This thread from Rufo is further evidence for the theory that anti-CRT advocates know how insane this legislative session is going to be. They can see what's coming and want to ever so slightly disassociate themselves from it. I doubt it will work.

First, you can see more evidence of that effort here. It's a trend!

Rufo thinks he can deflate the argument further by shifting to curriculum transparency (which, to be clear, has been a part of these bills since the beginning; Rufo isn't breaking new ground here). What he fails to consider is that curriculum transparency bills can be crazy too.
How crazy? This is Indiana HB 1231, introduced last week by Rep. John Jacob (R). It requires schools to allow a MINIMUM of five taxpayers (not parents -- taxpayers) to sit in and observe classroom instruction.…
If Missouri's HB 2189 passes, they'll be able to attend teachers' professional development programs too. I like to imagine a row of QAnon supporters just chilling out, watching Ms. Prosser from 6th grade English discuss new state testing standards.…
Of course, I'm sure you remember Oklahoma's SB 1142, which would require schools to remove from the library any book a parent deems offensive. Failure to promptly comply would cost librarians their jobs and expose the school to $1000s in civil penalties.…
My goodness, what else? South Carolina's "Freedom from Ideological Coercion and Indoctrination Act" establishes a state-run hotline that members of the public can use to report professors who "omit relevant and important context" from their lessons.…
Indiana HB 1040 requires teachers to notify parents in advance if they intend to counsel students about pronoun selection.…
And so forth. This is on top of the dozen or so bills that require schools to make all curricular and professional development materials publicly available on a searchable website. And not just for parents, either. Everyone.
Now here's the thing. These bills are clearly crazy and Rufo is deluding himself if he thinks they won't get even crazier. But the fact of the matter is that there IS room for a reasonable compromise. Parents *should* be able to know what's being taught to their kids.
Of course, generally they already have that right. What a compromise bill would do is take that material and place it on a website where it can be more easily consulted. That's something lots of schools already do, with carve-outs for copyrighted stuff.
But this is America we're talking about. Don't expect compromise. Expect instead pedal-to-the-floor levels of Red State legislative insanity, because that's currently what sells. And nobody has done more to create that market than Rufo.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Jeffrey Sachs

Jeffrey Sachs Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @JeffreyASachs

9 Jan
Apparently I was peripherally involved in a twitter spat earlier today. Anti-CRT laws: Who's the blame? Is the Harper's Letter crowd responsible? Etc. etc. Scintillating stuff! This is the sort of high stakes cultural frisson I miss for shabbat.
But without tooting my own horn *too* much, I actually do think I have a better read on this than most. I've kind of been on all sides of the debate, and having spent the last year reading every one of these bills, I think I have a good sense of where they're coming from.
But it's such an impossible discussion to have without coming across totally obnoxious. Is it even worth writing about?
Read 7 tweets
7 Jan
Hey free speech folks, I have a question. I know I've read articles that frame the Chicago Statement as a form of pre-commitment. That admins should adopt it so that when they're under pressure, they can point to the policy and say "My hands are tied!" Where is that case made?
@glukianoff @JoeatFIRE @adamsteinbaugh @sarahemclaugh For some. But it could also be an expression of values. The point of the original argument is that even weak admins who have only a lukewarm commitment to free speech might choose to adopt the policy as a kind of alibi for when the shit hits the fan.

Read 4 tweets
5 Jan
Nobody on this website hates college educated blue check libs more than college educated blue check libs five inches to their Right.
The working class is lucky to have those college educated blue check libs five inches to the Right of the other college educated blue check libs on their side and ready to speak on their behalf. They really have their best interests at heart.
Someone needs to write an @olivertraldi-style tear down of these folks and their desperate status jockeying.
Read 5 tweets
4 Jan
I missed it over the holidays, but apparently MRU has fired Frances Widdowson. It's unclear precisely what happened (everyone is keeping quiet b/c the union is taking it to arbitration), but apparently MRU is saying she created a toxic work environment.
Obviously "toxic work environment" can constitute just cause for termination, but it's also a loophole admins use all the time to discipline faculty for offensive but protected speech. Hopefully the union and @CAUT_ACPPU are watching this one closely.
@CAUT_ACPPU Here's how @mountroyal4u's collective agreement defines academic freedom. Under any plain reading of the text, there would be no grounds for disciplining faculty for their research, tweets, articles, or whatever.
Read 4 tweets
29 Dec 21
It’s a little thing, but she has him dead to rights and he doesn’t even see it. Why not? He’s a smart guy and it’s not complicated. But contempt can make a smart person dumb.
People like GG and Taibbi are okay in my book. They do more good than harm and there are plenty of other people I’d like to see disappear first. But their only way of dealing with a critic is to attack and it’s made them so sloppy. GG especially (Taibbi less so).
Also, on the actual underlying issue, please bear in mind that one of the most powerful activist groups in the country on this stuff has some very extreme beliefs.
Read 4 tweets
28 Dec 21
ICYMI: Education gag orders (aka "anti-CRT bills") around the country increasingly include a private right of action. In eight separate bills, as well as one law(!), private citizens have the right to sue a school for discussing race or sex the wrong way.…
Some of the bills limit suits to parties directly "injured" by a school. In others, any resident of a state or even the country would be eligible to sue. And the amount of money that courts would be permitted to award can be staggering.
All of which creates some very perverse incentives. After New Hampshire passed its education gag order last June, the conservative group Moms for Liberty announced it would pay a $500 bounty for information leading to a successful suit.…
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!