Minister’s SCATHING attack on Black Lives Matter and Teaching in schools

[Crimson Dynamo]

:clap1: what a speech. Schooling the opposite side of the house - have a watch and see what you think? (it's very watchable and NOT boring)

Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch made a speech during a debate on Black
History Month, in which she said any British schools teaching critical race theory
are “breaking the law” and criticised the “anti-capitalist” Black Lives Matter
group.


pwH45WlpDoo

[The Slim Reaper]

We now have a school system where it is illegal to criticise capitalism, and even talk about systemic racism against black people. I'm sure the Galahad free speech warriors will be up in arms about these infringements.

True 1984 stuff.

[Crimson Dynamo]

many are saying she would make a great leader in the future

[Oliver_W]

Criticising capitalism is fine tbh. But critical race theory has no place in ... Well, anywhere really. Apart from Tumblr.

[The Slim Reaper]

Criticising capitalism is fine tbh. But critical race theory has no place in ... Well, anywhere really. Apart from Tumblr.

Why not?

[Oliver_W]

Why not?

What good will come from telling people they're automatically victims and oppressed based on their skin colour?

[Liam-]

What good will come from telling people they're automatically victims and oppressed based on their skin colour?

Except that’s not what it does

[Oliver_W]

Except that’s not what it does

What does it do then?

[The Slim Reaper]

What good will come from telling people they're automatically victims and oppressed based on their skin colour?

Is teaching about the holocaust, and the fact that jews have been treated with suspicion and murdered for all of modern history just about teaching them to be victims?

[Oliver_W]

Is teaching about the holocaust, and the fact that jews have been treated with suspicion and murdered for all of modern history just about teaching them to be victims?

That's different as critical race theory treats the issues as being current, it's not describing historic events.

[The Slim Reaper]

That's different as critical race theory treats the issues as being current, it's not describing historic events.

Anti semitism is a dead concept? Discrimination is over?

[Oliver_W]

Anti semitism is a dead concept? Discrimination is over?

Of course not,but teaching black people they're automatically victims, as per CRT, helps no-one.

[The Slim Reaper]

Of course not,but teaching black people they're automatically victims, as per CRT, helps no-one.

It's not really about that, as Liam said. If your perspective is that it is, then we're really at an impasse and it's pointless carrying on

[Oliver_W]

It's not really about that, as Liam said. If your perspective is that it is, then we're really at an impasse and it's pointless carrying on

Then what is it about?

[The Slim Reaper]

Then what is it about?

Well the reason it's popular at the moment is to rile up the gallahads. But CRT by itself was an intellectual undertaking that started in the US to look into the reasons that black people suffered discrimination in the justice system, which has morphed into structural advantages that white people have historically had over black people.

It's curious that this became an issue for trump in September, then Johnson in October. Before Johnson brought it up, it had never even been mentioned in parliament before. It's more divide and conquer stuff.

[Tom4784]

Why not?

Because it upsets the racists and we can't have that!

[Redway]

What’s your obsession with discrediting BLM?

[Cherie]

:clap1: what a speech. Schooling the opposite side of the house - have a watch and see what you think? (it's very watchable and NOT boring)

Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch made a speech during a debate on Black
History Month, in which she said any British schools teaching critical race theory
are “breaking the law” and criticised the “anti-capitalist” Black Lives Matter
group.


pwH45WlpDoo

Hard to argue with any of her points

The major takeaway that we cannot improve history, we can only learn from it, and that we must stop importing the an American narrative because it is not the UKs :clap1:

[The Slim Reaper]

Hard to argue with any of her points

The major takeaway that we cannot improve history, we can only learn from it, and that we must stop importing the an American narrative because it is not the UKs :clap1:

How are we learning from history by making discussions illegal? That's willfully ignoring, not learning.

[Cherie]

How are we learning from history by making discussions illegal? That's willfully ignoring, not learning.

who is making discussion illegal?

[The Slim Reaper]

who is making discussion illegal?

Discussing the abolition of capitalism is outlawed.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/sep/27/uk-schools-told-not-to-use-anti-capitalist-material-in-teaching

[user104658]

How are we learning from history by making discussions illegal? That's willfully ignoring, not learning.

I agree but I also think a large part of the current problem is socio-political theory (e.g. Critical Race Theory) not being discussed as theory, but instead taught or pushed as fact, with critics branded simply "wrong" (or worse) even when doing something as basic as playing devil's advocate to further the theory... which is of course the antithesis of an academic discussion.

If something like CRT (or the BLM movement, for that matter) isn't open to examination or criticism, or at least is often not providing logically sound philosophical defenses of the theory but instead relying on ad-hominem against the critic, then they stop being political theory and become political dogma.

[MTVN]

Discussing the abolition of capitalism is outlawed.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/sep/27/uk-schools-told-not-to-use-anti-capitalist-material-in-teaching

It prohibits schools using material from anti-capitalist groups as an educational tool, that's not the same as making it 'illegal to criticise capitalism'

[UserSince2005]

I learnt about the slave trade in year 6 which must have been about 20 years ago

[UserSince2005]

Its actually quiet emotional to see a strong black person not play the victim.
What a beautiful woman.

[bots]

She certainly has an interesting and refreshing stance on things

[The Slim Reaper]

I agree but I also think a large part of the current problem is socio-political theory (e.g. Critical Race Theory) not being discussed as theory, but instead taught or pushed as fact, with critics branded simply "wrong" (or worse) even when doing something as basic as playing devil's advocate to further the theory... which is of course the antithesis of an academic discussion.

If something like CRT (or the BLM movement, for that matter) isn't open to examination or criticism, or at least is often not providing logically sound philosophical defenses of the theory but instead relying on ad-hominem against the critic, then they stop being political theory and become political dogma.


CRT is not even that controversial really. If we take Badenochs point, there's some weird suggestion in there that schools could be promoting abolition of police forces and prisons, and I just find it impossible to believe this is happening without any evidence.

Then she uses an anecdote about a policeman being called the n-word as the reason she knows that BLM is a political movement.

This is pure theatre, there is nothing intellectually honest she's presenting as any kind of counter if she wanted to play devils advocate. There is no discussion here; it's "we're not this, we shouldn't teach that." It's being used for culture war purposes.

She is not encouraging or advocating any discussion on anything, and the bigger problem for those in power isn't that CRT exists, it's that the ideology that created the curriculum in the first place is being challenged.

[The Slim Reaper]

It prohibits schools using material from anti-capitalist groups as an educational tool, that's not the same as making it 'illegal to criticise capitalism'

Are unions anti capitalist groups? Are socialists anti capitalists? As MsDonnel says, even the labour party. If capitalism could only be taught using socialist materials, then I think the issue would be more apparent.

[bots]

i'm happy that someone has highlighted that BLM is a political movement that is not above scrutiny, it's about time

[The Slim Reaper]

i'm happy that someone has highlighted that BLM is a political movement that is not above scrutiny, it's about time

Yeah, if only folks had been allowed to criticise BLM :laugh:

[Liam-]

Have people not been criticising blm the entire time?

[user104658]

CRT is not even that controversial really. If we take Badenochs point, there's some weird suggestion in there that schools could be promoting abolition of police forces and prisons, and I just find it impossible to believe this is happening without any evidence.

Then she uses an anecdote about a policeman being called the n-word as the reason she knows that BLM is a political movement.

Hmm, I think the BLM issue is a complicated one because whilst it's false to define the entire BLM sentiment as one political movement with any specific organized element, it's equally disingenuous to pretend that there AREN'T multiple political movements that could be considered (and probably consider themselves) to be "BLM movements". I see a lot of both, to be honest, and neither assessment of "what BLM definitively is or isn't" seems accurate.




This is pure theatre, there is nothing intellectually honest she's presenting as any kind of counter if she wanted to play devils advocate. There is no discussion here; it's "we're not this, we shouldn't teach that." It's being used for culture war purposes.

She is not encouraging or advocating any discussion on anything, and the bigger problem for those in power isn't that CRT exists, it's that the ideology that created the curriculum in the first place is being challenged.

I agree with all of that though, it's Commons soapboxing so it's never going to be an honest discussion of issues... there will always be a heavy element of party-political propaganda.

[MTVN]

Are unions anti capitalist groups? Are socialists anti capitalists? As MsDonnel says, even the labour party. If capitalism could only be taught using socialist materials, then I think the issue would be more apparent.

The wording refers to those who wish to 'abolish' or 'overthrow' capitalism so I don't think that applies to unions or the Labour party but more radical groups who would support violence/illegal means to achieve that goal. I think schools should certainly cover critiques of capitalism but if they were doing so via material produced by, say, the CPGB then that's a little different

[The Slim Reaper]

Hmm, I think the BLM issue is a complicated one because whilst it's false to define the entire BLM sentiment as one political movement with any specific organized element, it's equally disingenuous to pretend that there AREN'T multiple political movements that could be considered (and probably consider themselves) to be "BLM movements". I see a lot of both, to be honest, and neither assessment of "what BLM definitively is or isn't" seems accurate.



Yeah, I agree here. Of course there are political elements to pretty much anything these days, even kids going hungry. Any fight of perceived injustice versus perceived justice is political by it's very nature.

There are no doubt groups within BLM that are marxist, but there are also no doubt capitalists in there too.

[The Slim Reaper]

The wording refers to those who wish to 'abolish' or 'overthrow' capitalism so I don't think that applies to unions or the Labour party but more radical groups who would support violence/illegal means to achieve that goal. I think schools should certainly cover critiques of capitalism but if they were doing so via material produced by, say, the CPGB then that's a little different

I don't think it would be a stretch for someone to find a speech from a union or from a labour member advocating the abolition of capitalism.

Violence isn't the main issue here.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/oct/01/legal-threat-governments-anti-capitalist-guidance-schools-political

In guidance issued last week for school leaders and teachers in England, the Department for Education (DfE) categorised anti-capitalism as an “extreme political stance” and equated it with opposition to freedom of speech, antisemitism and endorsement of illegal activity.

This is fine?

[bots]

Yeah, if only folks had been allowed to criticise BLM :laugh:

i've seen people on here called racist because they didn't agree with some of the unsavoury things BLM have been up to. That's shutting down criticism

[Kizzy]

It's not a theory if it happened, when things happen they cease to be theory and become facts.

They want to stop teaching facts. And that's dangerous.

[user104658]

It's not a theory if it happened, when things happen they cease to be theory and become facts.

They want to stop teaching facts. And that's dangerous.

There's a difference between describing historical events, and adding subjective political context/assumed consequence of those events.

"[X] happened" is fact

"[X] happened which lead to [Y] and now today we have [Z]" is theory.

[The Slim Reaper]

i've seen people on here called racist because they didn't agree with some of the unsavoury things BLM have been up to. That's shutting down criticism

It's actually not shutting down criticism as two things can sometimes be true. BLM may/may not have overstepped the mark, and people criticising them may/may not also be racist.

I get called an anti semite all the time on here, and not once has it ever stopped me criticising Israel if I thought it was warranted.

[MTVN]

I don't think it would be a stretch for someone to find a speech from a union or from a labour member advocating the abolition of capitalism.

Violence isn't the main issue here.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/oct/01/legal-threat-governments-anti-capitalist-guidance-schools-political



This is fine?

I think it's a more limited restriction than is being made out here. It's one subject the guidelines apply to and it specifically prevents the use of groups materials - it doesn't prevent discussing their ideas.

[user104658]

i've seen people on here called racist because they didn't agree with some of the unsavoury things BLM have been up to. That's shutting down criticism

It's actually not shutting down criticism as two things can sometimes be true. BLM may/may not have overstepped the mark, and people criticising them may/may not also be racist.

I get called an anti semite all the time on here, and not once has it ever stopped me criticising Israel if I thought it was warranted.

I think that's a common mistake really, that "people being called stuff" is shutting down or stopping criticism... when that's entirely down to the critic. You can address it, counter it, or flat out ignore it and continue... it doesn't shut anything down. Really the only people who can be guilty of shutting down a debate are those in a position of literal power to do so; on here that would be mods and admin who can close threads/delete posts/implement bans.

I do think that "mob rule" has unfortunate scope for shutting down good debate as well, by simply swamping the debate to the point where it can't continue, but that doesn't apply on a platform as small as this one.

[Kizzy]

There's a difference between describing historical events, and adding subjective political context/assumed consequence of those events.

"[X] happened" is fact

"[X] happened which lead to [Y] and now today we have [Z]" is theory.

Then that cancels the whole premise of sociology, and a lot of new right theory, is all that to be dropped too?
Lone parents raise delinquent children... if you are jobless you are also feckless.. if you are raised surrounded by poverty and crime it's your fault if you're poor and involved with crime and criminals...

When's the debate on this?

[Tom4784]

i've seen people on here called racist because they didn't agree with some of the unsavoury things BLM have been up to. That's shutting down criticism

If someone called me a racist, I'd argue back and say why they were talking ****. It wouldn't shut me down at all.

If a person can't think of a single reason why they aren't racist if someone calls them such then that speaks volumes about them.

I'm so tired of people acting like they're being 'shut down' when they simply lose an argument. No one is holding your mouth shut, stop playing the victim and defend yourself.

[user104658]

Then that cancels the whole premise of sociology, and a lot of new right theory, is all that to be dropped too?
Lone parents raise delinquent children... if you are jobless you are also feckless.. if you are raised surrounded by poverty and crime it's your fault if you're poor and involved with crime and criminals...

When's the debate on this?

Things being theory rather than fact "cancel the whole premise" of the academic discipline they belong to?

:think: I think this might be coming from an incomplete understanding of what's (academically) meant by the word "theory". Theory is not synonymous with opinion, and academic theory is not layperson guesswork. But it's also not fact.

For example, gravity is theory. Very robustly proven theory, but theory nonetheless. I don't think we're planning to cancel physics.

[Kizzy]

I think that's a common mistake really, that "people being called stuff" is shutting down or stopping criticism... when that's entirely down to the critic. You can address it, counter it, or flat out ignore it and continue... it doesn't shut anything down. Really the only people who can be guilty of shutting down a debate are those in a position of literal power to do so; on here that would be mods and admin who can close threads/delete posts/implement bans.

I do think that "mob rule" has unfortunate scope for shutting down good debate as well, by simply swamping the debate to the point where it can't continue, but that doesn't apply on a platform as small as this one.
This is exactly what she is advocating...shutting down debate. How is that healthy?
There are historical events that are catalysts for movements and as mentioned even a collective resolution borne of a shared experience. As with the Jewish and their suffering during the early 20th century as is the black communities and their shared history of enslavement.

In my opinion if you withold or negate the right to directly link attitudes to historical events you are attempting to re write the historical narrative and take away or reduce the impact the events have even generations later.

That is of course down to culpability and guilt, if you deny the theory did it ever exist?...

[user104658]

This is exactly what she is advocating...shutting down debate. How is that healthy?
There are historical events that are catalysts for movements and as mentioned even a collective resolution borne of a shared experience. As with the Jewish and their suffering during the early 20th century as is the black communities and their shared history of enslavement.

In my opinion if you withold or negate the right to directly link attitudes to historical events you are attempting to re write the historical narrative and take away or reduce the impact the events have even generations later.

That is of course down to culpability and guilt, if you deny the theory did it ever exist?...

I haven't said that I agree with the person in the video nor the premise of what she's saying, I actually said that I think the vast majority of Westminster Commons speeches are party-political soapboxing.

I don't agree with shutting down the debate in schools, theory being taught in schools (as existing theory NOT fact), nor do I agree with certain types of political content being blanket-banned. I do think there should be robust restrictions on the sources of that political material or it very quickly becomes an avenue for propaganda; anti-capitalist teaching material from an anti-capitalist movement is about as useful as a paper on economic theory written by Amazon.

[Kizzy]

Things being theory rather than fact "cancel the whole premise" of the academic discipline they belong to?

:think: I think this might be coming from an incomplete understanding of what's (academically) meant by the word "theory". Theory is not synonymous with opinion, and academic theory is not layperson guesswork. But it's also not fact.

For example, gravity is theory. Very robustly proven theory, but theory nonetheless. I don't think we're planning to cancel physics.

I never mentioned physics...gravity is a fact Newton proved it remember?

Anyhoo, sociological theory is similar to political theory in a way that scientific theory isn't. So I suggest we only compare the two. You throwing in the straw man is not helpful.

[user104658]

I never mentioned physics...gravity is a fact Newton proved it remember?

A proven theory is not fact, gravity is not fact, and the fact that you don't know/understand that knocks the legs out of this discussion. I can't help you with fundamentals.

Anyhoo, sociological theory is similar to political theory in a way that scientific theory isn't. So I suggest we only compare the two. You throwing in the straw man is not helpful.

The academic distinction between theory and fact is what it is, and if anything sociopolitical theory is always going to be more subjective and have less robust proof behind it than theories in the "hard sciences".

[The Slim Reaper]

anti-capitalist teaching material from an anti-capitalist movement is about as useful as a paper on economic theory written by Amazon.

This I see as just wrong, and it's ok for us to disagree here. Any anti-capitalist discussion would have to include Marx (not Marxism necessarily) because his criticisms and predictions have been proved true, but he is an anti-capitalist.

The renaissance period wasn't brought about by priests criticising themselves and giving away their power, it was the introduction of the free thought movement and outside criticisms.

Self criticism from (government decided) pro capitalist groups would be automatic and co-opted capitalist propaganda.

[Kizzy]

I haven't said that I agree with the person in the video nor the premise of what she's saying, I actually said that I think the vast majority of Westminster Commons speeches are party-political soapboxing.

I don't agree with shutting down the debate in schools, theory being taught in schools (as existing theory NOT fact), nor do I agree with certain types of political content being blanket-banned. I do think there should be robust restrictions on the sources of that political material or it very quickly becomes an avenue for propaganda; anti-capitalist teaching material from an anti-capitalist movement is about as useful as a paper on economic theory written by Amazon.
Isn't that economic theory, that capitalism is failing...
Why does it have to be seen as anti or pro?
Look at the history of it, the expansion of capitalism and globalisation the exploitation that surrounds it be it labour or natural resources and critique it, how viable is it for the future?

There is nothing wrong with having those discussions, again it's just effectively imo refusing to admit that the whole conservative capitalist ethos is fatally flawed as it's unsustainable.

[Kizzy]

A proven theory is not fact, gravity is not fact, and the fact that you don't know/understand that knocks the legs out of this discussion. I can't help you with fundamentals.



The academic distinction between theory and fact is what it is, and if anything sociopolitical theory is always going to be more subjective and have less robust proof behind it than theories in the "hard sciences".

Again you're trying to muddy the water of this debate with some pedantic musing about gravity...I'm not here to discuss gravity so it doesn't ' knock the legs' from my opinion on the topic I'm here to discuss.

[Kizzy]

The wording refers to those who wish to 'abolish' or 'overthrow' capitalism so I don't think that applies to unions or the Labour party but more radical groups who would support violence/illegal means to achieve that goal. I think schools should certainly cover critiques of capitalism but if they were doing so via material produced by, say, the CPGB then that's a little different

There are different types of capitalism it is an umbrella term but there are those that are more exploitative than others. Venture capitalism for instance. A fair and explanatory synopsis of capitalism can easily identify which have negative impacts nationally, globally, ecologically or historically.

Some are just bad, no matter how or who dresses them up. It would be noble to just admit that some political and economical theories followed by successive government's were just plain wrong rather than arguing that it's wrong to even debate the issue.

What good, growth or progress can come of that approach for the future?

[user104658]

Again you're trying to muddy the water of this debate with some pedantic musing about gravity...I'm not here to discuss gravity so it doesn't ' knock the legs' from my opinion on the topic I'm here to discuss.

Ok.

[MTVN]

This I see as just wrong, and it's ok for us to disagree here. Any anti-capitalist discussion would have to include Marx (not Marxism necessarily) because his criticisms and predictions have been proved true, but he is an anti-capitalist.

The renaissance period wasn't brought about by priests criticising themselves and giving away their power, it was the introduction of the free thought movement and outside criticisms.

Self criticism from (government decided) pro capitalist groups would be automatic and co-opted capitalist propaganda.

Have his predictions been proved true? Marx thought capitalism would inevitably fall in quite short order when the workers achieved class consciousness, 150 years on and capitalism is stronger than ever

[The Slim Reaper]

Have his predictions been proved true? Marx thought capitalism would inevitably fall in quite short order when the workers achieved class consciousness, 150 years on and capitalism is stronger than ever

I guess the current strength of capitalism is decided by the perspective of the individual, because the speed at which wealth disparity is increasing, isn't healthy or the basis of a strong economy in any way.

He was correct about entrefemdung, about insecurity for workers, wealth disparity. As an example, Jeff Bezos has just under 900,000 employees, and if he gave them all a $100,000 bonus tomorrow, he'd have as much money left over as he had at the start of the pandemic, whilst workers are being abused on zero hour contracts, and he was on the money when it came to taxing corporate wealth to benefit society.

He was absolutely bang on when he wrote about capitalism lurching from crisis to crisis and I could go on. I would also argue that class consciousness is still an on-going endeavour, especially when highlighted by the fact that working class people who have achieved upward mobility, are equally liable to look down their noses at the remaining working class. A glance at the Rashford thread will highlight what I mean.

[MTVN]

I guess the current strength of capitalism is decided by the perspective of the individual, because the speed at which wealth disparity is increasing, isn't healthy or the basis of a strong economy in any way.

He was correct about entrefemdung, about insecurity for workers, wealth disparity. As an example, Jeff Bezos has just under 900,000 employees, and if he gave them all a $100,000 bonus tomorrow, he'd have as much money left over as he had at the start of the pandemic, whilst workers are being abused on zero hour contracts, and he was on the money when it came to taxing corporate wealth to benefit society.

He was absolutely bang on when he wrote about capitalism lurching from crisis to crisis and I could go on. I would also argue that class consciousness is still an on-going endeavour, especially when highlighted by the fact that working class people who have achieved upward mobility, are equally liable to look down their noses at the remaining working class. A glance at the Rashford thread will highlight what I mean.

There's definitely problems but imo capitalism has been the most effective tool at lifting people out of poverty globally and that's why Marxist movements have mostly faded now. 'Class consciousness' was surely much higher in the early-mid 20th century than it is now

Some of that is fair though, but I think Marx underestimated capitalisms ability to adapt and the ability of technology to completely change the circumstances, I mean the working class has never been a homogenous group but is much less so now than when the majority of the population worked in manual industries. Marx should always be studied but I think the world today is totally different to how he expected it to be

[The Slim Reaper]

There's definitely problems but imo capitalism has been the most effective tool at lifting people out of poverty globally and that's why Marxist movements have mostly faded now. 'Class consciousness' was surely much higher in the early-mid 20th century than it is now

Some of that is fair though, but I think Marx underestimated capitalisms ability to adapt and the ability of technology to completely change the circumstances, I mean the working class has never been a homogenous group but is much less so now than when the majority of the population worked in manual industries. Marx should always be studied but I think the world today is totally different to how he expected it to be

Some good and fair points in there, but anyone who looks at the world today with the way the wealth is dangerously congregating towards fewer individuals, poverty rising starkly, and with the increasing necessity even for working people to need foodbanks, and thinks yeah, capitalism is working for everyone, then I'm not sure what you're looking at.

Capitalism has made great contributions to combatting poverty, but if you want to go back to a golden age. then you're looking at tax rates of 70/80 and even 90 percent on the wealthiest individuals/corporations, which then provided the things that society needed.

I think communism and the cold war were the most damaging things to happen to Marxism (a different debate), but I'd actually suggest that socialism/Marxism is probably more on the rise at the moment than at any time post WW2.

[Elliot]

Criticising capitalism is fine tbh. But critical race theory has no place in ... Well, anywhere really. Apart from Tumblr.

If you’re talking about race science and how iq tests are used to dehumanise black people and call them stupid I agree

[user104658]

If you’re talking about race science and how IQ tests are used to dehumanise black people and call them stupid I agree

I'd question where this is actually happening - as I can't think of anywhere that uses IQ testing in any official or mandatory capacity. The only IQ tests I've ever taken were an official one out of curiosity, and online ones (which are mostly bull**** anyway) for "fun".

I'm aware of the standard IQ test being culturally biased, but unless you take an IQ test because you fancy taking an IQ test... there's no reason or scenario I can think of where someone would be asked to take one at all.

The bias of the test also has nothing to do with biological race bias by the way - it is entirely cultural/location bias (i.e. which country you were educated in).

[utopianman]

How are we learning from history by making discussions illegal? That's willfully ignoring, not learning.

Its the hardliners on the left and other radicals who are making it difficult to discuss these issues as they automatically accuse any critics as racist when theyre not

[Tom4784]

Its the hardliners on the left and other radicals who are making it difficult to discuss these issues as they automatically accuse any critics as racist when theyre not

Do people accused of racism lose the ability to speak? I'm tired of the whole 'wah, people are trying to silence me by pointing out racism' bull****. If you aren't a racist, refute it, argue against it.

If right wingers feel silenced by accusations of racism then perhaps they should better learn how to argue their points and defend themselves better. Or, they could just try to be at least less racist.

[Kizzy]

:clap1: what a speech. Schooling the opposite side of the house - have a watch and see what you think? (it's very watchable and NOT boring)

Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch made a speech during a debate on Black
History Month, in which she said any British schools teaching critical race theory
are “breaking the law” and criticised the “anti-capitalist” Black Lives Matter
group.


pwH45WlpDoo


She did not say that, she said if a teacher made statements like the police should be defined and presented theory as fact it would break the law.

I do think she herself could do with learning a thing or two on the subject before complaining about imaginary scenarios.

Contrary to some of the depictions on Twitter, on talk-shows and even in parliament
CRT does*not*view all White people as evil and racist.CRT does*not*peddle a view of Black people as powerless victims.CRT does*not*imagine that racism is the only social problem and thereby erase issues of class, gender, disability and other forms of discrimination.*


https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/research/crre/critical-race-theory/index.aspx

[Kizzy]

Dq6yDKSBnIs

[The Slim Reaper]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eqp7MGiW8AApPR4?format=jpg&name=medium
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eqp7MGkXYAA_4_A?format=jpg&name=medium
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eqp7MGkXYAMMyq4?format=jpg&name=medium

These jokers :joker:

[Crimson Dynamo]

1344938643115413504

[arista]

[Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch made a speech during a debate on Black
History Month, in which she said any British schools teaching critical race theory
are “breaking the law” and criticised the “anti-capitalist” Black Lives Matter
group.]




Good on Kemi

[arista]

Yes The London Mayor
thinks he is down with the kids.