Florida Anti-CRT law full of ambiguity?

1. 81

   Credence2posted 2 years ago

   And, yes, as you see by my copy, I have read the bill. This is stirring up a lot of dismay among educators and yours truly as an occasional sub in the Social Sciences area for county's public school system.
   ..........
   (f) An individual should not be made to feel discomfort,
   298 guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on
   299 account of his or her race.
   
   
   300
   301 Instructional personnel may facilitate discussions and use
   302 curricula to address, in an age-appropriate manner, the topics
   303 of sexism, slavery, racial oppression, racial segregation, and
   304 racial discrimination, including topics relating to the
   305 enactment and enforcement of laws resulting in sexism, racial
   306 oppression, racial segregation, and racial discrimination.
   307 However, classroom instruction and curriculum may not be used to
   308 indoctrinate or persuade students to a particular point of view
   309 inconsistent with the principles of this subsection or state
   310 academic standards.
   ----------
   
   I have heard complaints by whites(Karen motherly types) about virtually anything that touches on the topic. What does "not inculcating guilt, discomfort and anguish or any other form of psychological stress on account of his or her race" supposed to mean?
   
   Discussing even general tenets and events of the American past, slavery and the civil war, Jim Crow and the Civil Rights Movement and what was actually behind them could be brought up as violating 298 and 299, and has been by reported as such by parents, that just as soon not have their children be exposed to the reality of racism as part of America's past.  Mentioning these unpleasant aspects of American history could be "traumatizing" for the white school children. So, pressure is being put on educators to avoid the topic in its entirety or whitewash and airbrush it to the extent that it has no real significance or meaning.
   
   The truth, by its very nature, can be painful. Denying it will not bring us any closer to national harmony, but keep old wounds open as to why white fragility regarding these issues should be accommodated. I live in Florida and this nutty stuff is all around me, it has never been an issue in progressive states, like California, Hawaii and Colorado, where I have lived. The red tint here is the biggest negative I have about life in Florida.
   
   Another Jedi mind trick from the Right to simply silence the discussion rather than deal with the truth. But, many of us are not weak minded fools and can see through the ploy.
   
   Sorry, folks, just venting......

   replyreport
   1. 86

      Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      "Another Jedi mind trick from the Right to simply silence the discussion rather than deal with the truth."
      
      I think the problem starts with misinformation, most are just not knowledgeable in regards to what CRT is or what an actual curriculum would present in schools.  For instance, what grade is a good grade to present CRT  in our schools? 
      
      It's up to individual school broads to present a school's curriculum. It would seem they need to encourage parents to come to meetings and ask questions about CRT if they want to add it to the curriculum, perhaps work with the parents to iron out their concerns. It would seem a suitable curriculum could be agreed on. Our history is our history, none should be hidden or soft-pedaled. However,  we need to present this history at an appropriate age where it can be understood in its vast complexity.
      
      I hope more will join into this conversation, it is a very important subject, that needs to be discussed.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

         Thanks for your comment.
         
         From what I understand the actual concept of CRT should be available only at the college level. I not even talking about CRT, but the tendency for conservative politicians to associate the concept with any discussion on the topic of race and American History.
         
         I get upset when parents want to ban books from authors that critically examine the subject, as if they were pornography.
         
         CRT in its practice is far more involved. For an example, one parent got upset when the classic photo of the black girls in Alabama being assaulted by firehoses during the height of the Civil Rights Movement was displayed as part of a middle school curriculum. That is not CRT. If you can't deal with the facts behind the Montgomery bus boycott or sit-ins than you are saying I don't want the topic discussed in any meaningful way, period.
         
         We should be able to deal with the issue factually and honestly and in an age appropriate manner without whitewashing the events that actual occurred.

         replyreport
         1. 85

            tsmogposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            That is the way I understand it as well that the CRT concept and theory is taught at a university level. I agree with you history is history and it is evident what black history is. How can you get around it? From what I have gathered it seems somewhat to be an issue with individual teachers pushing a perspective at the personal level then that is seen as being an all are doing it view".
            
            To me it seems that is what these laws aim at by holding teachers accountable. I have not heard any beefs about the text books themselves or the actual curriculum the school system put forward. I am open to correction. However, I have not dug deep into it too. I did look at Calif briefly and like how they are covering race/ethnic history and what grade levels they are introduced.
            
            Some links of interest. I have only skimmed stopping here and there to read more closer.
            
            California School Board Association on CRT in schools K-12 (July 2021)
            https://www.csba.org/-/media/CSBA/Files … a45ff136a9
            
            California Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Guidelines by California Department of Education
            https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cr/cf/ethnicguidelines.asp

            replyreport
            1. 81

               Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

               Tsmog, thanks for the links and your checking into this. The people and educators of California have not been the problem. California programs are reasonable.
               
               Educators in red states like Texas, Tennessee and Georgia, and look at Virginia, the GOP candidate for governor won by stirring the pot on this issue. This certainly paints a different picture. We got a governor here in Florida that is a problem in regards to the issue.
               
               People have been heard to say that Black History Month in itself is an example of CRT.
               
               If there are not explicit boundaries as to how the less flattering aspects of American History is taught in regards to those that are not Anglo, it results in a intimidation where the subject is more easily avoided in its entirety. That is the intent of the rightwing conservative who wants to downplay the nation's horrendous past to make it easier to turn a deaf ear regarding grievances of the present.
               
               Books that focus on race related experiences are being banned from school libraries, labeled CRT.
               
               The conservative groups figure if they can shoot the messenger, the message will disappear and we can all return to "Ward Cleaver" world that so many of them pine for so much.
               
               CRT is an adult concept, not meant to denigrate individuals although school children may see it that way and that is not my intent. We can avoid the more controversial ideas presented by CRT of inherent racism of individuals as part of this society. However, contrary to the diatribe of Conservatives, racism here is systemic. Any serious study of the history must lead one to that conclusion. The opponents are speaking of aberrations, bad people, while extolling the American creed of the equality of men. They would much rather teach that George Washington never told a lie, despite the fact that he owned over 200 slaves. The ideals, if even I can identify those, when compared with the reality has never truly been lived up to by this society and most of its institutions for much of the nation's history. That truth can and should be taught to those in public schools, in an age appropriate manner.
               
               It is funny that no one asks how Black parents feel about this controversy, well, they are with me in acknowledging that the truth is not about making the hearer comfortable.

               replyreport
   2. 58

      Live to Learnposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I think what you label as Karens are people who don’t want to live by Old Testament standards. Holding descendants responsible, through the seventh generation, for sins of others.  I, frankly, agree with that.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

         We are not talking about "being held responsible", we are talking about an accurate rendition of history, it has nothing to do with Old Testament, New Testament or anything else.
         
         I want the truth about this issue taught in the classroom, it does not get any simpler than that....
         
         In other words, don't lie or whitewash!!

         replyreport
         1. 88

            wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Should we teach all the history of slavery?  How many kids learn about black slave owners?  About African villages selling slaves to the slave ships?  About American Indians, as well as other native western cultures, keeping slaves?  Should we teach them that nearly every land on earth has supported slavery at some point?
            
            Or should we only teach them that white people owned slaves and are all horrible people as a result of past transgressions?

            replyreport
            1. 81

               Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

               This is American History, Wilderness. black slave owners did not amount to one percent of the total. Do we acknowledge this or do what you usual do, exaggerate and take the issue out of context? So we are silly enough to take the 1 out of a thousand and equate that with the other 999, as if everyone should share equal guilt for the institution? Where do you thiink that preponderance of the responsibility for the institution in America lies?
               
               America and Anglo America is the predominant in guilt in the history in this matter, stop equivocating... what does it take to get you to stop dancing around things?
               
               Yes, teach them about slavery's universal history but let's emphasize that the circumstances relating to blacks in America is due to the greed and avarice/economic exploitation by the nation that had in its creed that
               "All men are equal under the law" and that "all men are entitled to the pursuit of life, liberty and property". African slavers did not practice the brutal American version of the institution, how did Africa have anything to do with Jim Crow that followed after?
               
               We teach the truth and Anglo America is primarily responsible for slavery, the exploitation afterward and systemic racism at its foundation so whitewashing will not redeem this reality of American history nor those that continue to downplay this issue. How much evidence do you need?  I know better and so should you.
               
               You right wing types can continue to try to shoot the messenger, but the message remains, all the same. And there is no averting from it.
               
               With this line of reasoning, once again your "slip" is showing.

               replyreport
               1. 88

                  wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  I assume - conclude - that your answer is "No".
                  
                  I would disagree.  Rather than make a major point of the fact that it was largely Caucasians that practiced slavery I would like to see children taught that it is every race that has done so.  No race is clean from that standpoint.
                  
                  By doing so no race is singled out as being evil (which is true) and the point is made that we all need to watch for it, and evils it brings, rather than just watch and blame any Caucasian for what happened years ago.
                  
                  Your "slip" is showing by refusing to even discuss the evils of slavery by anyone not Caucasian.

                  replyreport
                  1. 81

                     Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                     I am still trying to understand the "beef" conservatives have regarding this topic.
                     
                     But, in regards to Black American History, the fact that for around 90 years after the founding of the Republic, Anglos were the enslavers is the MAJOR point.  How do you make an omelet without eggs? You can't speak on the subject without talking about slavery and its effects on African American society. Yes, Anglos WERE the villains, from a legal/institutional, Social, political and economic standpoint. That is history. That horrendous experience combined with the savagery of the aftermath has residual effects that reach well into the current period.
                     
                     Now, Conservatives want to burn relatively innocuous books from minority/ black authors like Toni Morrison who discusses the subject from the standpoint of a great writer. They want to label BlAck History Month as intimidating and part and parcel of CRT, ridiculous, yes?
                     
                     The discussion automatically gets conservatives upset as if they are being blamed for something. There is no mild way of speaking about a church bomb that killed 4 little girls during the height of the Civil Rights Era and who and what was responsible and how the state legal (Alabama) system failed to get arrest warrants on the perpetrators until the late 1970s. Do we say that it never happened, do we disneyfy it?
                     
                     Pearl Harbor and 1941 happened, we all villanized the Japanese at the time, there can be no denying that. Japanese school children were still subject to attacks while I was in grade school.
                     
                     From the standpoint of Blacks, resistance to white racism and the pursuit of equal rights has been the predominant struggle of our lives here and consequently a considerable part of our history. How can you possibly minimize that?
                     
                     I can't help the fact that the relevant history disturbed so many of you and makes people uncomfortable but the facts remain inviolate and cannot be changed and the attempt to muzzle its existence is futile. I can't be concerned about putting "comfort" before the truth.
                     
                     You did not even attempt to rationalize the Jim Crow and the legalized terror against blacks for a century after emancipation. So, these issues go far beyond just slavery.
                     
                     You are not being villianized as I resist the idea of the CRT or otherwise regarding inherent racism of white people as individuals, but history does not lie as to a concerted effort from all aspects of American Society to oppress African American people for a considerable period of time over several generations, and that cannot be treated as a mere footnote.

                     replyreport
                     1. 88

                        wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                        "I am still trying to understand the "beef" conservatives have regarding this topic."
                        
                        Consider if schools everywhere taught that black people were bad, were evil, were all (and I mean "all") doing bad things to other people.  Would you appreciate that, would you approve of it, would you applaud it?
                        
                        Because that is exactly what CRT is teaching; that all white people are evil and still discriminating, that all white people need to be ashamed of their color and themselves because they are evil and doing bad things to other people.
                        
                        It may be couched in other terms, the words used are not so bold or outspoken, but that is the message being taught.

                        replyreport
                     2. 88

                        wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                        You may resist the idea of the CRT teaching inherent racism of white people, but those pushing for it do not.  It is "your people" that insist anyone with light skin is guilty of racism and discrimination, but only by whites and by all whites, today.  Indeed, it is 'your people" that are exclaiming that it is impossible to discriminate against a Caucasian no matter what is done to them!
                        
                        But why do you resist teaching all of the history of slavery?  Why insist we only teach US history, and leave out slavery by anyone not Caucasian to boot?  Why insist that we only teach that white people kept or sold slaves, knowing it isn't true?  Why do you only want to demonize whites, never mentioning that blacks (and other races) were also involved even in US slavery, let alone the rest of the world?
                        
                        Why not teach the whole sordid package, world wide, and teach that it is all skin colors that should watch for, and vehemently deny, any such opportunity again?  What is the reason for leaving out half the story?

                        replyreport
                        1. 81

                           Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                           American History is a specific topic. Black History is a sub topic to that.  World History is another topic. You can have your story expressed in World History, there you can talk about the slavery of the ancient Greeks and Romans and so on.
                           
                           But Black American History is focused, does not the very title indicate that?
                           
                           Conservatives have been trying to have any studies of Black History equivalent to CRT and that is a diabolical lie.
                           
                           CRT is not taught at the grade school level. Blacks were involved in US slavery only as the victims. To say that 1 out of a thousand blacks or Indigenous people, when compared with the other 999, had slaves is not involvement.
                           
                           You are basically saying that any discussion of Black History and offering of literature on the subject is CRT.
                           
                           That is dead in the water as I suspect the ambiguity of these laws being passed will create a cauldron that I will patiently wait to boil over and we will have the courts get involved. Not in Idaho, of course.
                           
                           I asked you before, why the focus on just slavery? What about the legalized segregation laws and structural institutional racism that came after slavery that has been as American as apple pie, how do we internationalize that?
                           
                           I wish that "your people" forebears would have been as concerned about the terror they inflicted at the time as much as you are so concerned about muzzling those facts today.
                           
                           Based on the link below, it appears that your forebears do not deserve any reprieve in this matter.
                           
                           https://socratic.org/questions/how-was- … an-america

                           replyreport