Have had some folks tell me my CRT thread is too snarky or condescending to "convince the other side." But what if that wasn't my point? What if I'm just pissed off at all the cynical bad faith tactics of the racist right? Why is our side held to such different expectations?
Them: CRT wants to put white people into jail if they can't define intersectionality.
Me: That's an absurd accusation
Them: *hours of demonstrable lies*
Me: soooo frustrating here's a sarcastic Twitter thread
Them: nay, sir; you must adhere to these lofty standards of discourse
Them: Critical Race Theory wants to turn Peoria into a gulag for whites
Me: OH COME ON
Them: No, really. That's what they told my kindergartener. FIRE THE TEACHERS
Me: JFC you people are delusional
The Discourse-Havers: Hey Kevin if you weren't so elitist maybe they'd listen
I mean Matt Bors nailed it a few years back:
All venting aside, I'm on my way to visit my excellent BIL @rocknuts42 and see some minor league baseball, so I'm keeping my vibe right
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So I'm at the airport, traveling for the first time in 16 months (when I was doing 2-3 trips a month pre-covid) and I am pleasantly surprised at the 100% mask-wearing rate. It's weird being back in this space, though, not gonna lie.
Welp, engine trouble and we're turning around back to Des Moines. Now this is the type of fun travel experience I remember. 😕
So. You don't think Critical Race Theory "should be taught in our schools" and want to ban it. Please answer the following questions or I will assume you're a clueless lemming who's angry because Tucker Goddamn Carlson told you CRT means you go to jail if you're white. /1
First question: describe Critical Legal Theory's arguments about systems vs. individuals when it comes to juridical harm and how those influenced the development of Critical Race Theory. /2
2nd question for all you CRT experts: which one of Derrick Bell's arguments do you disagree with, and why? /3
Strongly disagree with the way the @chronicle framed this headline. What "cost" her tenure was the Right-wing outrage machine and its hysterical refusal to even acknowledge racism exists. The Project itself won a Pulitzer, for crissakes.
I mean, here's the very next article in the newsletter, with one of the same co-authors! This is exactly what happened with UNC: the Board--packed full of right-wing zealots--was the entity that denied the tenure portion of NH-J's offer. Let's assign agency where it belongs!
Full disclosure: I write for the @chronicle (my editor probably wishes it was more regularly 🙂). I've worked with many of their reporters and editors, and every single one is an absolute pro. That's why I'm disappointed here-a bad hed choice undermines the good journalism within
I've now seen Matty Y, Calipers Sullivan, and Conor F. all weigh in on the UNC/Hannah-Jones issue and I swear to god these people are living breathing proof that white male mediocrity has way too much of a platform
I mean, Friedersdorf literally said, "I don't know if it was a political decision." Mind you, a member of the actual board said, and I quote, "politics" was the reason for the rejection of the tenure offer. For someone who treats higher ed like he does, this naive pose is a joke.
Literally two minutes of research would've kept ol' Conor from showing his ass on the internet, but he's so sure his glib assessment was correct because the case is about a Black woman, and he is a Thought Leader™ after all