Should CRT be taught in K-12?

This thread is about "should we" rather than "are we."

Otherwise, okbye?

About everything.

...he said after making sure to vote.

Repeating that lie will not make it true. Nobody is against teaching "the bad stuff." Only extending it to justify any kind of obligation on later generations, in an arena where debate is not explicitly encouraged.

Finder's keepers! Finder's keepers!!

It's tacky to include your signature line in the body of your posts.

the "critical" in CRT is all about explicitly encouraging debate.

Ideally. But school, particularly elementary and middle, is not a place for that. Making it one is perhaps a worthy project, but this'd be a lousy single exception to the paradigm. Making it a good place for that would require a much bigger rethinking of lower education.

Repeating THAT lie doesn't make it true.

Ok.

@Federal Farmer

By design, it's built around critical thinking skills so AT MOST it might be a unit in some AP History course in 12th grade.

Or did you mean all the "not actually CRT" history that conservatives want to silence by CLAIMING that it's CRT, in which case the appropriate answer is FUCK YES.

the Florida legislature is literally considering a bill that forbids the teaching of concepts which cause a student discomfort but do continue to go off.

QFT.

The question is stupid because the GQP have taken a term and painted it as a Boogeyman that has not, is not, and never will be taught at the K-12 level.

Stop letting the bad faith actors drive the conversation.

And before UA or FF jump in, no, some occasional mention of history or present issues doesn't mean CRT is being taught any more than a mention of solar power in a classroom means that students are being taught quantum mechanics.

If people who are against CRT being taught in K-12 actually knew what CRT was, they'd be clamoring for it to be a required course.

(As Raganarok Thor)
Would they though?

Sure. Because CRT is a discussion in which students are encouraged to question whether or not race is an influence when court rulings and judgements are made. If FF and UA want to end discussion, then they do not know what CRT is.

The Internet tells me CRT is indoctrination. Which is it?

You know, indoctrination is not bad when you are being indoctrinated into things like facts and science. This is what happens when you start both sidesing everything. People complaining about conforming to a religious cult should also be against conforming to the laws of physics because it is all the same thing, and conformity is bad dontcha know.

So there was something that was nagging at me about being indoctrinated into critical race theory. There was sort of a tingling in my mind that was telling me there was something wrong with that idea, so I looked up the meaning of indoctrination, and it turns out it is impossible to be indoctrinated into critical race theory because to be indoctrinated would mean you were taught to accept it uncritically. Critical is part of the course, so it cannot possibly be indoctrination.

How many times do we have to win this fucking argument with @Federal Farmer and @Uncle Albert ?

"Indoctrination" sounds more evil.
That's as much as they understand the word.

That sounds exactly as dumb as the people who think Critical Race Theory is Marxist, because Marxists have Critical Theory. None of them, especially as misused, implies any of the other.

I don't think they're calling CRT Marxist for such an intelligent reason, it's more likely because they think BLM is a Marxist organization so anything anti-racist is also Marxist.

It'd almost be laughable if this was a new sudden wrong turn in logic that the right has taken, but they've got a long ass history of calling anything anti-racist Marxist, or Bolshevist, or whatever.

No, that's definitely there in the more... articulate criticisms.