Anti Asian bias is quite clearly present, whether in local (usually white) school boards, university admissions, or assholes on the street venting their hatred and bigotry. But you haven’t made the case that this bias is endemic in CRT - not even close. CRT as I understand is very flexible and allows plenty of room to try and understand and discuss waves/explosions of bigotry like the current wave of anti Asian violence.
CRT’s proposal is that the current wave of mostly black people attacking Asians is due to “white supremacy” which doesn’t clarify understanding.
As an unfalsifiable theory purporting to explain everything, it of course explains nothing.
The kind that a fence might receive. I thought the sentence was pretty clear.
Take it up with that guy whose post I emphasized.
No, in this analogy, I’m holding generic-White-you accountable for the profits you still make from selling grandpa’s video clips of all the kiddie diddling he did on the Dark Web.
Getting out of the way of affirmative action programs would be a good start. Yes, that does mean sitting by while one’s hypothetical daughter’s seat is passed over. With a gods damned smile.
I’d like to report the state of Vermont for violating the Fourteenth Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by discriminating based on race in a government program.
Right. Note that one of the highest-profile recent scandales du jour involved the staff and readership of the super-“woke” publication Teen Vogue complaining about, and ultimately reversing, the editorial appointment of a renowned young Black journalist, due primarily to anti-Asian bigoted remarks she’d expressed online nearly a decade earlier.
It is because crt can be many things to many people that it has been used to perpetuate discrimination against asians buy those white school boards.
It is an undisciplined discipline. Crt is an almost meaningless term these days because it has been coopted by the woke left to justify everything and anything they want.
The concept of white adjacency and white proximity were specifically created to explain away model minority success and justify discriminating against model minorities for the benefit of urm. I can point to people who are disciples of crt saying decidedly anti-asian things and using crt as justification for much of their bigotry.
Crt as it was originally conceived was at least somewhat disciplined but it is a dogs breakfast at this point used to justify whatever position the crt crowd wants to justify.
Your ill-informed kvetching has already been rebutted in this concurrent thread.
Full stop here, this is nowhere close to what I did say, although it is clear that once again, there is no evidence coming that any CRT researcher has pondered about the vaccine issue or ordered that in Vermont.
The point stands, if one does want to talk about the boogeyman you at least have to show what the scared people are indeed talking about that specific “monster”. Not just an assumption, for all the report did say, it is more likely that some health officials looked at the mortality reports and concluded that after all the white and minorities over 65 were already vaccinated that then minorities should be next along with many other groups that include white people too.
Point being here that it is more likely that there were white policymakers in Vermont who did look at mortality rates and not an essay from Richard Delgado when they made their vaccine policy.
ISTM that it’s not just “the crt crowd” and “the woke left” who are using the term “Critical Race Theory” to mean whatever they want it to mean for their own rhetorical purposes.
Read it again, I was complaining about the other poster that indeed has been making the case with not even an id about who the CRT boogeyman being involved with the vaccine policies in Vermont is.
Right, it’s just become another pejorative spat out by the right in mindless condemnation of progress. And just like terms like politically correct, social justice warrior, the term has simply turned into meaning “Something that I don’t like.”
There is a lot of racial tension in places like nyc between blacks and asians. A lot of it is resentment as blacks watch immigrant group after immigrant group pass them by. A lot of it is indignation that these immigrants are being racist against blacks who have been in america for centuries.
A lot of black people died from covid in places like nyc (sort of the reason why tyhey are being given a preference in vermont). They’re angry and looking for someone to blame. The republicans offered up the asians and some people are going to believe them.
No race has a monopoly on racism.
Do asians have to get out of the way of those discriminatory affirmative action programs too? Or does that make us complicit with slavery and kiddie diddling?
Government has a lot of leeway when it comes to dealing with public health emergencies. You probably wouldnt get very far considering there is a lot of actual data supporting the government discrimination.
This is true. The right use it to mean every bad thing they can think of.
Showing me that people support the rampant, racist lawlessness of the Vermont government does not make it any less illegal or racist.
If you’re not objecting to the Alaska government’s explicitly designating African-Americans as a high-risk category in their law mandating insurance coverage of colorectal screenings, as discussed in that concurrent thread, then why are you objecting to the Vermont government’s explicitly designating African-Americans as a high-risk category in their policy about eligibility for COVID vaccination?
The purpose of governmental policies regarding medical practices is to improve public-health outcomes. The fact that a lot of Americans automatically absolutely lose their shit whenever it seems to them that African-Americans might be getting anything that they can possibly construe as some kind of benefit or advantage does not mean that such policies are necessarily unconstitutional or illegal or racist.
There is a historical process of groups like Irish or Italians “becoming white”. I don’t buy that Asians are “becoming white” in any sense - rather, the same old villains are trying to exploit and create tensions for their own purposes. And these same villains show up on both sides, though they’re far more common, and far more powerful, on the right, IMO. The ones on the right are governors and congressmen and firmer presidents. The ones on the left are NIMBYs and some local school boards.
Every bit of recent polling I’ve seen demonstrates that most Asians accept this - the great majority recognize that Trump’s “Kung flu” and other racist nonsense is a far, far greater threat to them than maybe only getting 50% of the slots at a prestigious school as opposed to 80% (which is not to dismiss the latter concern - only that that’s not inspiring street attacks, while Trump’s nonsense almost certainly did).
The fact that you personally think it is a good idea to do something that is unconstitutional, illegal, and racist does not mean that such policies are not unconstitutional, illegal, and racist. This is a much better argument than “sometimes we need to break the law and be racist if 4 people on a message board say it’s okay.”
The crude use of race as a proxy for biological factors probably should end. It is not the case that “African-Americans” are genetically more likely to get colorectal cancer in the first place. It’s the case that cultural and economic barriers to healthy lifestyles and preventative screening are more likely to affect African-Americans. Even true genetic differences can only exist in genetically definable populations of which “African-Americans” are not one. There are some genetically associated health conditions that may be more common in people descended from Nigerian Igbos, or Luchazi Bantus, or Sudanese Dinkas. But those groups have no more genetic commonality with each other than they do with any other human population. Skin color itself is basically unrelated to any genetic health condition besides certain melanomas.
This is the danger of using race as defined in American culture as a proxy for things that are only sort of associated with race in health policy, even before getting into the legal issues. It doesn’t work and we have the tools to do better. Then you get into “do we really want to start treating actual individuals based on what we think their racial groups are more likely to do on average, as a legally acceptable principle?” Ask George Floyd’s family how that works out.
Modnote: So this thread appears to have been bumped for a tangential barely related news bit. It appears to not be really related to the topic. I believe it is time to close this one for good.
@ZosterSandstom, you’re treading into getting a warning here. A weird bump, personalizing the argument more than once and then bringing up George Floyd shows no good faith here at all. I’m going to leave this as don’t bring an apparently racist agenda into other threads. Don’t bump controversial and problematic threads with barely related posts.