It would seem there is a lot of "freedom" being trumpeted by state officials these days.
Within hours of becoming governor of Virginia, Glenn Youngkin signed an executive order to ban the teaching of critical race theory, explaining that the state must promote "freedom of thought." He then moved to lift mask mandates in public schools, citing "individual liberty." In mid-January, Florida lawmakers debated an "individual freedom" bill that would limit discussions about race and discrimination in schools and businesses.
Around the same time, conservative politicians in Georgia created a Freedom Caucus that seeks to, among other things, keep "dangerous ideology" out of schools. And, in Iowa, a Parental Freedom in Education Act would have allowed parents to prevent children from learning anything they find objectionable, inspect teachers' curriculum and lesson plans at any time and challenge mask mandates. (The bill was rejected in the Iowa Senate.)
Each of these actions used the language of freedom to justify anti-democratic politics. These, then, are what I call "ugly freedoms": used to block the teaching of certain ideas, diminish employees' ability to have power in the workplace and undermine public health.
These are not merely misunderstood freedoms, or even just a cynical use of the language of freedom to frame bigoted policies. They manifest, instead, a particular interpretation of freedom that is not expansive, but exclusionary and coercive…
"Freedom to mentally enslave my child."
ReplyDeleteTrue freedom is having the ability to experience any mode of being. This "ugly freedom" is a freedom which is exclusive to one generation, and it is freedom to keep information away from a younger generation in order to keep them conformed to a specific mode of living which the former generation deems as best. But as we can see in the unfolding events of today, this older generation is stupid. Not by their own accord, but because they crave Nostolgia. They can't evolve with the world. This is the fate of most people however, and as this younger generation grows up and fights for what they see as ideal, they will also grow comfortable and exhibit similar behavior when dealing with future generations (hopefully to a lesser degree, however.
I would like to know more about critical race theory. The curriculum the schools are following and the way the information is presented to the students. I have read about it. But I have not had a teacher present this information to me through their interpretations as one would in a educational setting. So why did the governor ban this theory? Are there any true objective dangers that have been presented? Or is this just another uncalled for act passed to continue the perpetual motion of the "White Patriarchy". I would like to have a better breakdown of the concepts of this theory from a highly educated and objective individual to formulate an actual opinion. I am genuinely curious to hear both sides of the argument. And the potential philosophical effects of each
ReplyDeleteGood for you. I don't think the politicians who've been spouting off about CRT have done even minimal research into the subject, or have a clue what they're talking about. Here's some info:
DeleteCritical race theory (CRT), intellectual and social movement and loosely organized framework of legal analysis based on the premise that race is not a natural, biologically grounded feature of physically distinct subgroups of human beings but a socially constructed (culturally invented) category that is used to oppress and exploit people of colour. Critical race theorists hold that racism is inherent in the law and legal institutions of the United States insofar as they function to create and maintain social, economic, and political inequalities between whites and nonwhites, especially African Americans. Critical race theorists are generally dedicated to applying their understanding of the institutional or structural nature of racism to the concrete (if distant) goal of eliminating all race-based and other unjust hierarchies...
https://www.britannica.com/topic/critical-race-theory
The field that has come to be known as the Critical Philosophy of Race is an amalgamation of philosophical work on race that largely emerged in the late 20th century, though it draws from earlier work. It departs from previous approaches to the question of race that dominated the modern period up until the era of civil rights. Rather than focusing on the legitimacy of the concept of race as a way to characterize human differences, Critical Philosophy of Race approaches the concept with a historical consciousness about its function in legitimating domination and colonialism, engendering a critical approach to race and hence the name of the sub-field. Critical Philosophy of Race has also departed from broadly liberal approaches that have narrowed racism to individual and intentional forms.
Thus, the Critical Philosophy of Race offers a critical analysis of the concept as well as of certain philosophical problematics regarding race. In this approach, it takes inspiration from Critical Legal Studies and the interdisciplinary scholarship in Critical Race Theory, both of which explore the ways in which social ideologies operate covertly in the mainstream formulations of apparently neutral concepts, such as merit or freedom...
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/critical-phil-race/