There is a serious point here about branding. Right now "CRT" is a winning brand for the GOP, and every discussion of it seems to play into their hand. Some thoughts about what to do. 1/ donmoynihan.substack.com/p/bullshit-bra…
The anti-CRT movement has real consequences.
Reframing the discussion in terms of the red scare atmosphere, the McCarthyite witchhunts will make clearer to people the costs of this approach. 2/
The anti-CRT movement, which banned particular texts like the 1619 project, is leading to broader book bans and even talks of book burning. "Book banners" is a negative frame that again points to the cultural intolerance inherent in this movement. 3/
.@PENamerica argues not to use "anti-CRT."
Instead "educational gag orders" better reflects "the actual and intended effect of these bills: to stop educators from introducing specific subjects, ideas, or arguments in classroom or training sessions." pen.org/report/educati…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
New Washington Post column. Derrick Bell and Kimberlé Crenshaw went back in time and started Nazism.
This would be hilarious if there were not real consequences. Speech is being suppressed, books are being banned, school officials are being fired and threatened.
The clear goal here is to suggest that critical race theory is so radical - it has killed millions of people! genocide! - that extreme measures are needed to suppress it.
Will write about this at some point, but I dub this the Flight 93 Mentality (after the Michael Anton's essay comparing Hilary to 9/11 hijackers, justifying Trumpism): any disagreement has to be elevated to an existential threat to justify radical response
The first Black school principal in a Texas community removed from his position after unsubstantiated claims he was teaching CRT. washingtonpost.com/education/2021…
Here are some previous threads about this case, which is an example of how the anti-CRT educational gags has led to red scare like conditions where even the mention of CRT is enough to cost someone their job.
New from me: Come gather round children and hear the tale of Johnny McEntee: a simple college quarterback-turned-body-man-turned-political-enforcer. His story offers an insight into Trumpist politicization of government
Plz share & consider subscribing. donmoynihan.substack.com/p/trumps-loyal…
All Presidents try to balance some mix of competence and loyalty in choosing their political appointees. After his first impeachment Trump saw disloyalty everywhere. To root it out, he appointed his 29 year old body man (body man = the job of Tony Hale's character in Veep).
There have been millions of pieces about Trump, but to understand Trumpism as a governing philosophy you need to understand people like McEntee. With no real qualifications and despite a failed background check he was given control of one of the key offices in government.
It's not a moral panic. We're just banning prize-winning books relating to race, gender or sexuality from school libraries. kmuw.org/education/2021…
We're not banning books. Heavens no. We are just refusing to allow them in circulation because *one* person submitted a list of books they object to. kmuw.org/education/2021…
What I vaguely remember from being a kid is that if you are old enough to read difficult content you are probably the best judge of whether you can manage it.
Also, kids are interested in banned books.
Here is a list of the books this Kansas school district has banned.
Any time you hear that "wokeism is a religion" remember which ideological group in America is literally willing to sacrifice its lives to reaffirm their political identity rather than trust science. nytimes.com/2021/11/08/bri…
Covid deaths per 100,000 in October
Heavily Trump counties: 25
Heavily Biden counties: 8 nytimes.com/2021/11/08/bri…
As @DLeonhardt points out, vax hesitancy reflects elite media cues. This thread describes a series of paper that shows that Fox coverage really has made our shared pandemic worse, but has especially hurt its own viewers.
With David Brooks new column, the NY Times has featured five pieces, plus multiple reader's letters about Dorian Abbot being disinvited from giving a talk.
A professor who got fired at the behest of local politicians for political speech: zero hits thefire.org/lawsuit-fired-…
Put another way, NY Times readers have heard more about one professor being disinvited (and then reinvited) from a talk at MIT than the story about U Florida blocking multiple professors from testifying in lawsuits against the state government.
Why is the NY Times more focused on the Abbot case, rather than the U Florida censorship case, a story it broke? The simple answer is the opinion page, which has continued to push the case as an example of university failures, but can't find the same outrage for the Florida case.