What's most ironic about white folks criticizing antiracist history teaching for "making white students feel bad" is this: if we, as white folks, had picked BETTER white role models for our kids -- not enslavers but abolitionists -- this wouldn't have been an issue (1)...
If we had held up John Fee and Ellsberry Ambrose and the Grimke sisters, over the founders and other apologists for slavery -- thereby debunking the "they were just men of their day" excuse -- our kids would never feel shame bc they would know they could be antiracists (2)...
If we had held up antiracist white allies as examples of a different way to live in this skin, we'd never worry about white kids coming to think they were "inherently oppressive," bc they would know they had a choice, and have examples of what that choice looks like (3)...
But no, we didn't hold up those real s/heroes bc to do that wold require us to be honest about the evils they were so brave in challenging, and THAT would implicate too many of our ancestors, too many of US...so we buried the names of those white antiracists...(4)...
Not just those above but Lydia Marie Child, Jeremiah Evarts, Virginia Foster Durr, Bob and Dottie Zellner, J Waties Waring, Anne and Carl Braden, Will Campbell, Joan Trumpauer Mulholland, and many others...most don't know these names (5)...
As such, the only white folks we see are those who did, in fact, oppress, and enslave and go along with segregation, silently if not actively...and we wonder why our kids feel bad? It's because we CHOSE to not tell them the truth. There have always been whites who said no (6)...
Not enough, to be sure, but some...and if we taught about them too, alongside the brave Black & brown folk who have always led the struggle for justice, no white child would have to "feel bad." They could feel empowered. The fact we don't give them that tells us something (7)...
...and what it tells us is that some people are more committed to maintaining existing power structures -- and the narratives that uphold them -- than they are to education and justice and equity.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Those attacking Critical Race Theory want us to get bogged down explaining why they don't understand CRT, or what CRT really is. Don't fall for it. Flip the frame. By their own admission, they seek to lump all discussion of racism, past or present, under the CRT label...
THREAD
...Bc they don't want any analysis of racism as a historic or contemporary force in the U.S. This is why even books like To Kill a Mockingbird are coming under attack, and books looking at segregation are being called "divisive" because they cast whites in a 'bad' light (2)...
Rather than spend time trying to explain what CRT is, expose their real agenda: canceling truth about history and its lingering effects. Censorship. Book banning. And as I said in an earlier thread directed at one of their main attack dogs, their approach would cancel MLK...(3)
Hey @realchrisrufo. Serious Q: anti CRT legislation seeks to ban teaching that could "promote division" or cause discomfort for a racial group. So, should schools ban MLKs Letter from Birmingham Jail, which condemns white moderates bc some white folks might feel attacked?...(1)
Or how about his book Why We Can't Wait, where he endorsed aff action, or his statement in the I Have a Dream Speech re America giving Black folks a bad check marked 'insufficient funds.' Is that un-American bc it recognized how racism had been foundational to the country?...(2)
Or his last address to the SCLC in which he noted the importance of Black folks affirming their beauty, a self-affirmation "made compelling by the white man's crimes against him." I mean, talking of "the white man's crimes?" My goodness...how racist, right Chris?...(3)
White panic over kids learning truth about America's racist history has a long pedigree. In 3rd grade, white teachers got angry at me for reading Roots in the back of class during free time. The Black teachers encouraged it but the white ones were enraged (1)
THREAD
This was the year the miniseries was on, and the teachers wanted to either bury conversation about it (and its subject matter) or have us "trace our family tree" without thinking of how Black kids might experience that, and w/o confronting the enslavement elephant in the room (2)
I gather that this is what white conservatives prefer: avoiding truth and pain and conflict and contradiction and evil (if committed in our country and in our name or for our benefit). They have never wanted to face it. Not 200 years ago, and not today (3)...
Critics of antiracist teaching say they just want history taught in an "unbiased" way with "no agenda." First, that's a lie: their version of history has an agenda...blind patriotism without complication. That's not a neutral presentation...(1)
Second, they don't mean it: they don't intend to teach about the revolutionary war from "both sides," nor the bombing of Pearl Harbor, nor 9/11...We won't be hearing a balanced presentation of Hitler's take on Jews in the WWII section (nor should we) (2)...
Third, if they really believed in "presenting all sides" w/o an agenda that would actually be an argument FOR teaching the 1619 Project, and antiracist perspectives and theories, not shutting them down. By squleching these they prove they just want the white conservative side (3)
The critics of antiracist teaching in schools say they want to prohibit teaching that casts white people in a "negative light." So they'll have to ban MLK, bc he said: "Large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility...than about justice and humanity...(1)
and bc he said: "America is reaping the harvest of hate and shame planted through generations of educational denial, political disfranchisement and economic exploitation of its black population," bc that could encourage "hatred of one's country," so King's gotta go...(2)
He also said: "capitalism was built on the exploitation and suffering of black slaves and continues to thrive on the exploitation of the poor — both black and white, both here and abroad…" so he'll need to be banned bc he suggested America's economy was built on injustice...(3)
In the latest edition of 'White folk trying to cover up history,' a group in Williamson Co. TN is angry about their elementary schools using the book 'Ruby Bridges Goes to School,' about Bridges's harrowing integration of New Orleans schools. The reasons should enrage you...(1)
According to the leader of the movement to ban it, the mention in the book of a 'large crowd of angry white people who didn't want Black children in a white school' drew too stark a contrast between Black and white people, and the book didn't offer 'redemption' at its end...(2)
Um, no. 1), the book doesn't draw the contrast between white and black people, HISTORY & the behavior of white people drew that contrast. 2) What does it mean to end w/ 'redemption?' Those white folk never apologized. Should we pretend everyone lived happily ever after? (3)...