The first two chapters of this book detail what CRT is exactly, from its theoretical tenets as they developed in academia, to the ways in which CRT directly manifests in K-12 classrooms.
Chapter Three gives parents practical information and techniques to expose CRT in their own K-12 schools, and helps them sift through constantly changing definitions in an effort to help them navigate semantics and deal with the language games often played by school boards and CRT advocates.
Chapter Four helps parents challenge CRT in their own school districts, and provides sound alternatives that use core principles and values instead of identity to drive quality instruction for all children.
Finally, Chapter Five offers a collection of practical resources for parents to use in their fight against CRT, which include information on parent groups and toolkits, links to freedom of information forms and documents, recommended readings, and examples of curriculum and training that violate students’ and teachers’ rights, which can lead to possible legal action.
Joy Reid recently had Christopher Rufo on her MSNBC show, The ReidOut, where she failed to engage in a rational debate about Critical Race Theory, and instead attempted to spin a pre-packaged narrative about the topic.
After accepting Manhattan Institute senior fellow Christopher Rufo’s requests via Twitter to appear on her MSNBC show, host Joy Reid declined to engage in a debate on the topic of critical race theory — resorting instead to constant interruption and insults, insisting, “it’s my show … so it’s how I want to do it.
Recently, on the Black News Channel, Temple professor and BNC host Marc Lamont Hill asked Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow Christopher Rufo to “name something positive about being white.” This took place during Lamont Hill’s 26 minute interview with Rufo about the pros and cons of Critical Race Theory in America.
This video highlights the excerpt, but also brings attention to the impact culture has on racial disparities in the United States (something Rufo attempted to analyze during the interview), and how exploring culture has become increasingly taboo with anti-racists and those who push Critical Race Theory in education and government.
Full interview of Christopher Rufo by Marc Lamont Hill on the Black News Network here:
Purchase Exploring White Fragility: Debating the Effects of Whiteness Studies on America’s Schools here.
“It’s definitely not sensitivity and it’s definitely not diversity. There used to be sensitivity and diversity years ago, and this is not that.”
Christopher Paslay has spent 24 years working as a Philadelphia teacher, and has a background in multicultural education. He told the Daily Caller that celebrating diversity in the classroom used to include tolerance and understanding, but schools across the country are taking a different approach to educating about different cultures by hiring “anti-racism” trainers, who accuse others of being complicit in racism.
“I think it’s gotten to the point where people fear [being accused of not participating in racial justice efforts],” Paslay said. “People still don’t know what anti-racism is. They think it’s just social justice, but they don’t know the other components to it.”
The trainings have a variety of names. Conservatives refer to them that as “critical “race theory” sessions. Progressives have called the sessions “sensitivity” and “diversity” training. Paslay’s book explores research and presents alternative recommendations on approaching diversity and inclusion in the classroom to bringing in guest speakers to conduct “anti-racism” trainings. While school and workplace administrators may invite such experts with admirable intentions of remedying disparities, Paslay claimed such trainings carry the potential of being counterproductive in achieving social justice.
His book is written from the perspective of a longtime educator with a background in multicultural education. Paslay has spent 24 years teaching high school English, where he crafts his lesson plans with a selection of texts and literature that represent the different cultures of his students in an effort to be inclusive, he told the Caller. . . .
According to Christopher Rufo’s latest newsletter:
Critical race theory is a grave threat to the American way of life. It divides Americans by race and traffics in the pernicious concepts of race essentialism, racial stereotyping, and race-based segregation—all under a false pursuit of “social justice.” Critical race theory training programs have become commonplace in academia, government, and corporate life, where they have sought to advance the ideology through cult-like indoctrination, intimidation, and harassment. It is time to fight back. . . .
Our ambition is to take one of these cases to the United States Supreme Court and establish that critical race theory-based programs—which perpetuate racial stereotypes, compel discriminatory speech, and create hostile working environments—violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the United States Constitution. When we are victorious in the courts, it will have an immediate ripple effect through every school, government agency, and private employer in the nation. We will effectively abolish critical race theory programs from American life.
Christopher Rufo’s most recent article, “Woke Elementary,” exposes how an elementary school in Cupertino, California, recently forced a class of third-graders to deconstruct their racial identities, and rank themselves according to their “power and privilege.”
An elementary school in Cupertino, California—a Silicon Valley community with a median home price of $2.3 million—recently forced a class of third-graders to deconstruct their racial identities, then rank themselves according to their “power and privilege.”
Based on whistleblower documents and parents familiar with the session, a third-grade teacher at R.I. Meyerholz Elementary School began the lesson on “social identities” during a math class. The teacher asked all students to create an “identity map,” listing their race, class, gender, religion, family structure, and other characteristics. The teacher explained that the students live in a “dominant culture” of “white, middle class, cisgender, educated, able-bodied, Christian, English speaker[s],” who, according to the lesson, “created and maintained” this culture in order “to hold power and stay in power.”
Please watch the video above for an analysis of the article.
A mother sues a Las Vegas charter school after critical race theory and intersectionality create a hostile environment in her son’s classroom.
It appears that the push to indoctrinate American students with polarizing identity politics has finally gone too far. According to an article in the Epoch Times:
A high school senior of mixed race is suing a taxpayer-funded charter school in Nevada over the “coercive, ideological indoctrination” that is central to its Critical Race Theory-based curriculum that forces students to associate aspects of their identity with oppression.
In the lawsuit, Clark v. State Public Charter School Authority, filed Dec. 22 in federal court in Nevada, the young plaintiff William Clark and his mother Gabrielle Clark claim their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were being violated. Students were allegedly told that by refusing to identify with an oppressive group, they were exercising their privilege or underscoring their role as an oppressor. . . .
The new curriculum “inserted consciousness raising and conditioning exercises under the banner of ‘Intersectionality’ and ‘Critical Race Theory.’ These sessions … are not descriptive or informational in nature, but normative and prescriptive: they require pupils to ‘unlearn’ and ‘fight back’ against ‘oppressive’ structures allegedly implicit in their family arrangements, religious beliefs and practices, racial, sexual, and gender identities, all of which they are required to divulge and subject to non-private interrogation.”
William was directed “in class to ‘unlearn’ the basic Judeo-Christian principles [his mother] imparted to him, and then [the school] retaliated against [him].”
“Some racial, sexual, gender and religious identities, once revealed,” the complaint states, “are officially singled out in the programming as inherently problematic, and assigned pejorative moral attributes by Defendants.”
The lawsuit, filed by Attorney Jonathan O-Brien in association with Schoolhouse Rights, can be found here. The suit involves “compelled speech” and alleges violation of the First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments (Due Process: Invasion of Privacy & Equal Protection), among other counts.
With critical race theory and intersectionality becoming more contentious and invasive, any student, parent, or other member of the education community who feels they’ve been subject to a hostile environment is encouraged to speak out and report the incident. This includes being stereotyped and publicly judged by race, religion, gender, or sexuality — or being compelled to accept or submit to derogatory labels such as “privileged” or “oppressed,” or of suffering from “internalized superiority” or “internalized oppression,” or of being forced to publicly state race or use so-called “gender pronouns.”
Resources to help students, parents, and educational community members speak out include:
Fair Education, a non-profit corporation formed to advocate for our children, students, and teachers in our public schools and universities
No Left Turn in Education, a grassroots organization which aims to revive in American public education the fundamental discipline of critical and active thinking which is based on facts, investigation, logic and sound reasoning
For those families who have children in schools like Democracy Prep, who mean well and want social justice, ask yourselves this:
Do you want your child treated as a person, or as an identity group?
Do you want your child’s teachers to stereotype them by race, or communicate with them as individuals?
Do you want your child educated with academic skills, or indoctrinated with identity politics?
Do you want your child to develop into a free thinking American citizen, or an aggrieved political activist?
Do you want your child to embrace the love and compassion of MLK, or the anger and resentment of BLM?
Think about that for a moment. If you answered the former for most of the questions, it might be time to speak out against the kind of racialized indoctrination taking place in schools like Democracy Prep.
This video presents whistleblower documents from Seattle Public Schools, which, according to an article published in the New York Post by Christopher F. Rufo, “held a racially charged teacher-training session that convicted US schools of committing ‘spirit murder’ against black kids and demanded that white teachers ‘bankrupt [their] privilege in acknowledgment of [their] thieved inheritance.’
The video also compares true instructional equity models — like the ones being used in the School District of Philadelphia, which focus on giving all students access to rigorus, grade-level instruction — with those in Seattle, which aim to indoctrinate students in polarizing identity politics in an effort to make them antiracist activists.
It’s become clear Facebook doesn’t want to get in the way of society’s coordinated disruption of whiteness, white people, or white culture.
Facebook is readjusting it algorithms to police anti-black hate speech more aggressively than anti-white hate speech. According to an article in USA Today:
Facebook bans hate speech based on race, gender and other characteristics. It relies on a set of rules called “Community Standards” to guide decisions about what violates that ban. The standards are enforced by computer algorithms and human moderators.
According to Facebook’s hate speech policy, derogatory statements about men and white people are treated the same as anti-Semitic statements or racial epithets.
For years, civil rights activists have lobbied Facebook to change its policy of protecting all groups equally. . . .
And protecting all groups equally — judging whites and people of color by the same standards — is definitely a big no-no in contemporary American woke culture.
Take, for example, the Associated Press’s new rules for capitalizing the word “black” in its news articles, but not the word “white.”
“AP’s style is now to capitalize Black in a racial, ethnic or cultural sense, conveying an essential and shared sense of history, identity and community among people who identify as Black,” the AP writes. “AP style will continue to lowercase the term white in racial, ethnic and cultural senses.”
And why don’t white people deserve to have their race capitalized?
“After a review and period of consultation, we found, at this time, less support for capitalizing white,” the AP states. “We agree that white people’s skin color plays into systemic inequalities and injustices, and we want our journalism to robustly explore those problems. But capitalizing the term white, as is done by white supremacists, risks subtly conveying legitimacy to such beliefs.
So when you capitalize “black,” it’s social justice, but when you capitalize “white,” it’s racism and white supremacy.
The idea that so-called “whiteness” and white culture must be disrupted and dismantled is steadily gaining ground in a society infiltrated by wokeness. In March of 2019, The Paris Review published an article by black college professor Venita Blackburn titled “White People Must Save Themselves from Whiteness,” which stated that white people suffer from “cognitive dissonance” and “profit off of gruesome human suffering” while remaining happy.
In June of this year black education activist Nahliah Webber, the Executive Director of the Orleans Public Education Network, published an article in the Education Post titled “If You Really Want to Make a Difference in Black Lives, Change How You Teach White Kids.” In it she speaks of the “pathology of whiteness,” explaining that whiteness is literally a disease that needs to be cured. Her article was so offensive and radical, that Megyn Kelly pulled her children from the Upper West Side private school that allegedly circulated the article.
In the fall of 2019, New York City Schools Chancellor Richard Carranza held a training for administrators that aimed to end “white supremacy culture in schools,” a training some parents and administrators called “toxic and polarizing.” Carranza was later sued by four white female administrators for racial discrimination after they were allegedly demoted and replaced simply for being white.
In July of this year, the National Museum of African American History and Culture published a pamphlet titled “Aspects and Assumption of Whiteness and White Culture,” where white children were taught to confront their “whiteness,” because according to anti-racist dogma, whiteness is inherently racist, oppressive, and provides unearned privileges to whites at the expense of people of color.
In August, the City of Seattle held a training called “Internalized Racial Superiority for White People” for its 10,000 city employees.
According to an article in the City Paper by Christopher Rufo:
The trainers require white employees to examine their “relationships with white supremacy, racism, and whiteness” and explain how their “[families] benefit economically from the system of white supremacy even as it directly and violently harms Black people.”
Robin DiAngelo, whose book White Fragility has sold several million copies, says Whites must be blunt and actively call out the oppressiveness of “whiteness” in order to stop systemic racism. To be “less white,” DiAngelo states, “is to be less oppressive racially. To be less arrogant. To be less certain. To be less defensive. To be less ignorant.”
Cal-Berkeley now offers a course titled “Deconstructing Whiteness,” which “aims to confront conversations about privilege and positionality to understand where white bodies have the responsibility to be in movements against white supremacy and in solidarity with marginalized peoples and groups of color.” The class will not “coddle white fragility,” the course description states, but will help students “deconstruct and relearn whiteness through case studies, speakers, and critical readings.”
It’s become quite clear that Facebook doesn’t want to get in the way of the coordinated disruption of whiteness, white people, or white culture.
“Facebook still considers statements about men and white people to be in violation of its hate speech policy, and users can still report these statements, but the company’s algorithms will no longer automatically flag and delete them, resulting in about 10,000 fewer posts being removed each day,” Facebook said.
It’s good to see that Facebook is living up to its obligations to remain fair and impartial.
The King County Library System’s fixation on skin color is quite ironic.
According to the King County Library System, there is rampant racism within their libraries. So much so that KCLS officials were forced to bring in Racial Equity Consultants, which in turn held racially segregated “listening sessions” to help root out systemic oppression. These sessions were marked with pre-civil rights era signs which read DEI Session People of Color, and DEI Session People Who Are White.
A picture of the signs recently went viral on Twitter.
Christopher Rufo, a writer for the City Journal, reported the story:
At the King County Library System, a private consulting firm called Racial Equity Consultants recently held racially segregated “listening sessions.” The consultants “begin with an anti-oppression framework,” internal documents show, and they use segregated sessions to root out “institutional privileges and systemic inequities.” Widespread “institutional racism” is said to exist in the libraries, and employees who reject that premise are accused of “internalized racism.” When reached by e-mail, Racial Equity Consultants said that it was not authorized to comment.
The story prompted the KCLS to deny accusations of segregation, stating it was misinformation. “In 2019, under the guidance of our consultants, Racial Equity Consultants (REC), we provided caucused listening sessions for staff to help inform REC’s institutional racial equity assessment work,” the statement read in part. “These listening sessions were voluntary for staff and designed to gather information to help us better understand institutional racial equity concerns . . .”
Under REC’s “services” is something called “Racial Caucusing.” This is where “members work separately in their respective identity groups as either POC or White people,” the website states. “In racial caucus, POC and White people learn to work towards dismantling racism from their separate and particular positionality.”
Separate — and segregated — positions.
Racial Caucusing involves separating whites and people of color into “affinity groups” based on race, where POC are asked to reflect on their Internalized Racial Oppression, and whites are asked to reflect on Internalized Racial superiority. Some questions posed to whites are:
How was I socialized by IRS?
How do you collude with white culture in your institution/team at meetings, in organizing, during your day?
How is white supremacy reflected in your institution/team?
Recently, at the urging of President Trump, the Department of Justice began investigating the City of Seattle for such trainings. Amazingly, Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan stood by these workshops.
“This is a stunning illustration of the administration’s warped priorities,” Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan said in a recent statement. “In the midst of a nationwide reckoning with systemic racism and police violence, (the administration) is considering suing the City of Seattle for a training we provide that specifically seeks to combat racism and advance equity.”
But reality paints a different picture. A leaked video from a 2017 Seattle training shows facilitator Ashleigh Shackelford, a Black Lives Matter activist and organizer, disparaging whites in attendance.
U.S. Civil Rights Commissioner Peter Kirsanow has argued that racially segregated training sessions violate the 1964 Equal Employment Opportunity act, which prohibits employers from segregating employees based on “race, color, religion, sex or national origin.”
The KCLS’s fixation on skin color is quite ironic. Named after Martin Luther King, Jr., the county is still judging its people by the color of their skin, and ignoring the content of their character.
Dr. King is probably rolling over in his grave.
Click here to watch the companion video, which provides additional commentary and video clips on the topic.