Submitted by John Arbeeny.
Below labeled #1 through #14 are the most common deceptive statements you will hear from Critical Race Theory (CRT) supporters to any challenge of their orthodoxy. You’ll hear their deceptions time and again as part of their narrative. They seek to deny, distort, distract, detract and disavow the very nature of CRT because they know that CRT, seen in the light of day, would be rejected by most thinking people. The “counter responses” to these deceptions are also provided. You have a chance to vote for Clover Park School Board members in this upcoming election. Choose David Anderson and Jeff Brown who support informed debate of the issues on the Board instead of the Board incumbents who only parrot leftist deceptive talking points.
- “It’s not CRT”: Deny, deny, deny! Repeated constantly this can be effective in detaching equity, diversity, inclusion from the “mother ship” of CRT. “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Reich Minister of Propaganda from 1933 to 1945. NEA calls it CRT. WEA calls it CRT. If it looks like a duck, acts like a duck, quacks like a duck, it’s a duck! CRT disassembled into its component parts is still CRT: it still has the same political “DNA”.
- “It’s just teaching about history”: Go ahead and teach history! However CRT is actually about blaming history on one racial group and creating groups of victims based upon race. It sets up victimizer and victim status on the basis of race on people who weren’t even alive when that history occurred. CRT divides; it does not unify.
- “CRT isn’t taught in the classroom. It’s only taught in college”: However CRT is being taught to educators and will affect how they teach, relate, and treat students based upon the color of their skin. This training is mandated by state government and OSPI and represents a form of institutionalized racism. Students aren’t dumb: they will be “taught” by how they’re treated by indoctrinated teachers and staff based upon their race.
- “Teachers are being taught to be more aware of different cultures”: Such “awareness” in CRT is based upon race as though all people of a certain skin color have the same culture. So a black student from Jamaica, Haiti, South Africa, Chicago south side and Bellevue WA all show up in your class: whose culture are you aware of? What about every other unique individual in that class? And just how would you teach in a culturally sensitive way to a class full of “diversity”? An impossibility! The assumption that skin color has everything to do with an individual’s culture is racist. This is a “system” designed to fail.
- “Those who oppose CRT are part of a conspiracy”: Opposition to CRT is so grass-roots and wide spread nationally that there is no need for a conspiracy. Indeed the real conspiracy to bring CRT into schools is one involving powerful teachers unions, school boards, administrators, teachers and those lucky enough to be hired as “director of equity community engagement” with 6 figure incomes. Racism has become for them a new career choice. No wonder they’re so supportive: follow the money.
- “Those who oppose CRT are members of racist fascist right wing groups”: A personal charge made to impugn without any evidence to support it. This can include “6 January movement”, KKK, Qnon, Proud Boys or any other radical or racist group. Indeed you might even be a member of the Republican Party….gasp! Libeling a person by such labeling when you can’t defeat their argument gives some idea of how weak their argument actually is! If you can’t kill the message, kill the messenger!
- “Equity just gives those who need extra help”: CRT ties equity to racial group membership rather than individual need regardless of skin color. The operative word to get around that racial component is the oft heard expression “marginalized community”. Translation: certain minority racial groups. Yet Asians often don’t seem to fit the narrative since they are too successful. Maybe it has something to do with Asian culture, familial and educational values rather than the color of their skin. If they can do it, why not others regardless of skin color?
- “Student racial diversity requires a similar teacher racial diversity”: There is no correlation between the skin color of a teacher and their ability to effectively teach. There are too many other variables to consider. Teachers with the same skin color as their students certainly may serve as a role model and that has value. However, to claim that only black teachers can best teach black students because of “cultural sensitivity” is inherently racist and ultimately leads to segregated “separate but equal” (though never equal) classes. Back to the future: the Deep South rises again.
- “Systemic and institutional racism exists in the education system”: Give examples or go home! What is completely ignored are the social, cultural and economic factors that create disparities that have nothing to do with alleged systemic and institutional racism: generational welfare families, 70+% children born out of wedlock, absent fathers, drug culture, criminality, gangs, etc. CRT doesn’t fix any of these. Additionally, why would you trust those already in power to fix what arguably they were responsible for creating or maintaining in the past?
- “There are over 80 (or some other number) community members on the equity stakeholders group”: In CPSD the alleged number is 83. To begin with, nearly 55% were District employees….a captive audience: what are they going to say “NO”? Of the other 45% community members, 21% were those in academia and government with vested interests in CRT. Students and alumni were 14% and parents, perhaps the most invested in their children’s education, a measly 8%. That 55% District employee number grew to 77% in the second equity meeting while most of the erstwhile 21% “community members” apparently dropped out. Maybe it wasn’t worth any more of their time.
- “It’s going to take some time to improve academic achievement:” This response was used by Ron Banner at the recent Lakewood United meeting when asked how “equity policy” was going to advance academic achievement. The problem is there are no instances of CRT or equity policy improving academic achievement or any time line for its accomplishment. Without any definable metrics to link CRT/equity as causative change agents or time line for accomplishment, accountability by the Board becomes impossible. Maybe that was the intent all along.
- “Reach back years and years ago for something that has nothing to do with the subject at hand”: Just like CRT, go dredge up something from decades (centuries) ago to deflect discussion from the subject at hand today. If you can make 2001 or 2005 the issue perhaps you won’t have to discuss the issues of 2021. Why not go back to 1619? Oh! Leftist already did that but what does that have to do with today? You can’t change 1619, 2001 or 2005 but you can change 2021. Dwelling on the past holds your future hostage.
- “I’m sooooo offended (disgusted, alarmed, upset, angry, outraged, etc.)!” When reason leaves you all you’re left with is emotions. Such responses are the result of CRT supporters’ emotional “fragility” (as opposed to alleged “white fragility”) in reaction to perceived micro-aggressions and triggers. In fact this emotional “fragility” is actually an attempt to cut off any reasoned debate and shut you up. This is the predictable reaction to any challenge to their almost religious-like fervor for CRT.
- “When all else fails use the “R” word”: For people sooooo sensitive to “micro-aggressions” and cultural awareness they seem to have no compunction at all about dropping an “R-bomb” macro-aggression on anyone they disagree with. It just goes to show how little they practice what they preach and is an indication of what to expect when they gain control of CRT in our schools. Assimilate or else! Resistance is futile. If not…………you’re a Racist!