Criminalizing freedom of speech and the petitioning for redress of grievances:
American parents are organizing to fight racist critical race theories being taught in their kids’ schools. Attorney General Merrick Garland, once touted as a moderate, has responded by asking the FBI to treat them as domestic terrorists.
As befits the Biden administration, this over-the-top authoritarianism is accompanied by the stench of corruption, as it turns out that Garland’s son-in-law is in the business of selling educational materials on CRT.
Garland’s self-dealing and thuggery are grounds for resignation. But that isn’t the worst thing that’s happened. Bad as it is, the Biden administration’s poisonous combination of graft and authoritarianism can be remedied by getting rid of the administration — something that, if polls are any indication, is eminently doable.
The bigger problem is that school boards all over America seem to be growing ever more authoritarian themselves. Instead of serving as bastions of small-scale representative democracy, boards seem to regard themselves as above accountability to the voters and parents.
It was, after all, the National School Boards Association that, citing shaky claims of “threats,” asked the administration to investigate anti-CRT parents as “domestic terrorists,” specifically invoking the Patriot Act in its letter.
That claim of “threats” is an old move. Some readers may remember a story from Brooklyn five years ago, in which a father was arrested after complaining to a teacher. The teacher had refused his son permission to go to the bathroom and kept the son sitting in his own excrement for hours. When the father, quite understandably, showed up to complain, the teacher told police she felt “threatened”; the father was arrested, charged and subjected to an order of protection.
The magic words “I feel threatened” are now used by bureaucrats to escape accountability for their own misbehavior. That’s what the NSBA has done, on a larger scale, in the face of widespread parental dissatisfaction with curricula that tell white and Asian students that they are inherently racist and black students that they are permanent victims.
The go-to response: How dare you criticize us, peasant!
Go here to read the rest. As the BLM riots last year, Antifa allowed to threaten people on the streets and the Covid response demonstrated, the governing elites in this country tend to be out of touch and apparently actively hate much of the population they purport to rule. This is a recipe for civil war and/or revolution. This planned move by the Puppetmasters’ Administration to bring the weight of the Federal Government against parents concerned about what their kids are being taught is a textbook example of authorities taking a bad situation and making it so much worse. Treat a population as if they are enemies to be brutally suppressed and eventually they are going to assume you are serious and act accordingly.
When Democrats say “our democracy“; They don’t actually mean democracy they mean “their oligarchy”.
The same when Democrats say “our constitution”; They are not referring to the actual constitution written by the people as a contract for their governance; they are referring to what they interpret for their benefit as overlords.
Jeremiah has it, I think:
“Thus says the Lord of hosts:
‘Behold, evil is going forth
from nation to nation,
and a great tempest is stirring
from the farthest parts of the earth!'”
I have a question, just WHY did Catholics immigrate to a decidedly Protestant United States and gripe about it in the 19th perhaps early 20th centuries when with precious few exceptions ALL of the Caribbean and Central as well as South America was thrown wide open as a red carpet where such individuals would have been as Europeans and Catholics at the APEX of those societies.
Another question I have is, what does the actions of an obviously physically abusive teacher ( who, i believe was in the wrong) have to do with teaching about injustice and feelings of isolation and or ostracism in social situations? These things, NOT CRT is what is being attempted to be presented in the grade school years.
I have a question, just WHY did Catholics immigrate to a decidedly Protestant United States and gripe about it in the 19th
A lot did immigrate to South America, see Argentina and Chile. Many Latin American governments had anti-Catholic regimes that did deter immigration to a degree. There was very little griping by immigrants to the US in the 19th century who almost entirely became rather ardent American patriots.
These things, NOT CRT is what is being attempted to be presented in the grade school years.
False:
The lesson plans, which I have obtained from the district, are even more divisive. In kindergarten, teachers ask students to compare their skin color with an arrangement of crayons and watch a video that dramatizes dead black children speaking to them from beyond the grave about the dangers of being killed by “racist police and state-sanctioned violence.” By fifth grade, students are taught that America has created a “school-to-grave pipeline” for black children and that, as adults, “one million Black people are locked in cages.”
https://www.city-journal.org/buffalo-public-schools-critical-race-theory-curriculum
https://www.city-journal.org/philadelphia-fifth-graders-forced-to-celebrate-black-communism
https://www.city-journal.org/identity-politics-in-cupertino-california-elementary-school
I have a question, just WHY did Catholics immigrate to a decidedly Protestant United States and gripe about it in the 19th perhaps early 20th centuries when with precious few exceptions ALL of the Caribbean and Central as well as South America was thrown wide open as a red carpet where such individuals would have been as Europeans and Catholics at the APEX of those societies.
A. Outside the Southern Cone, the standard of living was a great deal higher in the United States than it was in Latin America.
B. The legal system here was comparatively trustworthy. Take Mexico for an example. From 1821 to 1855 its government was in the hands of a long run of short-term caudillos, generally with a military / partisan background. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna had five separate stints in the President’s chair. There was an attempt to set up some sort of constitutional order during the period running from 1855 to 1876, punctuated by an occupation courtesy Napoleon III. Then you had the 35 year long porfiriato (which was at least orderly). Then you had a sanguinary civil war. It was only in 1920 that something resembling a political system was established, and that was punctuated by a vicious repression of the Mexican Church which was ongoing for 14 years. Note, from the early 19th century to about 1940, Mexico lost ground economically contra the United States. Only very slowly has it gained ground over the last 80 years.
C. Masonic lodges were quite consequential in hispanophone countries as late as 1940. Note, the gentry factional politics in Latin America in that era (“Liberal” v “Conservative”) pitted the Masonic lodges and the commercial sector against the Church, the military, and the landed interest.
have to do with teaching about injustice and feelings of isolation and or ostracism in social situations? These things, NOT CRT is what is being attempted to be presented in the grade school years.
Buy my bridge. And when your done, you might ask yourself why people have competing conceptions of justice, why you fancy discussion of normative questions is apposite for elementary school students supervised by public employees, and why anyone would actually pay to have a stranger discuss ‘feelings’ with their children.