Thread by @MatthewBoedy

A Georgia Senate Committee hearing on Senate Bill 377 - an "educational gag order" bill concerning "divisive concepts" in k-12 and #highered. I'll try to live tweet. You can watch here: 1/X vimeo.com/showcase/90764…

Sen. Bo Hatchett, its sponsor, said he is trying to prevent students being taught "divisive concepts" not US history. He reads and you can read bill here: legis.ga.gov/legislation/61…

By the way, he offers no proof that any of these concepts are being taught, were taught, are part of #CriticalRaceTheory

Now he is saying what this bill doesn't do. While he says his bill wont prevent teaching of racist laws in US history, some of the concepts were part of those laws. So.... ?

He admits that after talks with university system, there will be tweaks. What those are he doesn't say.

The committee chair calls for "adult discussion," something this bill explicitly denies to adults.

Democratic senator asks if schools mascots such as "rebels" should be included in the bill. Hatchett says he doesn't want that in his bill but could see the claim.

Hatchett is asked about the "objective/without endorsement" language regarding teachers. Does that conflict, he is asked. He can't seem to describe in other words his own concept in the bill.

He isn't getting into any specifics on what these two words mean and he pushes off the question to future discussion. He just won't answer the question of meaning.

He is asked about specific topics such as how to teach redlining. He admits historic systemic racism but where does history start/end? Democratic senator making this point. He again avoids the premise of the question.

Hatchett's move to say he isn't limiting teachers but wants to ban these concepts is fundamentally flawed. He doesn't want professional educator opinions.

Hatchett's bill doesn't prohibit the teaching of slavery. But a Democratic senator wants to know what classroom limits he sees on teaching that subject that apply to the divisive concepts.

The monitoring question comes up again. There is a complaint process laid out in the bill. But there is also a financial penalty for a school/district/college if they do teach such concepts.

Now a comment from Democratic senator about the ban on student "distress/guilt" based on their race. Hatchett says teachers should not be allowed to say [implied white] students "should" feel discomfort.

Democratic asks for examples of this being taught. Hatchett says his bill is proactive.

My note: GOP is lumping in the systematic racist claim with claims no teacher would endorse. And so they can point to that they are banning white supremacy teaching. But they are also banning educated, researched arguments they don't like.

Hatchett argues that systemic means "as a whole" aka all of us, everyone. It is a misdirection. It is not all individuals as individual acts. It is a needed misdirection for their bill to be presented as objective.

These questions ignore key point about teachers: the bill bans educated, researched, professional opinion. This is what "objectively" means. It is a gag order. The bill will ban endorsing the systemic racism claim as same as endorsing the white supremacy claims.

BTW I am ignoring now two GOP rants on "cultural marxism" and systemic as "all individuals." Like the one going on right now. The rant leads to a question about examples in the nation. Hatchett still can't name any.