15 Comments

1. But hey, now 18 year olds of all races can make a terrible financial decision.

   propogandaCar

   Reply

2. The treatment of blacks after WWII was horrifying to me because they were constantly neglected, segregated. When it came to providing resources for them after they served the country, they were denied.

   Reply

3. To serve a country that will not serve you is a tremendous thing. Black soldiers were fighting for a country that had consistently shown no respect toward them.

   Reply

4. Despite service frequently on the front lines in the worst equipped units this side of no man’s land during the Second World War, many black veterans were denied their benefits afforded to them by the GI Bill.

   Reply

5. While the G.I. Bill offered unprecedented opportunities for many veterans, African American veterans often faced systemic barriers that limited their ability to fully benefit from these provisions. Discriminatory practices in the administration of the bill, particularly at the local level, and segregationist policies prevalent in housing and education, meant that black veterans frequently encountered obstacles when trying to access education or purchase homes.

   Reply

6. Many Black soldiers, after returning from the war, were denied loans because of their race.

   Reply

7. The arguments for critical race theory far outweigh the arguments against teaching it. I’ve learned so much in this class that I was completely unaware of in the past, and it has only given me a greater appreciation for the resilience of African Americans. These topics are so important, yet in Florida and other places, a class like this wouldn’t exist

   Reply

8. I discussed the GI Bill in Professor Cedric Johnson’s class last semester, and how oftentimes, it is used to excuse the actions of the United States due to their alleged support. However, barely any black veterans were able to get their promised financial support following the war.

   Reply

9. I remember hearing a comment like this on a random video on social media. About how black banks tend to not give out loans to black people. I was quite surprised about this. I was always led to assume it was a majority of banks that did this, regardless of the race of the people distributing loans. Critical Race Theory teaches this side of history that needs to be taught and I only see it portrayed negatively in predominantly red states.

   Reply

10. Like others have said, I don’t see an issue with teaching critical race theory. Obviously, kids not need to learn about lynchings, such as Claude Neal’s, but I’m not sure what school district in their right mind would even consider making that part of the curriculum. I have said it in a previous comment and will say it again. There is a way to teach history accurately while making sure that it’s remains age-appropriate. There is nothing wrong with representing the ways in which blacks were banned from actively participating in society, even after the Civil War. As a white person, I don’t feel that anything in this course has “taught me to hate myself” and I think it’s laughable the way some people believe that.

    Reply

    • we recently had an example of this (kind of) in my 356. a male student is protesting that the class is all about “the evils that men do,” and he feels personally under attack. I have tried to explain that I recognize my male privilege everyday but as long as I do my best not to promote misogyny, sexism, etc., I do not feel the class teaches me to “hate myself.”

      Reply

11. It has been on record that the entire CRT conservative fervor was pure propaganda crafted by Christopher Rufo. I can’t find their tweets right now but they bragged about how they were able to sedate millions of overtly-racist Americans to freak out about CRT, a graduate level area of study. Now it’s a common buzzword used in political campaigning. Here’s a piece exploring this pseudo-problem:

    https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conservative-activist-invented-the-conflict-over-critical-race-theory

    They do this all the time: making simple words like communist (as in “community”, sharing in caring) seem like the “real fascists” — the people on this can’t even explain either terms! Or, CRT being the “real racists”. What even is the political correctness fervor? It would be funny, if it wasn’t propagating negative peace (read MLK on negative peace).

    Reply

12. Dad jokes aside, I don’t really understand the opponents of critical race theory. I think they are taking calls for reform and educating students about historical inequalities in order to prevent history from repeating itself, a little too personally. A lot of people have this blind spot where they believe that the criticisms of social institutions are directly correlated to criticizing them and that is a problem when individuals can not separate themselves from the social institutions that govern them. By following institutions blindly and taking any critique of the institution as a critique against themselves, no change can ever be made and history consistently repeats itself. However, history has always promoted the wants of those in power, and maybe this is their way of keeping their power. Of course, I acknowledge that no shift toward educative reform nor educative policies are perfect, there are still kinks that need to be worked out, but embracing the changing discourse is the best way to create a more equitable society.

    Reply

13. To me , the argument about critical race theory is almost laughable if it wasnt so dangerously close to states becoming disseminators of authoritarianism (in lil pieces.) Teaching accurate history with contextualization outside of the white lens is not a bad thing, people just think it will ‘harm white children’…..to learn how their grandpappy was acting historically…. As a Tennessean, race isnt a thing in school that is talked about freely, not without light treading and making sure you dont upset a white person (and i am unfortunately so serious), so for the call to “stop teaching critical race theory” to emerge is embarrassing. History, especially black and even other non-white history is not an option to be taught. They taught us more thoroughly about the lineage of greek gods (in a literal textbook) before they even broached the topic of slavery and civil rights. If it wasnt for my super pro-black mom making me do outside readings, the functional knowledge I’d have of “CRT” is: slavery..kinda happened, but then everyone was a sharecropper and they lived in peaceful harmony, then Martin Luther King appeared with a dream that we can live in harmony, the end! That is the summation of my learned history until A.P. Government and A.P. U.S history my junior and senior year of highschool, which still was centered on the white perspective- i just had teachers who refused to let us have a one-sided truth, and sometimes they were punished for that. To limit the already extremely narrow and skewed discussion of race relations, honest U.S. history, and our colonial past (shit, our recent colonial past) is I think what W.E.B DuBois said when he mentioned that integrated schools will intentionally make our kids lackluster critical thinkers.

    Reply

14. I don’t understand the argument against critical race theory and against teaching it.

    https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2021/07/02/why-are-states-banning-critical-race-theory/ is a great article that explains the recent discourse that surrounds the teaching of CRT, but it still doesn’t make sense as to why it is avoided in schools or universities. While I acknowledge that these topics can be complex, there is still plenty of ways to integrate information that details both the good and the bad of the history of the nation. It’s important to acknowledge the full picture when learning about the tradition and history of the U.S. because most of the advances created in civil liberties and civil rights came from a long battle with the legacy of racism that exists in this nation. Also yes, solid joke there, Lyles.

    Reply