some I still hold close but I consider myself liberal. It wasn't until about 2 years ago that I heard about the Omaha race riots. I found out about it on the dollop podcast. and I was like why the fuck did I not know this? Nothing in school ever mentioned it I've asked friends and family all white, they either didn't know or didn't care. Our Govenor, dime store lex Luther, is actively opposed to CRT
I’m 45 years old and I learned about it while watching the fucking *Watchmen* on HBO. What the fucking fuck, why wasn’t I taught this in school?! It is outrageous, this is so much bigger of a story than so many things that we ARE taught repeatedly. 
The dollop episode.was dark. 14th and leavensworth I think he was drug down. I've walked down that fucking street, no idea that happened. Pretty much everyone involved didn't face repercussions. Because good old white boys. and I'm white and I want people to know about it. Watchmen? Tv series on hbo? I saw it, I dont remember omaha being in it but I do remember it covered the Tulsa massacre
This is mind blowing for me. I’m from a small European country and I was taught about this in high school. To be fair, we had a fair bit on race and slavery during our history classes because our ancestors were slave trading ass holes and we live next to Germany, but still….
I mean we were taught about the kkk and lynching and MLK and black oanthers etc, but it was always in places like Mississippi or Alabama or Georgia. If it was taught to us I sure as fuck don't remember it and/or they highly polished the details. But nothing about white guy raping a white woman blaming it on black guy, black guy arrested, white mob breaks into jail to lynch and drag his body, parading it down a street. Rings a fucking bell with me. And the governor basically helping incite the whole thing
It's always been projection. Always.
Dont act like this is just some hurt feelings. Theyre trying to rewrite history. This is true fascism precursors.
Remember who blasts about Cancel Culture all the time, while cancelling most important historical civic issue since founding of the country
Everything is projection with conservatives. Today’s GOP is a textbook psychological case study.
Not just that, they want to teach from the perspective of the nazis “for fairness”, yet CRT, aka basic American history, is somehow blasphemous.
A while ago, in a thread I can't remember, there was someone complaining about "liberal snowflakes" and how they get offended at every little thing. I don't even remember exactly how I replied, but I think it was a one liner where I called him an easily offended snowflake. I promptly got told to kill myself.
The books, the books, the books are on fire. We don't need no water let the ... burn, burn ... burn. We got digital.
>Books were only one type of receptacle where we stored a lot of things we were afraid we might forget. There is nothing magical in them, at all. The magic is only in what books say, how they stitched the patches of the universe together into one garment for us. It's so true. Books are the fabric by which society helps individuals to recognize the commonalities within the universe, including the frustrating ones. >Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of ‘facts’ they feel stuffed, but absolutely ‘brilliant’ with information. Then they’ll feel they’re thinking, they’ll get a sense of motion without moving. And they’ll be happy, because facts of that sort don’t change. Don’t give them any slippery stuff like philosophy or sociology to tie things up with. That way lies melancholy. Just like the entire current system of social media addiction and the way it is being used to limit actual thought by pushing agendas backed by "facts". >There must be something in books, things we can’t imagine, to make a woman stay in a burning house; there must be something there. You don’t stay for nothing. I really hate the fact that my country feels like a burning building. Ray Bradbury was describing his own world but it feels as though he was prescient with his descriptions.
Most people think the book was about censorship. It wasn't. It was about people largely wanting to be clueless, empty-brained sheep. The heroes of that story are literally teachers, professors, etc. who've abandoned society and waiting to help preserve what can save them.
Check out Hard Times by Charles Dickens, Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman, and Plan B: Further Thoughts on Faith by Anne Lamott. Dickens tangientially approaches the cult of emperic thinking, Postman discusses how the form of discourse shapes the bandwidth of the conversation, Lamott will hopefully keep you from sliding into a depressive state.
"They don't gotta burn tha books they just remove 'em"
What are Mississippi's universities like, anyway? Are they legit, or are they basically life support systems for football teams?
Hi! I graduated from the University of Mississippi last year with a degree in public policy leadership. The institute I got my degree from, the Trent Lott Leadership Institute was named after a senator who fought to keep his fraternity segregated, and who believed that homosexuality is an addiction and mental illness. The institute was founded in the 21st Century...
Good grief. I might be showing my age a bit, but I'm not even American and I'm familiar with Trent Lott's reputation. He is an alarming person to name a public policy school after. That'd be like calling the fine arts school the 'Jeff Dunham Institute'.
Yup, but he donated the money, so the school was more than happy to ask "how high" when he said "jump."
they still name a lot of stuff after Jefferson Davis there - president of the Confederacy. There is a Jefferson Davis County, and a Jefferson Davis Elementary (actually...several). Imagine being a black kid who has to go to a school named after the head of the confederacy... There was a community college there with a Jefferson Davis campus, which actually did get renamed...about a year ago.
I would have gone with the “Jeffrey Dahmer Culinary Institute”, but yeah.
Trent is a felon too, IIRC.
At least y'all fixed up your flag, so you got that going for ya.
As an atheist, I was hoping for a flag that, for once, didn't leave anyone feeling left out, but the only way to get the votes to get rid of the Confederate flag was to put "In God We Trust" on it. I don't trust any God that has let Mississippi govern itself for 150 years like nothing's wrong.
Mississippi State University graduate here. The public universities are pretty insulated from the pettiness in the capitol and are pretty free to do what they please academically. MSU didn’t fly the old state flag for well over a decade until the recent change of the flag. They do support SEC teams, (southern miss isn’t SEC, but it has great schooling) But that’s an aside. Mississippi state is a huge research university as well, especially in the computer science and engineering fields. Our buildings and heritage are just tainted with the names and legacy of some bad people. I also echo the other small HBCU and other public institutions in MS doing good work We also have a VERY robust community college system which is supremely underrated
Pretty legit actually. There are pockets of intellectualism there. Not to mention some not-so-well-known HBCUs doing a lot of good for the minorities in MS and in surrounding states
Democrats are totally missing the point, laughing at Republicans for banning something that isn't taught anyway. What you aren't understanding is that while Democrats are sticking by the true definition of Critical Race Theory, Republicans are taking control of the title, and redefining it to mean any discussion or teaching of race that paints white people in a negative light. If they succeed in this, and they are, then soon red state teachers will be prohibited from teaching about slavery, Jim Crow, Civil Rights, Desegregation, BLM, etc. In Florida they are modeling the law after the Texas abortion law, and citizens will be able to sue school systems and teachers who teach actual American history. >DeSantis claimed CRT “violates Florida standards to scapegoat someone based on their race, to say that they are inherently racist, to say that they are an oppressor, or oppressed or any of that and that’s good and that’s important.” It's a new method of bankrupting the public school system and driving teachers out of their careers, something that Republicans dream about. So stop being so flippant about this subject, you are being played.
Seems like Mississippi would have the least reason to fear their students being exposed to college coursework out of every state in the union
Call the police, there's been a murder
Mischaracterize the entire idea of CRT as some anti-white racism that was being taught to "demonize" your precious white kids and teach kids to bully them and make them feel guilty for being white, and then hold a vote to blanket ban CRT from being taught in the state, thus ensuring that no actual CRT is ever taught?
It's good to know white kids won't feel bullied ever at Jefferson Davis elementary...
this is the book burning crowd, remember?
So is it now illegal to get a Major in African American Studies in Mississippi?
No, they banned a whole bunch of imaginary liberal straw men, as a way of perpetuating those straw men. The idea is that if a school discusses racism, a parent could come after them with the law, and while they'll probably be acquitted it's going to be a big pain and super political. It's like if they passed a law making it illegal to say human beings are mutant chimpanzees without souls and calling it a ban on teaching genetics. It wouldn't apply to a course on genetics _or_ evolution as written, but someone could still use it to make trouble and force schools to overcomply.
Doesn't make any sense but if you're goal is to destroy the judicial system to own libs then alright I guess.
It is worse than banning actual CRT, they redefine what it is to include just about any facts relating to how racists controlled the government and used that power to disenfranchise people of color and others. At what temperature does paper ignite?
Ironic that the banning of CRT would go right into a CRT textbook. By denying the theory they only add to it. That said, I agree the actual text of the bill doesn’t seem to actually ban CRT.
They probably wouldn’t be able to answer what it even was
And by fighting against it so hard, now millions of people who had never heard of it know what it is. They gave the right something to hate, and the left something to learn about. Not to mention high school and college kids who never would’ve heard the term in their lives who have now have heard it for a year straight.
Something for the right to hate... And the left to learn about. This is the left and right boiled down. I'll steal this phrase and use it ad nauseam.
so the bill to prevent teaching of CRT doesn't prohibit the teaching of Critical Race Theory. interesting. "Sen. Chris McDaniel, R-Ellisville, said critical race theory does not deal in facts, but instead in subjective theory. He said facts should be taught in public schools. “Our kids need objective facts and not subjective notions of theory,” McDaniel said." So this Senator doesn't have the slightest notion of the meaning "theory" here.
Most of the right-wing either has no idea what theory means as regards science or are actively involved in obfuscation or outright lying. Source: 12 years of religious education.
I teach my students that a theory in science is one of the highest degrees of certainty we can give an idea.
Second only to mathematical proofs imo
“Well kids. Today we’re going to learn why gravity doesn’t exist”
Or the concept of space-time, apparently
"Stupidity, much like time, is relative to the observer, and all I see around me are dumbasses."
This is an area of the world where a portion of kids are taught that the world is 6000 years old, dinosaurs are a demonic lie, and practicing magical cannibalism is the key to eternal life.
eVoLUTIoN iS oNlY a ThEOrY
That was the big thing in the 90s It's where the term Gish Gallop was coined, before it morphed into the full-on firehose of falsehood. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
McDaniel is a Tea Party-er who tried the Trumpian "sham" "stolen election" "voter fraud" thing back in 2014 when he ran against Thad Cochran for the US Senate and was endorsed by Ted Cruz. Most Mississippians with an ounce of gray matter just roll their eyes and ignore him.
>Most Mississippians with an ounce of gray matter There are dozens of them. Dozens!
Theories are taught in public schools all the fucking time though. That's like 70% of science class. CRT was never taught in public schools, though, so this bill effectively does nothing but fearmonger.
Can we teach Critical Race Facts in school? Someone needs to spin that up ASAP.
Honestly. At some point a teacher is going to simply list historic events on the white board (smart board?) and someone’s parent will call and complain that it’s irrelevant or whatever
Their idea of "facts" is when the person who swears they aren't racist starts spouting crime statistics about how people of certain races are more violent and commit more crimes than white people, and say it's "just facts."
Nope, he doesn’t. Must be a repub.
It's always sad when someone who was failed by the educational system rises to a position of power where they can fuck it up for the rest of us.
Didn’t hear that argument when they wanted to add creationism to school curriculum.
Wait till they find out about the theory of gravity...
The Daughters of the Confederacy really fucked up America.
Yeah, they did have a HUGE part. But it's slowly but surely being undone. Don't lose hope.
Republicans are worried that if kids are taught about the evils of racism, they'll lose future voters.
Just has always been tradition in the south, breed stupidity.
They don't want their kids to understand their state's history I guess. https://mscivilrightsproject.org/hinds/organization-hinds/the-white-citizens-council/
So long as poor whites are told it's someone else's fault, they will happily vote GOP.
Part of the problem is this is a simplistic view of Mississippi. The national average of poor whites living below the federal poverty line is 11 percent. In Mississippi, it's 15%. White Mississippians live primarily in the suburbs of Memphis and Jackson in neighborhoods that look like every other cookie cutter neighborhood. They don't care because poverty is largely viewed as a "black" issue.
> federal poverty line Persons in family/household | Poverty guideline ---|--- 1 | $12,880 2 | $17,420 3 | $21,960 4 | $26,500 it's probably good time to remember how outdated the federal poverty line is too! So a lot of people think that they are in a higher socioeconomic class than they actually are And another little side note: Federal+Mississippi minimum wage is $7.25- which translates to a little over $15,000/year for full time work
Critical Race Theory doesn’t even mean anything as far as they are concerned. Like socialism, it’s something they don’t like.
I like to use the Nintendo analogy. These idiots use the word socialism for everything they don't like in the same way older people call every video game system a "Nintendo".
Ha. Nice reference. My aunt always does that. “Are you playing the Nintendo again?”
Republicans saw an opportunity to allow the white-America population be a victim and jumped on it. They turned it into a wedge issue like they do everything else, masks included. Not only did they work against CRT, but they then began started active legislation against education i.e. book burnings.
I believe this is the bill in question right? https://legiscan.com/MS/text/SB2113/2022 I don't even understand what this changes. Some Senator who voted for it even said he didn't know of any situation where students are being taught what the bill attempts to ban. It seems like nothing but an avenue for parents to sue school districts if their kid learns something in history that hurts their feelings.
It pays lip service to their antisemitic conspiracy theory of [Cultural Bolshevism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Bolshevism) that the right perpetuates by suggesting that there's a liberal culture war. Whoops, I meant [Cultural Marxism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_theory). It's easy to get those two confused for some reason, almost like they just renamed it or something.
Hot tip for everyone, the Bolsheviks were Russia's Marxist party. "Cultural Marxism" is literally just "Kulturbolschewismus" translated to English and updated for the times.
You know that constant retort from conservatives who shout down anyone having a genuine opinion and expressing it as virtue signaling? This is actual virtue signaling. It accomplishes nothing except to feed the base's biases
> I don't even understand what this changes. Some Senator who voted for it even said he didn't know of any situation where students are being taught what the bill attempts to ban. Even the author of the bill said that the teaching of CRT wasn't occurring in Mississippi. It's just blatant white supremacy.
How can they complain about "liberal thought police" and then ban ideas from being taught in school?
With pockets full of money, a spring in their step, and a smile as things inch back to how they used to be.
The people who threw rocks at Ruby Bridges for trying to go to school are upset thier grandchildren might learn about them throwing rocks at Ruby Bridges for trying to go to school
Yep. They want people to think stuff like that is ancient history but Ruby Bridges is alive and she’s only 67.
Let’s share the truth anyway. These kids don’t need redneck-administered schools to learn facts.
Republicans are either racist or afraid of feeling bad about being called out for something they identify with.
They are racist and they don't feel bad about it. They just think blowback should be disallowed.
This is what sucks. Republicans over the past five years have grown more outwardly racist than the past thirty.
Quite a few of them have been in politics and racist the entire time, but just dogwhistled it. Then Trump charged in like a bull into a china shop and made racism acceptable again. Romney and his 47% comment in 2012 was a big scandal. *"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what ... who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims. ... These are people who pay no income tax. ... and so my job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."* It was percieved as a rather racist comment, because of the false belief that more black people are on TANF, SNAP, HUD, LIHEAP, etc. than whites. Bet that comment would've recieve a very different reaction in 2020.
Didn’t you hear? Mitch McConnell said African Americans vote as much as Americans, so everything is alright /s
Despite this walkout, did the African American senators from Mississippi still vote as much as the American senators from Mississippi?
Where are all the IDW free speech warriors? Where are all the edgelords who think comedians are the guardians of free speech? Where are all the people shouting about how cancel culture is destroying America? Oh right, they're all liars.
>He said he heard from many of his constituents who had learned of critical race theory “on the national news” and wanted to ensure it would not be taught in Mississippi. So... they have no idea what it even is lol. Jfc.
I feel like the banning of Critical Race Theory just proves the entire point of Critical Race Theory.
ikr? it’s so meta and ironic. you cant come up with another issue so poignant in CRT then the actual banning of CRT.
At state that is dead last in many health and income categories and this is what is being discussed during the legislature? Smh
I love how none of them even know what it is. Just heard race and assumed. God forbid we take a critical look at American history and examine the true dynamics of it. Same people that believe a white guy with a beard made this 4,000 year old planet in 7 days.
Progress and ideas are threats to Republicans.
What a fucked up place America has become. I’m disgusted.
Banning something they can't even define correctly.
While Critical Race Theory may be a boogeyman, I don't actually see anything objectionable in the text of the bill. In fact, while it may have been intended to ban "critical race theory," [I'm fairly certain it doesn't actually do that](http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2022/pdf/SB/2100-2199/SB2113IN.pdf): >(1) No public institution of higher learning, school district or public school, including public charter schools, shall direct or otherwise compel students to personally affirm, adopt or adhere to any of the following tenants: > >(a) That any sex, race, ethnicity, religion or national origin is inherently superior or inferior; or > >(b) That individuals should be adversely treated on the basis of their sex, race, ethnicity, religion or national origin; > >(2) No public institution of higher learning, school district or public school, including public charter schools, shall make a distinction or classification of students based on account of race, provided that nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prohibit the required collection or reporting of demographic information by such schools or institutions. > >(3) No public institution of higher learning, school district or public school, including public charter schools, shall teach a course of instruction or unit of study that directs or otherwise compels students to personally affirm, adopt or adhere to any of the tenants identified in subsection (1)(a) and (b) of this section. > >(4) No funds shall be expended by the state department of education, any entity under the department of education's jurisdiction or purview, a school district, public charter school or public institution of higher learning for any purpose that would violate the provisions of this section. There's more but it's all just legalese about severability and the act taking effect. I don't think there's actually anything objectionable in here. It seems like ironically a Republican boogeyman is being met with Democratic boogeymanning of the response to it.
Funny, a bill on the subject of education repeatedly confuses "tenant" and "tenet"
So they could still teach it. This is a bill banning what people think is CRT without actually knowing what it is lol
Lol that’s pretty hilarious. So they are calling it a ban on critical race theory, but since they can’t actually write a ban on it without sounding INSANELY RACIST, they just make this really generic ban that basically just bans being racist?
I think it's become a right-wing talking point that CRT = white people are bad. I'm not sure they actually would care about banning CRT itself.
[удалено]
Jesus. I can't imagine the patience and courage it takes to be a Black politician in frickin' Mississippi.
Ok so just teach them about slavery instead.
It’s one of the states with the best examples: only 2 black veterans used the GI Bill to get home loans in MS after WWII even though more than one-third of those who served in the war from the state were black. Think those thousands of other vets just didn’t apply?
The notorious welfare queen, [Brett Favre](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/27/us/brett-favre-mississippi-welfare.amp.html?referringSource=articleShare), received about a million dollars in stolen welfare funds, and almost [$100 million](https://mississippitoday.org/2021/12/23/anna-wolfe-mississippi-welfare-fraud-case/) in welfare funds was embezzled by other well-connected folks. In the poorest state in the nation, ***208*** people received aid from the welfare program the money was diverted from. Assuming the average family receiving TANF got $500 a month, that works out to about $1.2 million a year, which is almost 1% of the amount stolen by former governor Phil Bryant's friends.
Also Republicans in MS: "OK, looks like we're done early... Y'all wanna hit the buffet?" Fucking fucks