Objectivity Is Impossible And It Is Also Undesirable — Zinn

CALIFORNIA POLICY and AMERICAN GREATNESS has this quote that I wish to add to my Howard Zinn vault:

…..The irony here is that the planned protests were hosted by the Zinn Education Project, whose approach to history is based on Howard Zinn’s best-selling book A People’s History of the United States. Published in 1980, the book became extremely popular and still dominates our nation’s classrooms. Zinn maintained that teaching history “should serve society in some way” and that “Objectivity is impossible and it is also undesirable.” When called on the carpet for writing a history book that played very fast and loose with the facts, the author freely admitted it, saying that his hope in writing the book was to cause a revolution.

At least Zinn was honest enough to admit that he was a liar. There’s no indication that the union troofers will go that far. Or perhaps they really believe that their lies are the truth. Either way, the troofers’ actions are very much akin to those of the Big Bad Wolf, and the nation’s children are Little Red Riding Hoods. That story had a happy ending, but the current version has yet to reach its climax.

Bad Faith

 How post-60’s liberalism created the Bad Faith we see in America today.

LEGAL INSURRECTION

“Equity” and other CRT approaches will eventually have a judicial reckoning. 5th Circuit Judge James C. Ho concurring opinion: “Citizens may fairly wonder how officials can condemn race-neutral policies as racist and defend explicitly race-conscious programs as inclusive.”

[….]

In a concurring opinion (starting at page 22 of the pdf.) Judge Ho wrote in part (emphasis added):

I concur in the judgment and in all but Section III.A of Judge Haynes’s opinion. With respect to the intentional discrimination claim, we all agree that this case turns on geography, not race. With respect to the disparate impact claim, we all agree that remand is appropriate. I write separately to explain why I share Judge Jones’s concerns about unelected agency officials usurping Congress’s authority when it comes to disparate impact theory.

Congress enacted Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prohibit intentional racial discrimination—not to restrict neutral policies untainted by racial intent that happen to lead to racially disproportionate outcomes. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000d; Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275, 280–81 (2001) (“[§ 2000d] prohibits only intentional discrimination,” not “activities that have a disparate impact on racial groups”).

There’s a big difference between prohibiting racial discrimination and endorsing disparate impact theory. See, e.g., William N. Eskridge, Jr., Dynamic Statutory Interpretation 78 (1994) (disparate impact is “a significant leap away from” intentional racial discrimination). It’s the difference between securing equality of opportunity regardless of race and guaranteeing equality of outcome based on race. It’s the difference between color blindness and critical race theory. Compare Martin Luther King, Jr., I Have A Dream: Address to the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom (Aug. 28, 1963) (“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”), with Ibram X. Kendi, How to Be an Anti-Racist 18 (2019) (“A racist policy is any measure that produces or sustains racial inequity between racial groups.”); see also ‘When I See Racial Disparities, I See Racism.’ Discussing Race, Gender and Mobility, N.Y. Times (Mar. 27, 2018), available at NYTs

Prohibiting racial discrimination means we must be blind to race. Disparate impact theory requires the opposite: It forces us to look at race—to check for racial imbalance and then decide what steps must be taken to advance some people at the expense of others based on their race. But racial balancing is, of course, “patently unconstitutional.” Parents Involved in Cmty. Schs. v. Seattle Sch. Dist. No. 1, 551 U.S. 701, 723 (2007). Accordingly, “serious constitutional questions . . . might arise” if “[disparate impact] liability were imposed based solely on a showing of a statistical disparity.” Tex. Dep’t of Hous. & Cmty. Affs. v. Inclusive Cmtys. Project, Inc., 576 U.S. 519, 540 (2015). See also Ricci v. DeStefano, 557 U.S.557, 594–96 (2009) (Scalia, J., concurring) (same).

***

So these are not frivolous concerns of discrimination that we’re talking about here. In fact, for disparate impact advocates, requiring discrimination may not be a problem—it may be the whole point. To quote one leading critical race theorist, “[t]he only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination,” and “[t]he only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.” Kendi, supra, at 19.

***

It’s said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. That’s why we have laws on the books, like Title VI, that simply forbid the “sordid business” of “divvying us up by race”—no matter what our intentions. League of United Latin Am. Citizens v. Perry, 548 U.S. 399, 511 (2006) (Roberts, C.J., concurring in part, concurring in the judgment in part, and dissenting in part)….

***

So public officials may sincerely believe that race-conscious policies are beneficial rather than corrosive. But the American people have never been the blindly trusting sort. Citizens may fairly wonder how officials can condemn race-neutral policies as racist and defend explicitly race-conscious programs as inclusive.

“Equity” and other CRT approaches will eventually have a judicial reckoning. When that day comes, those of us attacked for speaking out for equality without regard to skin color will be vindicated, and those demanding race-based outcomes will be shamed.

That time may be years away, however, and in the meantime, tremendous damage to the fabric of the country will have been done.

Ty Smith (aka Modern Renaissance Man) Slams CRT!

Ty Smith (aka Modern Renaissance Man) from “Cancel This” on Cities 92.9 spoke at the D87 school board meeting. He was met with opposing comments from students and other public commentators. Ty is a parent and says we need to protect our children when it comes to Critical Race Theory (CRT) in schools.

Illinois Father Ty Smith joins “The Story with Martha MacCallum” and sounds off on CRT.

Totalitarian Ideology Taking Hold of Portland (via Educatoors)

Dennis Prager reads from an exceptionally long, but well-worth your full attention, article by Christopher F. Rufo entitled The Child Soldiers of Portland via THE CITY JOURNAL.

Some other recent uploads via Armstrong and Getty confirm this craziness:

#Wokism, Seth Rogan Style (Armstrong & Getty)

In an excellent Armstrong and Getty Show, audio of Seth Rogan as well as a refutation of critical race theory by Allen Guelzo on Fox News’ Martha MacCallum:

  • Allen Guelzo joined The Story with Martha MacCallum on Fox News to discuss the dangers of using critical race theory in school curriculums. Dr. Allen Guelzo is a visiting scholar in The Heritage Foundation’s Simon Center for American Studies and a Princeton University professor and acclaimed scholar of American history. (YOUTUBE)

Disney Has Jumped the Shark (Racist Wokism At Disney)

In an excellent article from CITY JOURNAL entitled The Wokest Place on Earth. Dennis Prager is flummoxed at the disgusting and immoral actions by Disney Corp. During the monologue Prager cannot remember the law professor he interviewed, Amy Wax is her name. (I have the interview HERE) The article she and Larry Alexander wrote is entitled: “Paying the price for breakdown of the country’s bourgeois culture” (PHILEDELPHIA ENQUIRER). An article regarding the response to Amy can be found at INDEPENDANT WOMEN’S FORUM (IWF).

I just wish to say I nor my wife have ever been a Disney fan… we view it as a cult in discussion between us. I have no idea why, however, now I have the urge to be evangelistic about others not liking Disney as well.

SIDE NOTE: the picture for the video is via BLAZING CAT FUR, a site BTW I love. Thanks BCF!


Disney “Responds”


The POST MILLENNIAL has a follow up to Disney’s response. Here is the Tweet by Christopher Rufo they commented on (with Mr Rufo’s additions – click to enlarge):

TWEET

DISNEY’S RESPONSE

MR. RUFO’S COUNTER

 

 

 

 

Systematic Ignorance Underlies Systematic Racism (+The Capitol Incident)

This is the last portion of a larger audio, to follow. Larry Elder discusses new studies – but included one from the 1970s… this is the first time I have heard this particular study:

This is from yesterdays show (1/7/2021), and is a large sample of why The Sage is great at what he does. I add some video which radio only allows audio to play, as well as adding some of the video from @The Larry Elder Show — Enjoy, it is a stitching of large sections from all three hours.

Racism Disguised as Racial Justice at Smith College

𝐴𝑅𝑀𝑆𝑇𝑅𝑂𝑁𝐺 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝐺𝐸𝑇𝑇𝑌 discuss a staffer at Smith College, Jodi Shaw, talking publicly about the dangers of “Critical Race Theory” in dehumanizing people in the work environment and in life. I hadn’t heard of Jodi and so this was my first introduction to her… but she joins a panoply of women fed up with the racial contextualizing of them as the leading factor that counts about them. So, I included two excerpts from her YouTube Channel after the commentary by A&G. These begin at the 6:08 mark.

Here are some stories I recommend:

  • Smith College whistleblower hits campus Critical Race Theory indoctrination: “Stop reducing my personhood to a racial category” (LEGAL INSURRECTION)
  • Meet the Smith College employee whistleblower exposing anti-white racism (THE COLLAGE FIX)
  • Update: Story of Smith College “Critical Race Theory” Whistleblower Jodi Shaw Goes National (LEGAL INSURRECTION)

A book I wish to recommend is “Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity―and Why This Harms Everybody” – a short review I end with is here:

What Cynical Theories expresses is not a paranoid state of mind. It is a genuine concern about the threat that social justice activism, identity politics, and the legacy of postmodernism poses to Enlightenment liberalism and the belief that “disagreement and debate [are] means to getting at the truth.” The book explains how we have arrived at a state in which social justice scholarship treats the principles and themes of postmodernism as The Truth, where no dissent is tolerated, and anyone who disagrees must be cancelled.

(Read It All)

Armstrong and Getty are right, this is one of the most dangerous dogmas infecting our country right now. I would say enjoy, but blood boiling is not always “enjoyable.”

I will add that Critical Race Theory is a form of fascism in that the only country known for the deeply held belief that race make a difference in similar ways was that of Germany in the first half of the 20th Century. And now? Social Justice Warriors pick up that horrible mantle.