Wrong. That is what Freire stated in Pedagogy of the Oppressed. That was then used to create Critical Theory, and then in turn Critical Legal Theory, and from there extended to Critical Race Theory. If you have alternate information and facts regarding the lineage of CRT and its development then by all means share them. I showed how it was thought up and created.
That was answered to. All education is political and indoctrination. That is the central tenant of the idea of Critical Pedagogy.
https://evolvingeducation.org/en/critical-pedagogy/One of the main founders of this practice is Paulo Freire, who defined “education can not be neutral, it is either an instrument of liberation or an instrument of domestication“. Education must liberate the individual through a conscious, understood and analyzed act.
https://educationjournal.web.illinoi.../view/1792.pdfCritical pedagogy, on the other hand, in its attention to social justice, the empowerment of disadvantaged groups, and the social and political context of learning...
This is an argument for separating groups into oppressed and oppressor, just as I stated.
http://www.cfmta.org/docs/essays/Mus...775b170961.pdfALL EDUCATION IS POLITICAL, TEACHING IS NEVER A NEUTRAL ACT
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf...e.2010.8.6.715
Giroux is one of the preeminent 'thinkers' on Critical Pedagogy.
Now that I've done exactly what you asked, I'm sure your defense will be that I didn't show those words precisely and exactly, even though the content of what I posted clearly shows that is the intent and understood purpose in a weak attempt to use a logical fallacy (trivial objections) without offering a single piece of counter evidence. But that is par for the course with you.
Except that isn't anywhere in Pedagogy of the Oppressed, so you are angry about something purely imaginary.
And you object to that, why?“education can not be neutral, it is either an instrument of liberation or an instrument of domestication“.
And you have a problem with this, why?Critical pedagogy, on the other hand, in its attention to social justice, the empowerment of disadvantaged groups, and the social and political context of learning...
Nothing in that pervious sentence indicates a division or separation of people into groups. Empowering a group that has previously been powerless is not separating anything or anyone, and you can't articulate how it does that.This is an argument for separating groups into oppressed and oppressor, just as I stated.
All you've argued against is education within context, because that context undermines the myth of exceptionalism that explains your complacency.
I asked you to articulate in your own words without plagiarizing, what you had a problem with and you couldn't even do that.Now that I've done exactly what you asked, I'm sure your defense will be that I didn't show those words precisely and exactly
When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist
Guno צְבִי (06-23-2021)
Guno צְבִי (06-23-2021), Taichiliberal (06-23-2021)
They hate CRT because they don't want to have to explain to their kids what grandma is doing in the background of this picture:
When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist
Guno צְבִי (06-23-2021), Taichiliberal (06-23-2021)
The rightys just do not want the fact that we are a racist nation, with systemic racism against minorities, being taught in school. That is who we were are and still are. We do not provide equal opportunities to minorities. Driving while black is a real problem. Redlining is a real problem. Financing schools via property taxes is a guarantee that poorer neighborhoods will have worse schools. Police mistreating minorities is a fact. There is discrimination in housing and jobs. Even Hollywood is feeling the pressure for their discriminatory system.
This is who we are. Hiding it from future generations is not how we move toward being the country we say we are. Have we finally given up? Have the white power types that populate the Republican party won?
We should not talk about Tulsa and Rosewood. It makes whites feel bad. We should not talk about lynching. We should not talk about a history of right-wing voter suppression against blacks. We should not even say they are still doing it.
Guno צְבִי (06-23-2021), Taichiliberal (06-23-2021)
That's a pretty amazing position considering you think yourself and all other Democrats either aren't or can't be racist. You want to talk about systemic racism yet think one of the two major political parties had nothing to do with it? Even our local paper and talk shows regularly talk about liberal racism in the state of California. But no, don't they know Nordberg said that doesn't exist? They're all lying. There's no racism in the Bay Area or California because almost everyone is a Democrat right Nordberg?
You might want to look in the mirror first.
Guno צְבִי (06-23-2021), zappasguitar (06-24-2021)
Guno צְבִי (06-23-2021), Phantasmal (06-23-2021)
Here's the leading academic talking about CRT on MSNBC with a very friendly show host:
https://www.msnbc.com/the-reidout/wa...w-115226693996
At 2:45 in the interview, Joy Reid asks Kimberle Crenshaw "Is Critical Race Theory Marxist?"
For the next two minutes, all the way to 4:44, Crenshaw gives a rambling answer that never touches on whether CRT is Marxist or not. She completely avoids the question.
Why is that you ask? Because she knows damn well it's Marxist.
https://www.blackagendareport.com/in...rxist-critiqueIntersectionality: A Marxist Critique
As Crenshaw herself readily admits, CRT is an offshoot of Critical Legal Theory / Study. This is utterly and completely Marxist in origin, and Crenshaw is a major advocate of it, not to mention contributor to the theory.
https://cyber.harvard.edu/bridge/Cri.../critical2.htmSome critical scholars adapt ideas drawn from Marxist and socialist theories to demonstrate how economic power relationships influence legal practices and consciousness. For others, the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....act_id=2633885This essay explores the relationship between the Critical Legal Studies movement and the Marxist tradition.
https://philpapers.org/rec/AKICLSCritical Legal Studies: A Marxist rejoinder
You can buy Crenshaw's book (or maybe get it at a library)
It too admits the Marxist origins of CRT in CLT.
Of course, the advocates of CRT know that admitting CRT is derived from Marxist origins is a kiss of death to getting it used in academia, and particularly in K - 12 where it is being pushed down. This is why they cannot and will not answer basic questions about it other than in rambling didactic answers full of obfuscation and red herrings.
Guno צְבִי (06-23-2021)
Bookmarks