GOV/MIL Leftists Call For New "Secret Police" Force To Spy On Trump Supporters (AN ABSOLUTELY MUST-READ THREAD)

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Biden’s overtly anti-white COVID rescue plan won’t survive in court
By Betsy McCaughey
May 25, 2021 | 5:20pm | Updated

Disabled farmer suing Biden administration for denying coronavirus relief due to race

Team Biden is poised to hand out billions of dollars to what it misleadingly labels “socially disadvantaged” farmers, restaurateurs and other business owners hurt by the lockdowns. The money will start flowing to them in early June — provided they don’t have white skin.

Biden’s American Rescue Plan defines “socially disadvantaged” based on skin color and ancestry, not the hardships faced by an individual. Blacks, American Indians, Alaskan Natives, Hispanics and Pacific Islanders are included. One group is excluded: whites.

Fortunately, the new law’s anti-white provisions are facing a challenge in court, and the challengers are likely to win. The US Constitution forbids discrimination based on race — period.

One of the Midwestern farmers suing, Adam Faust, was born with spina bifida and has two prosthetic legs. He manages to milk 70 cows a day and grow 200 acres worth of feed crops. He’s in debt but he doesn’t qualify for forgiveness under the American Rescue Plan because of his skin color.

Last month, a Texas farmer who is the state’s agricultural commissioner also sued. Like Faust, he argued that the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause guarantees him equal treatment regardless of race.

That is a Texas café owner’s claim as well. Philip Greer’s café lost $100,000 during the shutdown. He applied to the Restaurant Revitalization Fund set up under the American Rescue Plan. The fund offers restaurateurs up to $5 million per location to cover losses. But Greer is white, and the law says for the first 21 days funds are disbursed, most white men have to go to the back of the line, behind women, veterans and “socially and economically disadvantaged” applicants.

1622062848773.png

Greer sued. On May 18, federal Judge Reed O’Connor determined that he is likely to succeed at trial and ordered the Small Business Administration to halt its discriminatory practices and consider Greer’s application immediately. The judge pointed out the obvious, that the fund’s $29 billion would likely be distributed before Greer and other white male applicants made it to the front of the line.

Citing Supreme Court precedent, O’Connor cautioned against giving “government license to create a patchwork of racial preferences based on statistical generalizations.” Amen.

Just because blacks make up a small percentage of restaurant owners or farmers doesn’t, by itself, prove past racism or justify discriminating against another group now.

Farmers 'frustrated' with latest COVID relief legislation

https://nypost.com/a51191af-99de-494a-90b4-c9a38a0f4865 3:17 min

Overturning the American Rescue Plan’s racist provisions is essential, lest Democrats move ahead with more extreme measures. Next up is the Justice for Black Farmers Act, “to encourage a new generation of black farmers” at a cost of $100 billion.

Five Democrats on the Senate agricultural committee, including Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock, are behind the measure, which would award 160 acres, a home mortgage, a loan for farming equipment and agricultural training to 200,000 recipients over 10 years, setting them up to be farmers. The only qualification is a parent of African ancestry — no agricultural experience required.

What could go wrong? It’s a reckless abuse of taxpayers’ money to buy and give away 32 million acres based on one principle only: skin color. It’s reparations by another name.

Most Americans oppose racial preferences, though Democratic politicians push them. Voters in California and Washington state, two of the bluest states, recently rejected ballot measures for affirmative action.

The public agrees with Chief Justice John Roberts that “the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” In 2022, the Republican Party should present itself as the anti-discrimination party, offering voters a stark choice between racial preferences and colorblind fairness.

For now, the battle to defeat the anti-white provisions of Biden’s American Rescue Plan will be fought in court. Fortunately, that’s where the Constitution still matters.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Published 1 hour ago
Democrats are getting increasingly nervous about 'woke' culture, analysts say

James Carville: 'Wokeness is a problem and everyone knows it'
By Cortney O'Brien | Fox News

CNN's Jeff Zucker downplaying Chris Cuomo advising his brother as a 'mistake' and more round out today's top media headlines

A New York Times opinion writer wondered in a new op-ed on Wednesday if the progressive cancel culture push will backfire on Democrats at the polls, and he isn't the only analyst asking the question.

"Is Wokeness ‘Kryptonite for Democrats?’" Times contributor Thomas Edsall's headline asked.

Edsall quoted several surveys finding most people are against the more radical campaigns, such as efforts to defund the police and upend traditional gender norms. And yet, he said, Republicans can still point to the extreme minority that is pushing these ideas to argue that the Democratic Party is increasingly beholden to the radicals.

"Although centrist Democrats make up the majority of the party in the polls I cited above, the fact that a substantial minority of Democrats takes the more extreme stance allows Republicans to portray the Democratic Party as very much in thrall to its more ‘radical’ wing," Edsall wrote.

Edsall shared an email he received from social psychologist Jonathan Haidt arguing that the left-wing policies will only serve to drag down the party.

"Wokeness is kryptonite for Democrats," Haidt wrote. "Most people hate it, other than the progressive activists. If you just look at Americans' policy preferences, Dems should be winning big majorities. But we have strong negative partisanship, and when people are faced with a party that seems to want to defund the police and rename schools, rather than open them, all while crime is rising and kids' welfare is falling, the left flank of the party is just so easy for Republicans to run against."

That belief is shared by Democratic strategist James Carville, who made perhaps an even bolder statement on how cancel culture will impact the party last month.

"Wokeness is a problem and everyone knows it," he said. "It’s hard to talk to anybody today — and I talk to lots of people in the Democratic Party — who doesn’t say this. But they don’t want to say it out loud."

Andrew Guttmann, a New York City parent who has been speaking out against schools' push for critical race theory, said on Fox News' "America's Newsroom" on Wednesday that the cancel culture curriculum "is going to destroy our country" if it's not reversed. In a new piece for The Hill, he argued that the campaign for wokeness will only hurt the progressives spearheading it.

NYC father says schools ‘indoctrinating’ children with critical race theory push
Video
.56 min

"There appears to be widespread belief that opposition to critical race theory is a view held solely by the political right," he wrote. "This perception is wrong. It is certainly true that the conservative media has almost exclusively embraced viewpoints unfavorable to critical race theory while the liberal-oriented media has been overwhelmingly approving. But our polarized media does not seem to accurately reflect the view of most Americans."
 
Last edited:

marsh

On TB every waking moment

MSNBC Wails Over States Combating Radical Racial Propaganda in Schools

Kyle Drennen
May 26th, 2021 12:39 PM

Throughout the day on Tuesday, MSNBC anchors and reporters bitterly complained that states like Oklahoma were fighting back against left-wing attempts to push radical propaganda like Critical Race Theory in schools. The coverage falsely claimed the proposed legislation would somehow ban any discussion of race or racism in the classroom and desperately tried to spin the effort to protect students from an extreme political agenda as an attack on free speech.

“So is racism systemic in American society?,” asked Today show co-host and MSNBC anchor Craig Melvin during his 11:00 a.m. ET hour show. He then explained: “That’s really at the heart of a debate that we’ve had in this country for years now. And right now, lawmakers in at least 12 states have introduced bills that ban teaching what’s called Critical Race Theory, in schools.”

https://cdn.mrctv.org/videos/53866/53866-480p.mp4 2:13 min

In the report that followed, correspondent Antonia Hylton breathlessly warned: “Anthony Crawford worries he could lose his job. He teaches creative writing at Millwood High in Oklahoma City, where a new state law is set to ban certain teachings of race, bias, and history.” After soundbite ran of Crawford talking to his students about racism in society, Hylton hyped:
The law targets Critical Race Theory, a decades-old academic study of the legacy of racism and inequality. But growing chorus of Republicans use the phrase to describe diversity training and historical teachings they see as divisive. The law bans teaching concepts that lead students to feel guilt or discomfort due to their identity.
The reporter was shown speaking with one of the bill’s co-sponsors, Republican State Representative Kevin West, who read a portion of the measure aloud: “No teacher shall require or make part of a course the following concepts, an individual by virtue of his or her race or sex bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex.”

Not finding that provision objectionable at all, Hylton contended it was unnecessary to even have to spell out: “I’ve certainly never heard a teacher say those things.” However, recent comments from Oklahoma City Public Schools Board of Education member Ruth Veales would suggest otherwise. While lashing out at the legislation, she ranted:
When I listen to what the governor said in his speech, and to say that it is not right for White students to feel like they should be held responsible for the oppression that Black people and others have felt by cause of them....But then let’s talk about the generational wealth, all on the backs of my people, let’s talk about that....and then for White fragility to come in and say ‘I don’t appreciate being called a racist,’ rather than honoring the request to have a place to have these conversations.
Talking to UCLA and Columbia University Law professor Kimberle Crenshaw, “one of the original founders of Critical Race Theory,” Hylton fretted that she “thinks this is only the beginning.” Crenshaw bemoaned: “I’ve been trying to tell people for at least six months that the efforts to respond to the reckoning of last summer was going to metastasize into a backlash. I thought, ‘Okay, so they found their bogeyman.’” She claimed that having her leftist agenda expelled from schools would lead to students having “an education that is less robust than we have even right now.”

After the taped portion of the segment concluded, Hylton told Melvin that “no matter what ends up happening with this law, many of the teachers feel like there’s already been a chilling effect on their speech.”

The report was replayed again in the 2:00 p.m. ET hour, after which, anchor Geoff Bennett spread unsupported fears that somehow the new Oklahoma law would ban the teaching of tragic historical events: “Yeah, I mean, one wonders how, you know, teachers in Oklahoma can teach the accurate history, for instance, the Tulsa race massacre, with a law like this on the books.”

If he had actually bothered to read the legislation, he would have seen that there was absolutely nothing in it that would prevent the teaching of such historical topics. After signing the measure, Republican Governor Kevin Stitt specifically stated:
We must keep teaching history and all of its complexities and encourage honest and tough conversations about our past. Nothing in this bill prevents or discourages those conversations....We can and should teach this history without labeling a young child as an oppressor or requiring that he or she feel guilt or shame based on their race or sex. I refuse to tolerate otherwise.
Bringing up the subject in the 3:00 p.m. ET hour, anchor Ayman Mohyeldin emphasized: “...we know the issue of racism is deep in this country, systemic and deeply rooted.” He then invited NYU Law professor and far-left pundit Melissa Murray to pontificate on the issue. She lamented:
History is written by the victors and the perspectives of those who were not on winning side often get sidelined. What things like The 1619 Project and Critical Race Theory aim to do is to surface those marginalized voices. And when those voices are surfaced that can be incredibly threatening to those whose vision of history has always been predominant.
The radical goals of Critical Race Theory were never honestly discussed and aside from a single brief soundbite from a Republican sponsor of the Oklahoma bill, the actual content of the legislation wasn’t really explained to viewers.

This push to defend the left-wing indoctrination of students was brought to viewers by BMW
and Verizon. You can fight back by letting these advertisers know what you think of them sponsoring such content.

Here is a full transcript of the May 25 report from Hylton: (Scrolling doc. on website)

1622066552592.png
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Report: Nation’s Largest Defense Contractor Sent Executives to a White Male Reeducation Camp to Deconstruct Their ‘White Male Culture’ . . . Developing

By Matthew Burke • May. 26, 2021

Christopher Rufo, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, is teasing a report that Lockheed Martin, America’s largest defense contractor sent key executives to a three-day “white male reeducation camp” in order to deconstruct their so-called “white male culture” and apparently to atone for their “white male privilege”‘.

Rufo reports that he’s obtained shocking internal documents that will be forthcoming:

1622085146459.png

Rufo reports that the brainwashing was led by the woke consulting firm, “White Men as Full Diversity Partners”:

1622085100996.png

Bonus: In a related matter, check out Christopher Rufo crushing Marxist race hustler Marc Lamont Hill, whose gotcha question of “Tell me something good about whiteness” doesn’t go well for him:

1622085014983.png

View: https://twitter.com/marclamonthill/status/1397522506198753280?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1397597206199234560%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es3_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fthelibertydaily.com%2Freport-nations-largest-defense-contractor-sent-executives-to-a-white-male-reeducation-camp-to-deconstruct-their-white-male-culture-developing%2F
2:20 min

1622084960508.png
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

U.S. Miners React to Joe Biden’s Move to Ditch U.S. Development of Critical Minerals: China Wins
SYCAMORE, PA - APRIL 13: Coal miner Dale Travis, 53, of Wheeling, West Virginia, waits for the arrival of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt to visit with miners at the Harvey Mine on April 13, 2017 in Sycamore, Pennsylvania. The Harvey Mine, owned by CNX Coal Resources, is …
Justin Merriman/Getty Images
PENNY STARR26 May 20211,480

Miners in the United States who hoped President Joe Biden would support domestic production of critical minerals are reacting to his plan to ditch them and rely on other countries, including China.

The New York Post reported:
The plan under consideration would entail buying the materials from overseas markets and allow US manufacturers to assemble them into batteries or electric vehicles in an effort to create American jobs but still remain in the good graces of environmental groups, Reuters reported on Tuesday.
The Post report continued:
According to figures from the World Bank, the U.S. imports of minerals in 2018 relied mainly on Canada, China, Mexico, Brazil and South America. But labor leaders, many of whom support Democratic candidates, said they don’t want their workers left out of a lucrative job market.

“Let’s let Americans extract these minerals from the earth,” Aaron Butler of United Association Local 469 union, which does work for Rio Tinto Ltd.’s proposed copper mine project in Arizona and endorsed Biden in the election, told Reuters.
Pini Althaus, CEO Of USA Rare Earth, said in a statement:
The U.S. Government cannot make assumptions that non-U.S. rare earth and critical minerals producers will sell their materials into the U.S. supply chain and not to China. China is actively and aggressively pursuing acquisitions of rare earth projects or offtake agreements all over the world, and non-U.S. project owners will make the best commercial decisions for their own shareholders, not the idealistic and regulated approach that U.S. miners will take — prioritizing materials for the U.S. supply chain.
“And whilst this development does not directly affect our Round Top deposit as we are on State of Texas land, the United States needs several projects to come into production, and in the near term, if we are to achieve our goals around electrification of vehicles,” Althaus said.

“Given our ability to process third-party materials, USA Rare Earth would be available to take in materials from non-U.S. projects, but as a whole this policy is devastating for the sector and a setback towards the goal of establishing a secure domestic supply chain.”

“The reason the U.S. is in its current precarious position – lacking a domestic critical minerals supply chain – was due to poor decision making 30 years ago, when the same argument was made to let someone else, China, do the mining and processing,” Althaus said. “The naive thought process at that time was that those materials would come back into the U.S. supply chain, even as China made no secret back then as to its ambitions in controlling the rare earth supply chain.”

“The winner of such policy is China, again,” Althaus said in the statement.

“The U.S. took a positive step in this direction when the U.S. Dept. of Energy recently launched the Division of Minerals Sustainability,” Rich Nolan, president of the National Mining Association, said in a statement in March. “But if we want to seriously compete in the global EV market, the U.S. must give mining and the mineral supply chain the attention they deserve. We have the tools to win this race, but only if we make smart policy decisions.”

The Detroit Bureau website also reported on the reactions to the Biden administration’s move:
During his campaign last year, Biden expressed the need to source the raw material for batteries within the U.S., giving a boost to the American mining industry. A policy that does not invest in American mines would almost certainly turn into a political football.
“These ‘not-in-my-backyard’ extremists have made clear they want to lock up our land and prevent the mining of minerals,” U.S. Representative Lauren Boebert, a Colorado Republican, said during a House Natural Resources Committee forum last week.
Some Democratic leaders are seeking to have the White House reverse course, worrying that the proposed mining strategy could hurt the party’s chances in advance of the critical 2022 mid-term elections.
This is another reversal of former President Donald Trump’s policies, this time on critical minerals.

“The ‘federal strategy lays out a blueprint for America to once again be a leader in the critical minerals sector,’ then-Interior Secretary David Bernhardt said in a statement in June 2019,” the Post reported.

“As with our energy security, the Trump Administration is dedicated to ensuring that we are never held hostage to foreign powers for the natural resources critical to our national security and economic growth,” Bernhardt said at the time. “The Department will work expeditiously to implement the President’s strategy from streamlining the permitting process to locating domestic supplies of minerals.”
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpd4OUb9dGs
9:43 min

Woke politics will DIVIDE our military: US vs. Russian ads show CLEAR difference

•May 27, 2021


Glenn Beck


Glenn plays a Russian military ad back to back with one released recently by the US Army — a cartoon featuring a soldier’s gay parents (one of whom is wheelchair bound). But here’s the thing: the goal of our military, as the Russian ad blatantly states, is to track down the enemy, out perform them, and come home the victor. But instead, leftist politicians are injecting woke politics into our military, which surely will divide them. So, based on these ads, who do YOU think would ‘come home the victor’?
 
Last edited:

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Stunning New Court Ruling Reveals Blatant Institutional Discrimination Against White Americans

May 26, 2021 (19h ago)

2021.05.27-03.40-revolvernews-60af1491e8866.jpeg


It’s increasingly obvious to all Americans (even Congressional Republicans) that America’s governing elites openly spout racist propaganda against white people. Public schools push critical race theory while abandoning advanced math. Even in high-stakes institutions like the U.S. military and its key contractors, fairness and merit are being tossed in favor of hysterical denunciations of phantom “white supremacy.”

1622155392557.png1622155429443.png

But this is about more than rhetoric and propaganda. The Biden Administration is sending the signal in the clear for anybody who wants to notice it: America has implemented an anti-white race and anti-male sex-based caste system, where the hated straight white men are firmly at the bottom. And the courts are ready to sustain it.

In the most recent $1.9 trillion round of coronavirus stimulus, Congress set aside $28.6 billion for a “Restaurant Revitalization Program,” to bolster the industry hit the hardest by a year of economically suicidal lockdowns. But instead of fairly distributing the money based on need, or on a first-come, first-served basis, the program was set up with rigid identity-based restrictions: For the first three weeks, only “women, veterans, or socially and economically disadvantaged individuals” are eligible for funds.

And, naturally, now that the program is open to white men, all the money is already gone. Too bad! Better luck next time.
Eligibility was slated to open broadly afterward. However, the SBA reported on May 18 it had already received more than 303,000 applications representing more than $69 billion, with nearly 38,000 applicants already approved for more than $6 billion.
Of the applications, 57% came from women, veterans, and socially and economically disadvantaged business owners, who had already applied for $29 billion in the $28.6 billion program by May 12, the SBA has said. [CBS]

The Restaurant Revitalization Program’s criteria are flagrantly illegal, violating the plain text of the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection under the law. In 1989’s Richmond v. Croson case, the Supreme Court ruled that creating government set-asides specifically based on race was unconstitutional; 1995’s Adarand Constructors v. Peña found that any racially-discriminatory preferences by the federal government must satisfy strict scrutiny (in other words, be as narrowly tailored as possible to fulfill a compelling government interest). Neither of the government’s latest initiatives come close to satisfying such a standard.

But so far, it hasn’t mattered. Just last week, federal judge Travis McDonough allowed the government to start making payments for the Restaurant Revitalization Program.
The lawsuit said the limited funding put White male “applicants at significant risk that, by the time their applications are processed, the money will be gone” — an argument that did not sway the judge.

“While this is certainly unfortunate, Congress cannot reasonably have been expected to predict with precision the level of demand for funds nor how the demand would break down between priority and non-priority applications,” the judge wrote. [CBS]

McDonough’s ruling flagrantly ignores the American Constitution, but right now, it doesn’t matter. The Globalist American Empire is imposing a new, higher law, overtly centered on racial hierarchy rather than equality.

It’s not just for restaurants, either. The Biden stimulus also includes $4 billion to provide debt relief for farmers. The only catch: No white farmers allowed.
Agriculture secretary Tom Vilsack told The Washington Post he estimates that between 11,000 and 13,000 Black, American Indian, Hispanic, Alaskan Native, Asian American or Pacific Islander farmers will benefit from this program, with the entirety of their loans paid off by the U.S. Treasury. Eligible farmers and ranchers will also receive an additional 20 percent of that loan as a cash payment sent directly to them, to cover the tax burden that comes with such large debt relief. …

In a statement, Vilsack repeated his commitment to “ending discrimination wherever it exists at USDA and working like never before to gain the trust and confidence of America’s farmers and ranchers.” [Washington Post]
As customary in our new Globalist American Empire, Vilsack brags about ending discrimination when he is actually entrenching it. There is no pretense about remedying specific harms done to specific farmers. Instead, farmers are divided solely based on race into oppressors (whites) and victims (everyone else), and only the anointed victims are eligible for federal aid. This is supposedly justified to remedy “centuries” of discrimination, the main effect of which is that it will conveniently justify centuries of additional discrimination going forward.

If the federal government wanted to uplift businesses that are most economically vulnerable, then only an “economically disadvantaged” category would be necessary. But instead, the program explicitly created the “socially disadvantaged” category. Why? Because the purpose was to deliberately cut out white men.

The entire “socially disadvantaged” label concocted by the federal government is an obscenity and insult to logic. The category includes “Asian Pacific Americans” (i.e. East Asians and Pacific Islanders) and “Subcontinent Asian Americans” (i.e. Indians, Pakistanis, and Bangladeshis).

Nothing in American life “socially disadvantages” these groups, other than government-sanctioned discrimination against them in university admissions. Indian Americans earn more than $100,000 a year on average, more than double the national median. Seventy-two percent of Indian American adults have at least a bachelor’s degree. Asian Americans have both the highest incomes of any race in the U.S., and their incomes are growing the fastest.

The goal is not to uplift “socially disadvantaged” groups. The goal is to exclude a new legal underclass, white men. They aren’t excluded because they are the most successful group in America; Indians and Asians are easily more successful on average. They are excluded because America’s ruling regime hates them. It wants their businesses bankrupt and their children addicted to opioids or selling nudes on OnlyFans (or better yet, both!).

Why are they so hated? There are many reasons: Because their ancestors built America into the richest, most powerful, most innovative, and freest country in the world, and the Globalist American Empires retches at its own obvious inferiority. Because they, more than any group, represent what America was, and what the left wants to destroy forever. Because they’re the demographic that voted Trump, and has always voted against the failing machinations of the Globalist American Empire.

The patsies of this new corrupt regime will argue that white Americans cannot be second-class citizens, because (for now) they remain more economically well off than some (but not all) other groups in America. This is meaningless. Discrimination has coexisted with economic success many times throughout history. In many nations, Jews were better-off on average than Christians; and in Rwanda the Tutsi were richer than the Hutus before and after 500,000 Tutsis were butchered with Hutu machetes.

There is no rational reason to think that anti-white animosity will stop with discrimination in hiring and government benefits. Already, American elites are on the hunt for new ways to entrench the legal inferiority of whites and in particular white men. A Tuesday segment on NPR discussed how America’s entire tax structure needs to be changed to make sure that white people pay more in taxes. Why? No reason is needed. Taking more from whites is an end unto itself.

So, what is to be done? The essential first step is to stop being in denial. If you’re one of the tens of millions of straight white American men, you aren’t at risk of becoming a second-class citizen. You are not in danger of becoming a legally entrenched scapegoat for the nation’s problems. You are one right now. Every college, every corporation, and every charitable non-profit in American life was already biased against you. Now, the very laws of the country aim at your marginalization as well.

Once one understands the truth about what’s going on, the path forward becomes clearer.

Above all, stop propping up a system engineered to destroy you and your children. Despite its vast power, the Globalist American Empire still lacks the capacity to enforce its ideology on the noncompliant masses. Incredibly, the new racial caste system relies substantially on the honor system. As Revolver wrote back in March, this can be exploited:
There is no honor in playing by the rules of an immoral unjust and illegitimate system — and make no mistake, that is just what we live under in the Globalist American Empire. A century ago, black Americans evaded the injustice of Jim Crow by “passing” as white. Today, America is reviving segregation and racism as an official part of government policy, and once again, “passing” and deception are perfect tools of resistance.

So go wild. When reparations come to your town or your institution, do everything you can to get a cut. When your children apply to college, shave their heads and give them a tan and claim they are proud of their partial African heritage. …

If you can’t get away with that, claim Hispanic lineage from Mexico or, better yet, Central America. Hispanic isn’t even a real race, so literally anybody can qualify. So what if you can’t prove it? Most people don’t have detailed family trees. Your family lore says it’s true. If family lore was enough to launch Elizabeth Warren’s career, it’s good enough for you.
As much as it wishes otherwise, the Globalist American Empire relies on its new legal underclass. Even now, it needs them to fill the ranks of the armed forces. It needs them to enforce the law as police officers (even as it threatens to imprison them for life if they restrain criminals resisting arrest). It needs them to do the hard work of keeping society running smoothly despite all the stresses placed on it by the GAE’s mismanagement. Perhaps it’s time that patriots stopped cooperating.

But this isn’t just about refusing to cooperate legally and institutionally. Even more important is refusing to cooperate morally.

At the beginning of this article, Revolver linked the latest work from Christopher Rufo, who has done excellent work over the last two years exposing the critical race theory fraud that is ripping through American institutions. Rufo is a great American who deserves everyone’s support. But in a recent interview, Rufo was asked a simple question, and flubbed his answer to it badly:

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1397522506198753280
2: 20 min

Even the most prominent public enemy of critical race theory, which is in truth anti-white racial theory, doesn’t feel comfortable saying anything positive about being white, even when asked. This speaks to how deeply ingrained anti-white conditioning has become in America, and how thoroughly terrorized everyone has been to not ever test the limits of the Overton Window on the issue.

This is not a call for “white nationalism” or any of the insulting lies vomited out by the regime’s propaganda apparatus. The very suggestion that saying anything positive about white people is “white nationalism” is part of the sinister anti-white conditioning that governs America now.

Americans are taught that almost any criticism of white people, no matter how deranged, is acceptable or even worthy of government funding, while any kind of praise is virtually off-limits. When that propaganda is allowed to flourish unchecked, it’s no surprise that Americans have meekly accepted explicitly anti-white laws.

To fight back against this new caste system, it is essential that we not cooperate in our mindset and our moral psychology. Only when this evil dogma is rejected at its most basic level will it be possible to overthrow the Globalist American Empire.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Ministry Of Truth 2.0 Looms

THURSDAY, MAY 27, 2021 - 04:40 PM
Authored by Cal Thomas, op-ed via The Epoch Times,

Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas is reportedly considering the development of tools that would help America’s children discern truth from lies and know when they are being fed “disinformation.”


The Washington Times, which first reported the story, says a department spokesperson declined to give details, but that more information would be revealed “in the coming weeks.”

Mayorkas might want to start by fact-checking his recent claim that the U.S. southern border is “closed.” He made the statement when news pictures showed waves of people crossing the border. Should kids believe him, or their “lying eyes”?

Should anyone, regardless of political party or persuasion, be comfortable with government telling especially children what they can believe and whom they can trust? This is what totalitarian states do. It’s called propaganda.

We are already inundated with political correctness, cancel culture, and woke-ism. TV networks spend more time delivering opinion and slanting stories to particular points of view than what once resembled—if not objective journalism—then at least fairness.

The list of government officials who have lied is long and dates back to the founders of the nation. Some lies could be defended on national security grounds. Others were used to cover up wrongdoing or enhance the image of the one who lied.

In recent years, we recall President Clinton’s denial of having sex with Monica Lewinsky, President Obama’s claim about his health care program: “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor,” President George H.W. Bush’s “Read my lips, no new taxes,” assertions by the George W. Bush administration that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, Richard Nixon’s lies about Watergate, the lies told by Lyndon Johnson, members of his administration and generals about how we were winning the war in Vietnam (Johnson had pledged during the 1964 campaign not to send Americans to fight in Vietnam, another lie), and the CEO of R.J. Reynolds telling a congressional committee in 1994 that “cigarette smoking is no more ‘addictive’ than coffee, tea, or Twinkies.” The Washington Post reported in January that by the end of his term, former President Trump “had accumulated 30,573 untruths during his presidency—averaging about 21 erroneous claims a day.”

I could go on, but you get the point.

George Orwell was prescient when he wrote in “1984” about Newspeak and the Ministry of Truth. We have already achieved the former in what we are allowed to say, or not say, lest we be smeared with nasty rhetorical stains. Let’s revisit the Ministry of Truth for those who haven’t read the book or need a reminder.



The Ministry of Truth was related to Newspeak in that it had nothing to do with truth, but propaganda by another name. Its job was to falsify historical records in ways that aligned with government policies and its version of those events. It was also tasked with defining truth, which sometimes resulted in “doublespeak,” or contradictions, that served the purposes of the state.

Truth has become subjective and relative in modern times and is now personal. You have your “truth” and I have my “truth.” Even when they contradict each other, it doesn’t matter as long as we both feel good about it.

This flawed notion has contributed to our cultural decline.

Try this experiment if you want to see how far we have moved from objective truth. Go to any popular definition website and type in “truth.” They assume truth exists and can be discovered.
The truth is supposed to set us free, but if we can’t recognize or define it, we will be in bondage. Secretary Mayorkas should reread Orwell’s novel and then abandon any plans to indoctrinate schoolchildren.
 

155 arty

Veteran Member

U.S. Miners React to Joe Biden’s Move to Ditch U.S. Development of Critical Minerals: China Wins
SYCAMORE, PA - APRIL 13: Coal miner Dale Travis, 53, of Wheeling, West Virginia, waits for the arrival of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt to visit with miners at the Harvey Mine on April 13, 2017 in Sycamore, Pennsylvania. The Harvey Mine, owned by CNX Coal Resources, is …
Justin Merriman/Getty Images
PENNY STARR26 May 20211,480

Miners in the United States who hoped President Joe Biden would support domestic production of critical minerals are reacting to his plan to ditch them and rely on other countries, including China.

The New York Post reported:

The Post report continued:



Pini Althaus, CEO Of USA Rare Earth, said in a statement:

“And whilst this development does not directly affect our Round Top deposit as we are on State of Texas land, the United States needs several projects to come into production, and in the near term, if we are to achieve our goals around electrification of vehicles,” Althaus said.

“Given our ability to process third-party materials, USA Rare Earth would be available to take in materials from non-U.S. projects, but as a whole this policy is devastating for the sector and a setback towards the goal of establishing a secure domestic supply chain.”

“The reason the U.S. is in its current precarious position – lacking a domestic critical minerals supply chain – was due to poor decision making 30 years ago, when the same argument was made to let someone else, China, do the mining and processing,” Althaus said. “The naive thought process at that time was that those materials would come back into the U.S. supply chain, even as China made no secret back then as to its ambitions in controlling the rare earth supply chain.”

“The winner of such policy is China, again,” Althaus said in the statement.

“The U.S. took a positive step in this direction when the U.S. Dept. of Energy recently launched the Division of Minerals Sustainability,” Rich Nolan, president of the National Mining Association, said in a statement in March. “But if we want to seriously compete in the global EV market, the U.S. must give mining and the mineral supply chain the attention they deserve. We have the tools to win this race, but only if we make smart policy decisions.”

The Detroit Bureau website also reported on the reactions to the Biden administration’s move:



This is another reversal of former President Donald Trump’s policies, this time on critical minerals.

“The ‘federal strategy lays out a blueprint for America to once again be a leader in the critical minerals sector,’ then-Interior Secretary David Bernhardt said in a statement in June 2019,” the Post reported.

“As with our energy security, the Trump Administration is dedicated to ensuring that we are never held hostage to foreign powers for the natural resources critical to our national security and economic growth,” Bernhardt said at the time. “The Department will work expeditiously to implement the President’s strategy from streamlining the permitting process to locating domestic supplies of minerals.”
Well .........duh!!!! Color me surprised...of all people! Joe Biden is going to close mines or not allow new mines ??? Stupid ass union cucks if they voted for him
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment


Thursday, May 27, 2021
Blacktivists say "people of color" is racist

9LVRgfLk

Newsweek ran a column by two blacktivists, under the headline, "Stop Saying 'People of Color' When You Mean Black."

When did white stop being a color?

This is woke to the woke-th degree. The column complains that calling people of color places people of other colors on par with black people in their grievances.

No, no, no.

They do not want those Asians or Hispanics horning in on their action

The whole point of BLM and all that crap is to promote black supremacy. The argument is white people got to be racist for a few centuries, it is black people's turn now.

People of color would mean black people would have to share the supremacy with other races.
Writer Andrea Plaid and Christopher MacDonald-Dennis, chief diversity officer at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts, wrote, "Instead of erasing this truth with the term 'people of color,' we ask that you use it sparingly. It is a term that denotes all racially marginalized people. How often are you really talking about all racial minoritized people?

More often than not, you're describing a specific group with its own specific problems. Don't be lazy; name them. Though all racisms are rooted in white supremacy, they manifest themselves differently in different communities."

Not all grudges are equal.

Plaid and MacDonald-Denis wrote, "We keep hearing that this moment is a true reckoning with racism and white supremacy in our society. While we are not sure if that is necessarily so, we do know that any movement to end white supremacy and the scourge of racism in this country will never occur if we try to take the easy way out of difficult conversations.

"We must be clear with what we are discussing if we are ever going to create a more just world. Stop saying people of color when you mean black people..

How about we stop saying people of color and also stop saying black people?

How about we give up race and simply judge people by the content of their character?

If all you are is the color of your skin, then you are nothing. That was what racists meant when they called black men boy and the N-word.

But the animus by some black people against the term people of color is both amusing and illuminating.

People of color is just too much for Newswoke to handle.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Exclusive — Critical Race Theory: Inside a Virginia County’s Curriculum for Racial Indoctrination
Elementary school kids raising hands to teacher, back view
monkeybusinessimages/Getty Images
BRECCAN F. THIES28 May 202116

In 2019, the Albemarle County, Virginia School Board unanimously voted to adopt a radical “anti-racism” policy aimed at “building the racial consciousness” by requiring children to deconstruct their racial and sexual identities and “understand that anti-racism is an action” for which they have a “personal responsibility.” Breitbart News has obtained access to the County’s pilot curricula, which the County has attempted to keep secret from parents.

In a mission statement, Albemarle County claims “personal and institutional racism have historically existed and continues to exist,” and that the purpose of the policy is to “dismantle the individual, institutional, and structural racism that exists” and establish a system of “equity.”

Critical Race Theory (CRT) is a Marxist ideology that argues “all of society is racialized and properly viewed through a prism of identity groups based on race and color, with minorities being the oppressed while white people serve as the oppressor.” Moreover, “CRT teaches that white people are inherently and irredeemably racist and benefit from various systemically racist power structures that white people have put in place and perpetuate.”

CRT is an inherently racist ideology and is able to gain public traction as its proponents employ semantically overloaded phrases like “anti-racist,” “equity,” “social justice,” “culturally responsive teaching,” and “diversity and inclusion.” Because of the palatable nature of these phrases, it is important to define terms like “equity” and “anti-racist” in order to understand the inherent issues with CRT.

Equity does not mean equality. Equality is “explicitly rejected by critical race theorists. To them, equality represents ‘mere nondiscrimination’ and provides ‘camouflage’ for white supremacy, patriarchy, and oppression.” As Breitbart News’s Joel Pollak noted, “‘equity’ replaces the individual as the unit to which ‘fairness,’ ‘justice,’ and ‘impartiality’ apply. It is the community that is said to be suffering, whether individuals within that community are, or not.”

Equity, as manifested in CRT, dictates that opportunities should be stripped from some in order to advantage others in the name of “social justice.”

Anti-racist does not mean not racist. Albemarle County and other CRT adherents believe “anti-racism is an action” and a “personal responsibility.” CRT teaches that if “you are white or a part of so-called white ‘power structures,’ you are inherently racist and part of an oppressing class.

By operating under this framework, CRT argues the only way to establish ‘justice’ is to completely revolutionize society by overthrowing the oppressor’s institutions.” Therefore, indeed, part of the “action” of anti-racism is “enforcing equal outcomes based only on the characteristics of race, gender, and sexuality.”

To critical race theorists like Ibram X. Kendi, a chief purveyor and architect of anti-racist ideology and its programmatic material as well as an often-cited figure in Albemarle County’s curricula, one can only either be anti-racist or racist — there is no way to simply not be racist.

Indeed, as shown below in one of the slides from the pilot program, Kendi believes “children are either going to learn racist or antiracist ideas … if we don’t actively protect them from this dangerous racist society, what do you think they will be taught?” (Emphasis added).



Slide 1 of Albemarle County Public Schools’ “MS Anti Racist Lessons – Unit 3 – Final”
Albemarle County is taking a systematic, multi-year approach to teach CRT. Breitbart News has obtained slide decks from several units of a pilot program for the sixth to eighth grades at Joseph T. Henley Middle School in Crozet, Virginia.

Henley’s program is supposed to take place during the first class period of the school day called Advisory (homeroom), but one concerned parent, who wishes to remain anonymous for fear of retributive actions taken upon her child, told Breitbart News that when she sought to opt her student out of CRT, Henley Principal Beth Costa initially said “you can choose not to have your child participate.” Despite this, “Diversity Resource Teacher” Chris Booz — who helps write the curricula for the entire county — immediately corrected Costa, saying the radical ideology “is going to be woven through in all of the classes in Albemarle County.”

“They essentially told me, ‘well, you can try to opt out, but good luck,'” the parent said.
The sixth and seventh grade CRT curricula are the same and appear to be aimed at orienting a student toward the CRT thought process, while remaining somewhat ambiguous about race and sexuality. Despite this, the curricula also appear to sow seeds of mistrust between the student and their parents, as some concerned parents detailed to Breitbart News.
One student told Breitbart News that “they asked if we liked the religion our parents chose for us,” and another concerned parent — who also wishes to remain anonymous for fear of retributive actions taken upon their child — said that “Questions are posed to question if they were truly born into the gender that their parents say they are? Do you want to change but are afraid? The question has also been posed if you have the same beliefs your parents have or are your beliefs different?” (Emphasis added).



Slide 11 of Albemarle County Public Schools’ Sixth and Seventh Grade CRT Units 1-3
According to many of the concerned parents, students are told not to discuss what they talk about in Advisory with their parents.

The radical indoctrination becomes much more acute in eighth grade with survey questions that ask students to agree or disagree with ideas like, “It is okay to say phrases like ‘I am white'”:



Slide 13 of Albemarle County Public Schools’ “Henley- Anti-Racism Advisory Student Workbook – Units 1&2”

“The DOMINANT CULTURE is… in the U.S.: people who are white, middle class, Christian, and cisgender… [and] is… in charge of the institutions and have established behaviors…”:



Slide 25 of Albemarle County Public Schools’ “Henley- Anti-Racism Advisory Student Workbook – Units 1&2”



Slide 27 of Albemarle County Public Schools’ “Henley- Anti-Racism Advisory Student Workbook – Units 1&2”

Ironically, they go on to ask why there is a “human desire to divide people into groups”:



Slide 28 of Albemarle County Public Schools’ “Henley- Anti-Racism Advisory Student Workbook – Units 1&2”

Students are told that, while there are many other privileges, “white privilege is perhaps the most enduring throughout history”:



Slide 35 of Albemarle County Public Schools’ “Henley- Anti-Racism Advisory Student Workbook – Units 1&2”

Students are then shown a video in which a biracial couple partake in an activity where the wife, who is white, “checks her privilege” while her husband, who is black, counts ‘bias-related incidents’ such as being “accused of not being able to afford something expensive,” having “fear in your heart when being stopped by the police,” or having to “teach your child how not to get killed by the police.” The students are then apparently asked to “check their privilege” by completing the same task shown in the video:



Slide 39 of Albemarle County Public Schools’ “Henley- Anti-Racism Advisory Student Workbook – Units 1&2”

After “checking their privilege,” students are asked, “Why is it challenging for white people to think about (and do something about) white privilege?”:



Slide 40 of Albemarle County Public Schools’ “Henley- Anti-Racism Advisory Student Workbook – Units 1&2”


Slide 51 of Albemarle County Public Schools’ “Henley- Anti-Racism Advisory Student Workbook – Units 1&2”

Albemarle County then issued its white students a “call to action” in a video while simultaneously telling its black students that they “are shown over and over and over that [their] lives do not matter.” The video continued to profess that “being white in America is not needing to state your life matters. And when your life matters, you have power. Now is the time to use it. Not being racist is not enough. Now is the time to be anti-racist … Now is the time to take action.” (Emphasis added).

The CRT ideology appears to be taking hold. In Henley’s school newspaper, one contributor lauded the heavily debunked, anti-historical New York Times “1619 Project,” saying, “Think about this, Jamestown was established in 1607 and roughly 12 years later Africans were brought to Virginia as slaves, therefore building this country on the foundation of slavery”:
The 1619 project aims to teach all of America’s youth the real truth about the history of our country. About how our country is built by enslaved Africans on Native American grounds. Our country wouldn’t be nearly as advanced if slaves didn’t play such an important role in American history. Most public schools aren’t allowed to teach kids in this country about the gruesome truths throughout history, especially in Virginia.
Further, a concerned parent told Breitbart News that when Principal Beth Costa was asked if there was any racial discrimination going on at the school that parents should know about, Costa “could not answer the question,” but said that the “problem we’ve been told is that the majority of our students are Caucasian and that is the biggest problem we need to fix.”

Albemarle County Public Schools is planning to use the data they have collected from Henley’s pilot program to write county-wide CRT curricula for many grade levels — curricula that, given the trajectory of the middle school coursework, is likely to get much more intense going into high school. A group of Albemarle County parents told Breitbart News they are concerned that, since there are only two weeks left in the school year, the school board will be able to use the time to avoid accountability and come out with much more radical curricula without public oversight or input.

These parents told Breitbart New they are exploring their options and may take legal action.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

6th Circuit slaps down Biden…
Posted by Kane on May 28, 2021 11:47 am




Yesterday evening, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit granted a temporary injunction barring the Small Business Administration from prioritizing applications for COVID-19 relief funding based upon the race or sex of the business owner applying for the relief. Judge Amul Thapar wrote for the court, joined by Senior Judge Alan Norris. Judge Bernice Donald dissented.

Judge Thapar’s opinion in Vitolo v. Guzman begins with a simple and straightforward description of the case and holding: “This case is about whether the government can allocate limited coronavirus relief funds based on the race and sex of the applicants. We hold that it cannot.”

“It has been twenty-five years since the Supreme Court struck down the race-conscious policies in Adarand. And it has been nearly twenty years since the Supreme Court struck down the racial preferences in Gratz. As today’s case shows once again, the ‘way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.’”

Full story here…

1622244759352.png1622244813253.png
1622244860690.png
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Politicrossing
00_.jpg

The Age of Surveillance Capitalism
Big Tech spends billions to lobby against oversight, while capitalizing on publicly funded data and details of our private lives

Dec-6-48x48.jpg


May 28, 2021
By Jeff Davidson


The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power by Shoshana Zuboff is an eye-opening book, that everyone who loves freedom needs to heed. Here are snippets of reviews of the book:

This book explains the challenges to humanity posed by the digital future, and offers a detailed examination of the unprecedented form of power called “surveillance capitalism,” and the quest by powerful corporations [think: Facebook, Google, and Twitter] to predict and control us.

The heady optimism of the Internet’s early days is gone. Technologies that were meant to liberate us have deepened inequality and stoked divisions. Tech companies gather our information online and sell it to the highest bidder, whether government or retailer.

The Profits Roll In
Profits now depend not only on predicting our behavior but modifying it too. How will this fusion of capitalism and the digital shape our values and define our future?
We are at a crossroads. We still have the power to decide what kind of world we want to live in, and what we decide now will shape the rest of the century.

Our choices: allow technology to enrich the few and impoverish the many, or harness it and distribute its benefits. The stark issue at hand is whether we will be the masters of information and machines or its slaves.

We Are Their Pawns
A review of The Age of Surveillance Capitalism from the Guardian observed that we are their pawns. Tech companies want to control every aspect of what we do, for profit. This bold, vital book identifies our new era of capitalism.

First intent on organizing all human knowledge, Google ended up controlling all access to it; we do the searching, and are searched in turn. Setting out merely to connect us, Facebook found itself in possession of our deepest secrets.

In seeking to survive commercially beyond their initial goals, these companies realized they were sitting on a new kind of asset: our “behavioral surplus”, the totality of information about our every thought, word and deed, which could be traded for profit in new markets based on predicting our every need – or producing it.

In a move of such audacity that it bears comparison to colonial conquests, the tech giants unilaterally declared that these previously untapped resources were theirs for the taking, and brushed aside every objection.

Above the Law
While insisting that their technology is too complex to be legislated, companies have poured billions into lobbying against oversight, while building empires on publicly funded data and the details of our private lives. They have repeatedly rejected established norms of societal responsibility and accountability.

What is crucially different about this new form of exploitation and exceptionalism, is that beyond merely strip-mining our intimate inner lives, is that the extraction is so grotesque, so creepy, it is almost impossible to see how anyone who thinks about, it lives with it – and yet we do.

The benefits of faster search results and turn-by-turn directions mask the deeper, destructive predations of “surveillance capitalism,” a force that is as profoundly undemocratic as it is exploitative….

Ignorance of surveillance capitalism is one of the central strategies of this regime, and yet the tide is turning: more and more people express their unease about the surveillance economy and, disturbed by the fractious, alienated, and trustless social sphere it generates, are seeking alternatives.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Thomas Lindsay, a distinguished senior fellow of higher education and constitutional studies at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, in an interview on May 27, 2021. (Crossroads/Screenshot via The Epoch Times)
Thomas Lindsay, a distinguished senior fellow of higher education and constitutional studies at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, in an interview on May 27, 2021. (Crossroads/Screenshot via The Epoch Times)

‘Critical Race Theory Is the New Racism,’ Says Texas Public Policy Foundation Scholar
BY TOM OZIMEK

May 28, 2021 Updated: May 28, 2021

A scholar at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a conservative think tank, told The Epoch Times’ “Crossroads” program that he believes Critical Race Theory (CRT) “is the new racism,” while praising a bill being finalized in the Texas state legislature that would ban “racial scapegoating” and other objectionable practices that he attributed to the theory.

Thomas Lindsay, a distinguished senior fellow of higher education and constitutional studies at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, said that there are CRT-inspired programs “being instituted down to the third grade, where they’re telling third-grade children that because of the color of their skin, they are oppressors, meaning that because of the color of their skin, they’re bad.”

“That used to be called racism,” he said. “And unfortunately, critical race theory is the new racism.”

Video teaser on website .58 min

CRT—which espouses the idea that race is not natural, but socially constructed to oppress and exploit minorities—is an offshoot of the quasi-Marxist critical theory social philosophy that was promoted by the Frankfurt school of thought.

Then-President Donald Trump signed an executive order banning CRT training in federal agencies in September 2020, with the White House describing it as “anti-American propaganda.”

After taking office, Biden reversed Trump’s September 2020 executive order and has pushed CRT training on a number of fronts.

Proponents of Critical Race Theory have argued that it’s needed to demonstrate what they say is “pervasive systemic racism” and to facilitate rooting it out.

The Biden administration’s efforts have triggered widespread pushback from federal and state Republican lawmakers, conservatives, and related organizations, as well as parents.

“Parents are incredibly upset that their children are being told that if they’re white, they are by definition oppressors, and if they’re black, they’re by definition oppressed,” Lindsay said in the interview.

He also praised House Bill 3979, which passed the state Senate on May 22 but, as of Thursday, had not yet been finalized as some amendments continue to be scrutinized. While the bill doesn’t mention CRT by name, it apparently aims to ban the quasi-Marxist ideology in public and open-enrollment charter schools.

According to the bill text, teachers, administrators, and employees from state agencies, school districts, and open-enrollment charter schools are prohibited from teaching students that one race is inherently superior to another race or sex or that an individual is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive by virtue of his or her race or sex.

Lindsay said the bill “prevents any teaching of students and any teacher training that uses racial scapegoating or racial stereotyping or sexual scapegoating or sexual stereotyping.”

He added that the measure also does several things “on the positive side,” namely requiring all Texas students to study the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, Federalist Paper essays 10 and 15, excerpts from Alexis de Tocqueville’s “Democracy in America,” and the first Lincoln-Douglas debate.

“That’s going to give them that information about our founding principles that they’re going to need to understand current events,” Lindsay said.

He said the Texas bill came in response to the Biden administration’s April proposal to fund history and civics programs that promote Critical Race Theory or related curricula.

In a proposed rule, released on April 19, the Education Department outlined new priority criteria for a $5.3 million American History and Civics Education grant, as well as exemplary materials for K-12 educators to use. Specifically, the department cited the “1619 Project,” and critical race theorist Ibram X. Kendi’s “antiracist idea” as leading examples of the kind of content it wants to use taxpayer dollars to promote in history and civics classrooms across the country.

The “1619 Project,” inaugurated with a special issue of The New York Times Magazine, attempts to cast the Atlantic slave trade as the dominant factor in the founding of America instead of ideals such as individual liberty and natural rights. The initiative has been widely panned by historians and political scientists, with some critics calling it a bid to rewrite U.S. history through a left-wing lens.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Facebook Will Now Unperson Individuals Who Spread ‘Misinformation’
Mark Zuckerberg Facebook creepy smile
KENZO TRIBOUILLARD /Getty
LUCAS NOLAN27 May 2021268

Social media giant Facebook has announced that it will now be “reducing the distribution” of individual accounts that share misinformation across its platform, even as the Masters of the Universe and their army of “fact-checkers” struggle with the definition of misinformation on topics such as the origins of the coronavirus pandemic.

The Verge reports that in yet another attempt to crack down on misinformation on the platform, Facebook has announced that it will not only make posts containing misinformation less visible but will actually limit the visibility of individuals users who share them. Making a user less visible to others based on their posts is very similar to shadowbanning.

Facebook has previously employed a number of other methods to crack down on misinformation, including working with “fact checkers” and employing moderators. Now the company plans to bury the accounts of users that share posts that it considers misleading.
“Starting today, we will reduce the distribution of all posts in News Feed from an individual’s Facebook account if they repeatedly share content that has been rated by one of our fact-checking partners,” the company wrote in a press release.

Posts the company believes are misleading are already downranked in Facebook’s News Feed, but now it appears that the company will be taking action against users who share alleged “misinformation.” Of course, this could mean that users that unwittingly share posts containing misinformation could unknowingly have their accounts buried on the platform.

Adding to this, Facebook’s definition of what counts as “misinformation,” is shifting — only last night stating that it will no longer be removing claims addressing the possible origins of the coronavirus after President Joe Biden ordered U.S. intelligence agencies to investigate the origin of the virus, despite ending a State Department investigation under President Donald Trump seeking the same information.

Breitbart News reporter Simon Kent wrote in a recent article:
Facebook released a memo detailing its new stance, pointing to “ongoing investigations” as reason for its change of heart while adding the proviso other restrictions remain.

A spokesman for the company said:

In light of ongoing investigations into the origin of COVID-19 and in consultation with public health experts, we will no longer remove the claim that COVID-19 is man-made from our apps.

We’re continuing to work with health experts to keep pace with the evolving nature of the pandemic and regularly update our policies as new facts and trends emerge.
Facebook announced last December it would remove what it decides are false claims about coronavirus vaccines including posts debunked by Facebook’s chosen health experts.
In October, Google-owned YouTube made a similar promise. The decision expanded Facebook’s current rules relating to theories related to the coronavirus pandemic, its origins and the vaccination programs underway world wide.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

China Boasts of Using Video Game Addiction for Communist Indoctrination
This picture taken on October 18, 2020 shows people looking at their phones as they sit inside a coffee shop in the 798 art district in Beijing. (Photo by NICOLAS ASFOURI / AFP) (Photo by NICOLAS ASFOURI/AFP via Getty Images)
NICOLAS ASFOURI/AFP via Getty Images
GABRIELLE REYES28 May 202124

Chinese youth have become “addicted” to learning about the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) history through smartphone app games promoted by the Chinese government, the state mouthpiece Global Times claimed Thursday.

A 22-year-old Chinese college graduate named Zhou Ying told the Global Times this week she “never thought she would one day become addicted” to learning about the CCP’s history through a government-sponsored mobile app but has “enjoyed the process of exploration” the app’s video game employs to engage its users.

The game challenges players to “find five objects hidden in a painting of Shanghai in the 1910s shown in the game, including a portrait of Karl Marx and a poster of the May Fourth Movement in 1919. Each time Zhou successfully finds an item, the game shows her a brief introduction of the person or event related to the item,” according to the Global Times.

The May Fourth Movement of 1919 began in China’s national capital, Beijing, as a student-led protest against certain clauses of the Treaty of Versailles — which established peace terms ending World War I — that handed over China’s Shandong province to Japan. Roughly 3,000 student protesters from around Beijing gathered in the city’s Tiananmen Square to denounce the Chinese government’s decision to concede territory to China’s longtime rival Japan. The demonstration eventually turned violent, with some students attacking a Chinese government official and setting fire to the home of another official. The protests in Beijing sparked nationwide unrest across China and two of the leaders of the 1919 demonstration in Tiananmen Square — Chen Duxiu and Li Dazhao — went on to help found the CCP in July 1921.

China will mark the 100th anniversary of the CCP’s founding on July 1, 2021. Chinese government officials have encouraged the nation’s younger generations to engage with the anniversary by learning more about the Communist Party’s history through interactive events and activities, such as the video game the Global Times promoted Thursday.

“Literally named ‘a [revolutionary] spark in Shanghai,’ the game that Zhou plays has attracted many young people since its beta version was released in May. It is one of the dozens of recent mobile games that reportedly center on introducing the history and development of the [Chinese Communist] Party and targeting Generation Z,” according to the newspaper.

“The emergence of the CPC history-learning mobile games, as well as some other forms including talk shows and board games, cater to the Chinese youths’ enthusiasm of learning about the history of the [Chinese Communist] Party, which has enjoyed a major milestone this year — the 100th anniversary of the founding of the CPC,” the Global Times noted.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Florida school district leaders berated as communists and Nazis for opposing ‘white advantage’
Scott Travis, South Florida Sun-Sentinel 1 day ago
1622247741301.png
A pledge to root out “white advantage” in Palm Beach County schools led to an outcry from some parents, prompting a divided School Board to remove it from a statement on student equity and diversity.

a person sitting at a table using a laptop: Palm Beach County School Board Member Karen Brill asked the School Board to remove white advantage from a school district equity statement.
© Michael Laughlin/Sun Sentinel Palm Beach County School Board Member Karen Brill asked the School Board to remove "white advantage" from a school district equity statement.
The School Board voted 4-3 Wednesday to make the change after more than an hour of debate and four hours of public speakers. Opponents of the diversity statement called board members words like communists, socialists and Nazis.

The issue surrounded an equity statement approved by the School Board on May 5. One of the five paragraphs in the statement said the district “is committed to dismantling structures rooted in white advantage and transforming our system by hearing and elevating underrepresented voices, sharing power, recognizing and eliminating bias and redistributing resources to provide equitable outcomes.”

The School Board took out the words “dismantling structures rooted in white advantage” and changed “redistributing resources” to “distributing resources.”

Officials said the statement is intended to address the wide achievement gaps between white and minority students. Most board members said the goals haven’t changed but it wasn’t worth alienating people by using the term “white advantage.”

“We have to make sure we have community buy-in. Let’s not focus on keeping the words at the expense of losing community support,” board Chairman Frank Barbieri said.

Board members Karen Brill, Marcia Andrews and Barbara McQuinn supported the change. Debra Robinson, Erica Whitfield and Alexandria Ayala voted no.

“Do we really believe changing a few words is where the divisiveness and the screaming ends?” Ayala asked. “It’s not going to stop. When do we stop catering to the loudest group?”

Supporters say the statement recognizes a reality: that white people have traditionally had advantages, such having better access to good schools and teachers than Black students. They are less likely to be met with suspicion from police and other authority figures if they are walking into a store or a new neighborhood or playing with a toy gun, they say.

“White advantage is being able to live your life without worrying those things will kill you,” state Rep. Omari Hardy, D-Lake Worth Beach, told the School Board. “I ask you to acknowledge white advantage is real. You can’t fight it without calling it by name. We need our leaders to not be faint-hearted about doing the work to ending racism.”

Members of many community groups that work with the district also supported keeping the statement as is.

But opponents, largely conservative parents and community activists, say the statement disparages white students and teaches them to be ashamed of the color of their skin. They say it also sends a message to Black students that they’re unequal. Some referred to the statement as communism or Marxism.

“Let’s encourage children by telling them they’re victims, oppressors, good guys, bad guys, toxic, non-binary. You live in a racist country,” said speaker Allison Rampersad. “You’re never going to get ahead because someone’s great-great grandfather owned slaves. How does that motivate anyone?”

The issue ignited controversy after it was added to the district’s website and included in letters to parents. School Board members agreed last week to reconsider it after being flooded with emails and phone calls.

“Those words are a trigger, and I want this community to embrace the work we’re doing,” Brill said. “I had one parent call me crying, asking me where her white advantage was. If we put this out the way it is, it’s dividing, it’s not uniting.”

Board member Marcia Andrews said Wednesday that she heard a lot of hurt coming from the audience and that was never the intent.

“When we’re not coming together for the benefit of the children, it causes me to take notice,” Andrews said.

Board member Debra Robinson said the statement isn’t about teaching children to feel unequal or inferior or about any particular curriculum.. She said it’s about adults who work with them recognizing their biases.

“This country was founded on racial biases. That’s just the truth,” Robinson said. “We can save this country and the next generation by making sure the adults free their minds and stop operating out of their own implicit or explicit biases.”

Some of those who attended Wednesday’s meetings are conservative activists who have also opposed mask requirements in the county and school district. After hearing complaints from some mask proponents that they didn’t feel safe with anti-maskers in the same room, School Board Chairman Frank Barbieri allowed people without masks to stay in a separate room and address the board virtually.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Indoctrination As Intervention
The Biden administration encourages school districts to conduct “antiracist therapy.”

Max Eden
May 25, 2021

Congress has allocated nearly $200 billion in Covid-19 relief funds for K-12 schools over the past year. While this money was intended to help re-open schools and mitigate learning loss, President Biden’s Department of Education is encouraging school districts to spend some of it for a different purpose: providing “free, antiracist therapy for White educators.”

The American Rescue Plan (ARP) requires school districts to reserve 20 percent of funds for “evidence-based” interventions that “respond to students’ academic, social, and emotional needs”—a very sensible charge. But the devil is in the definition, and the administration’s guidance booklet for spending ARP funds suggests that students’ social and emotional needs include the disruption of “whiteness” and the propagation of Critical Race Theory (CRT) ideology. The “Roadmap to Reopening Safely and Meeting All Students’ Needs” explains that “schools are microcosms of society,” and that therefore “intentional conversations related to race and social emotional learning . . . are the foundation for participating in a democracy and should be anchor tenets in building a schoolwide system of educational opportunity.”

The guidance document links to the Abolitionist Teaching Network’s “Guide for Racial Justice & Abolitionist Social and Emotional Learning.” Traditional Social and Emotional Learning (SEL), the Network maintains, is built around five key “competencies” or “standards”: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making. By contrast, an “abolitionist” approach to SEL contends that traditional “SEL can be a covert form of policing used to punish, criminalize, and control Black, Brown, and Indigenous children and communities to adhere to White norms.” Abolitionist SEL is “not a lesson plan” but rather a “way of being that informs all aspects of teaching, learning, and relationship building with students, families, and communities.”

In order to bring about this ontological shift, the document endorsed by Biden’s Department of Education presents a host of recommendations, including:

“Partner with and compensate community members to develop and implement Abolitionist SEL models.”

“Remove all punitive or disciplinary practices that spirit murder Black, Brown and Indigenous children.”

“Requir[e] a commitment to learning from students, families, and educators who disrupt Whiteness and other forms of oppression.”

“Free, antiracist therapy for White educators and support staff.”

“Free, radical self/collective care and therapy for Educators and Support Staff of Color.”

Several of these recommendations are, of course, illegal under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

Schools may not define a race as inherently oppressive or provide race-specific therapeutic services premised on race-specific mental illnesses. But the Biden Department of Education is proving that it cares less about safeguarding the spirit of the Civil Rights Act than about advancing the tenets of Critical Race Theory.

While parents are still waking up to the reality that Biden’s Department of Education wants to indoctrinate their children, no close observer should be surprised. After all, when Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona served as commissioner of education in Connecticut, he insisted that “we need teachers behind this wave of our curriculum becoming ‘woke.’” When Deputy Secretary of Education Cindy Marten led the San Diego Unified School District, she oversaw teacher training that accused white teachers of “spirit murdering” black students.

The question now is how politicians will respond. There’s little doubt that if the Trump administration published guidance recommending that schools dismantle “blackness” and target black teachers for therapeutic intervention, Democrats would have rightly decried it as a manifestation of “white supremacy.” But to date, Democratic politicians have not raised many qualms about CRT indoctrination in schools.

For their part, many Republican state leaders have shown admirable initiative by introducing legislation to prohibit racial stereotyping and scapegoating. But more must be done. School districts will decide how to spend Covid relief funding over the next few months and must submit plans to their state education agencies. State superintendents and governors should send out counter-guidance that draws a line in the sand: no matter what the Biden administration recommends, schools may not use public funding for purposes that violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by racially discriminating against students or teachers.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Trump-Era 1776 Commission Opposes Funding For "Teaching Of Racial Discrimination" In Schools

FRIDAY, MAY 28, 2021 - 07:00 PM
Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

A Trump-era commission tasked with combating “false narratives about the American Founding” has urged the Biden administration to drop its proposal to fund history and civics programs that promote critical race theory or related curricula “under the misleading name of ‘anti-racism.'”



Former President Donald Trump holds an executive order he signed at the White House in Washington on June 26, 2020 to establish a 20-person Advisory 1776 Commission under the Department of Education to promote “patriotic education.” The commission was terminated by President Joe Biden on Jan. 20, 2021. (Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)

The so-called “1776 Commission,” established in the final months of the Trump presidency before being formally dissolved by President Joe Biden upon taking office, has continued its work in a non-government capacity. The group met on Monday at Hillsdale College’s campus in Washington to discuss civic education curricula, issuing a statement critical of the Biden administration’s proposed rule to issue grants to classroom educational projects that give prominence to so-called “antiracist” ideas such as the controversial “1619 Project.”
“We are concerned that the U.S. Department of Education’s Proposed Rule defining priorities for the American History and Civics Education programs, whether as Critical Race Theory or under the misleading name of ‘anti- racism,’ actually encourages and seeks to direct federal funds to the teaching of racial discrimination in America’s elementary and secondary school systems,” the group wrote.
“This Proposed Rule should be withdrawn, and individual states should oppose any such race-based pedagogy as part of their curricula, especially if that curricula is imposed by the federal government,” it added.
In the proposed rule, released on April 19, the Education Department outlined new priority criteria for a $5.3 million American History and Civics Education grant, as well as exemplary materials for K-12 educators to use. Specifically, the department cited the “1619 Project,” and critical race theorist Ibram X. Kendi’s “antiracist idea” as leading examples of the kind of content it wants to use taxpayer dollars to promote in history and civics classrooms across the country.

The Biden administration’s proposal, which was open for public comment until May 19, praises “growing acknowledgement of the importance of including, in the teaching and learning of our country’s history, both the consequences of slavery, and the significant contributions of Black Americans to our society,” but makes clear that such an “acknowledgement” would be “reflected […] in the New York Times’ landmark ‘1619 Project’” and in Kendi’s “antiracist” ideas. The proposal cites Kendi, noting that “antiracist ideas argue that racist policies are the cause of racial inequities,” which is essentially the highly contentious argument that differences in outcomes among different racial groups can be reduced to a single variable—racist policies.


President Joe Biden delivers remarks from the South Court Auditorium at the White House in Washington on May 12, 2021. (Oliver Contreras/Sipa USA)

The “1619 Project,” inaugurated with a special issue of The New York Times Magazine, attempts to cast the Atlantic slave trade as the dominant factor in the founding of America instead of ideals such as individual liberty and natural rights. The initiative has been widely panned by historians and political scientists, with some critics calling it a bid to rewrite U.S. history through a left-wing lens.

The 1776 Commission meeting was hosted by Larry Arnn, president of Hillsdale College, who said in a statement: “History is complete and cannot be changed. These controversies about history can only be resolved by looking at the facts. To help the young know this history is the work of the commission, and its importance has not diminished since inauguration day.”

Matthew Spalding, the 1776 Commission’s executive director, told the Washington Examiner in an interview ahead of the group’s meeting that the commission does not want to whitewash the nation’s history of racism, but rather seeks to emphasize racial equality as America’s foundational principles, as enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, namely that “all men are created equal.”
“When we start going about dividing people by groups, by social identities, and especially by identities that deal with race, and we’re starting to make those kinds of divisions, all Americans should get very nervous,” Spalding told the outlet.
“It’s a departure away from the historic grounding of civil rights in America, which is that we all are equal.”

“Current arguments about identity politics and critical race theory that … present themselves as merely responding to perceptions of their current assessment of American society, but do so by introducing as their principle that we should look at people based on the color of their skin, strikes us as a fundamental denial of the idea that all men are created equal,” Spalding said.

“And that’s a problem for politics. That’s a problem intellectually and historically.”
The commission’s meeting comes as Republicans across the nation are trying to prevent the teaching of critical race theory and related ideas in the nation’s classrooms.

Proponents of critical race theory have argued that it’s needed to demonstrate what they say is “pervasive systemic racism” and to facilitate rooting it out.

Critics have noted critical race theory’s roots in Marxism, arguing that the concept advocates for the destruction of institutions, such as the Western justice system, free-market economy, and orthodox religions, demanding that they be replaced with institutions compliant with the critical race theory ideology.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

BUSTED! Professor Admits Critical Race Theory Is To Build The ‘Church Of Marxism’ (VIDEO)

By Kari Donovan
Published May 29, 2021 at 1:24pm

The left is not even trying to hide their Marxist agenda for Critical Race Theory anymore or their true target for their many decades of transformation of America; Christians. The Marxist left wants to destroy the options for the spiritual pursuit of Christians and those who agree with Christians about human free will.

“The Marxist foundation of Critical Race Theory is at base a spiritual concern. If you read Marx you know he was concerned with alienation. Specifically alienation of the species being. That element of humanity that provide creativity that is unique to the individual and defines us from animals,” Glenn Bracey told a zoom audience of educators on why he was appealing to them to adopt a controversial set of ideas called Critical Race theory.

The left is building the’ church’ of Karl Marx and that is worrisome because Marxism is the foundation for the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) control of China’s society. And that is concerning because the CCP murders people when they won’t submit and do what they are told to do.

The left claims that Marxism will liberate people into a utopian creative existence, however, the people who live under Marxism are not happy people, so something is wrong. Allowing them access to making oppressive public policy should be our highest priority in America. It is worth investigating where the disconnect between the left’s fantasies about Marxism is with the reality of people suffering from underneath its demands.

They see themselves as sort of hipsters.

Screenshot-2021-05-29-132741.jpg

But they are really trying to discredit other people’s beliefs.

“Marx was concerned that our modern systems were flattening that humanity and alienating us from those endeavors… that uh.. Christians would say, we were.. uh… designed to emulate and to practice,” Bracey told the zoom attendees.

So consider the changes the Marxist left is pushing for when transforming sexuality, gender, spirituality, education, medicine, parental rights, age of sexual consent, government authority over citizens, racism against White people, and American sovereignty. If they represented what humanity wanted, why are Marxist and Communist counties so unhappy?

“So the core question for Critical Race Theory is one of releasing people, people of color, especially Black people from the oppressive systems that deny us access to our species being… including racism. It’s Marxism, Critical Race Theory’s Marxism is fundamentally a spiritual concern,” he said.

There is no question that the Marxist left will promote racism as a tool to harm people while virtue signaling for spiritual points that they are rescuing Black people.

But what if Black people are Christians? The left can’t accept that at all. To do so would be to acknowledge one of the many inconsistencies between their fantasies and reality.

It appears that OAN commentator, Jack Posobiec, broke the story about the video after finding it on the Villanova YouTube channel.
VIDEO:
BREAKING: Villanova professor encourages adoption of Critical Race Theory due to its roots in Marxism pic.twitter.com/eNaTws6hAb
— AntifaBook.com (@JackPosobiec) May 29, 2021
The video is recorded a mass rationalization on the justification of stealing people’s individual sovereignty and justifying attacks on Christianity. Note the speaker refers to the writings of Karl Marx as the foundation for Critical Race Theory (CRT) that is very important for people to understand; they have now admitted that the foundation of their utopia is a foreign ideology, a violent foreign ideology.

Bryan Dean Wright reported that Bracey had a negative rating by his students, and the left would tell you that the students need to be reprogramed. Reality would tell you that the ideology is sick and wrong, and it doesn’t reflect how people feel or what they need.
The Villanova professor speaking here — Glenn Bracey — is a well known radical Leftist.
Reviews for his classes are littered with complaints, including that he praises communism. (Glenn Bracey at Villanova University - RateMyProfessors.com) https://t.co/o0mQmAasqt pic.twitter.com/wbCNH4SI7i
— BDW (@BryanDeanWright) May 29, 2021
1622322054509.png

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1398644441129365504
1:10 min

Critical Race Theory is fully out of the closest. The only thing left to do now is for Americans to decide how much of the public resources the church of Marxism gets in American institutions.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Buchanan: Does Our Diversity Portend Disintegration?

FRIDAY, MAY 28, 2021 - 10:20 PM
Authored by Pat Buchanan,

After nine people were shot to death by a public transit worker, who then killed himself in San Jose, the latest mass murder in America, California Governor Gavin Newsom spoke for many on the eve of this Memorial Day weekend.
“What the hell is going on in the United States of America? What the hell is wrong with us?”
Good question.

Indeed, it seems that the country is coming apart.



In May, Congress, to address a spate of criminal assaults on Asian Americans, enacted a new hate crimes law to protect them.

May also witnessed a rash of assaults on Jewish Americans to show the attackers’ hatred of Israel and support for the Palestinians in the Gaza war.

The terms “racist” and “racism” are now commonplace accusations in political discourse and a public square where whites are expected to ritually denounce the “white privilege” into which they were born.

In the year since the death of George Floyd and the rise of the Black Lives Matter “Defund the Police!” campaign, the shootings and killings of cops and citizens in our great cities have skyrocketed.

In March, and again in April, 167,000 immigrants were caught crossing our southern border illegally. The invaders are now coming not only from Central and South America but also from Africa, the Islamic world and the largest and most populous continent, Asia. And their destiny may be to replace us.

For as the endless invasion proceeds, native-born Americans have ceased to reproduce themselves. Not since the birth dearth of the Great Depression and WWII, when the Silent Generation was born, has the U.S. population experienced such a birth decline as today.

At the same time, a war of all against all in America seems to raise the question, to which recitation of the cliche — “Our diversity is our greatest strength” — no longer seems an adequate response:

Is there no limit to the racial, religious, ideological, political, cultural and ethnic diversity the nation can accommodate before it splinters into its component parts?

In professions of religious belief, atheists, agnostics and secularists have become our largest “congregation,” followed by Catholics and Protestants, both of which are in numerical decline.

Diversity of faiths leads to irreconcilable, clashing opinions about morality on the most divisive social issues of our era: abortion, homosexuality, same-sex marriage, etc.

Racial diversity, too, is bringing back problems unseen since the 1960s.

America was almost 90% white in 1960, but that figure is down to 60% and falling. In 25 years, we will all belong to racial minorities.

Are we Americans still united in our love of country? Do we still take pride in what we have done for our own people and what America has done for the world in the 400 years since Jamestown?

Hardly. Part of the nation buys into the academic and intellectual elites’ version of history, tracing America’s birth as a nation to the arrival of the first slave ship in Virginia in 1619.

We not only disagree about our history; some actually hate our history.

That hate can be seen in the statues and monuments destroyed, not just of Confederate military heroes but of the European explorers who discovered America, the Founding Fathers who created the nation, and the leaders, from Thomas Jefferson to Andrew Jackson to Teddy Roosevelt, who built the America we became.

Yet, tens of millions from all over the world still see coming to America as the realization of a life’s dream.

Some look at Western civilization as 500 years of colonialism, imperialism, genocide, slavery and segregation — practiced against people of color. This is the source of the West’s wealth and power, it is said, and that wealth and power should be redistributed to the descendants of the victims of Western rapacity.

For many, equality of opportunity is no longer enough.

We must make restitution, deliver reparations and guarantee a future where an equality of rewards replaces an equality of rights.

Meritocracy must yield to equity.

Elite high schools, such as Thomas Jefferson in Virginia, Stuyvesant in New York and Lowell in San Francisco, must abandon their emphasis on grades, tests and exams to gain admissions and prove progress.

And these schools must be remade to mirror the racial and ethnic composition of the communities where they reside.

And a new cancel culture has taken root in America.

Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, a CNN commentator, was fired for suggesting that Native American institutions and culture played no significant role in the foundation and formation of the American Republic.
“We birthed a nation from nothing. I mean, there was nothing here. I mean, yes, we have Native Americans,” Santorum said, adding: “There isn’t much Native American culture in American culture.”
Impolitic though this rendition was, was it wholly false?

Something is seriously wrong with a country that professes to be great but whose elite cannot abide the mildest of heresies to its established truth.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Microsoft President Warns 2024 Will Look Like Orwell's '1984' If We Don't Stop AI Police State

FRIDAY, MAY 28, 2021 - 10:00 PM

George Orwell's dystopian vision written in his book "Nineteen Eighty-Four" could become a reality by 2024 as artificial intelligence technology becomes the all-seeing eye, a top Microsoft executive warned Thursday.

Microsoft President Brad Smith told BBC's Panorama George Orwell's 1984 "could come to pass in 2024" if government regulation doesn't protect the public against intrusive artificial intelligence surveillance.
"I'm constantly reminded of George Orwell's lessons in his book '1984.' You know the fundamental story … was about a government who could see everything that everyone did and hear everything that everyone said all the time," Smith said on BBC while chatting about China's use of artificial intelligence to monitor its citizens.


"Well, that didn't come to pass in 1984, but if we're not careful, that could come to pass in 2024," Smith continued.
"If we don't enact the laws that will protect the public in the future, we are going to find the technology racing ahead, and it's going to be very difficult to catch up."
He warned that Orwell's view of a government spying on its citizens around the clock is already a reality in some parts of the world.

Artificial intelligence-led totalitarianism, such as in China, has wiped away the freedoms of its citizens and transformed them into obedient members of the state. A social credit score keeps citizens in check.

To prevent such a dystopia in the West, lawmakers need to act now, explained Smith.
In 2019, the billionaire investor Peter Thiel insisted that artificial intelligence was "literally communist."

He said artificial intelligence concentrates power to monitor citizens. These surveillance tools know more about a person than they know about themselves.

Artificial intelligence is a crucial tool for governments to adopt an Orwellian state of surveillance and control.

But can we trust lawmakers and "Big Tech" who want to consolidate power to prevent such a dystopia?

It's hard to say, considering politicians have only one objective: stay in power.

Suppose we can't trust politicians to protect our freedoms and interests; instead, they side with mega-corporations. In that case, we must raise our understanding of privacy shields that protect us from artificial intelligence spying on us.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Blue Pill or Red Pill – Choose Wisely

iu-5.jpeg

I’ve been writing a great deal about buyer’s remorse. But just when I think I’ve said everything that needs to be said on the subject, it suddenly gets even worse. President Asterisk’s poll numbers are going south faster than a Minnesota snowbird in October. But, not to be undone, President-elect Harris is racing old Joe to the bottom of the scale. Even liberals are starting to disclose how truly nasty and unlikeable the duo really are. Has Joe managed to “red pill” the population?

In our modern-day version of The Matrix, the left has been attempting to “blue pill” us with their incessant propaganda. However, some are experimenting with the red pill. They’re opening their eyes and seeing the truth for the first time. It’s the blue pill for the leftist Kool-Aid and the red pill for truth and reality — a rather appropriate color choice — no?

The blue pill provides comfort — at least in the short term. It dulls our sense of reality and inhibits our ability to reason. It provides a sense of security — even if it’s only an illusion. The blue pill allows us to accept:
  • That America was founded by evil men for evil purposes
  • That individuals are ill-prepared to make smart decisions
  • That individual liberty is an impediment to utopia
  • That the killing of human beings is not murder, if done in the womb
  • That human beings control the weather
  • That science is settled except when applied to biology (humans are the only species in which DNA is not a determinant of gender)
Conversely, the red pill offers a life of struggle. It requires that we cope with the world as it really is — not as we wish it were. It allows us to choose our own path. We can languish in sloth — with 200 cable channels at our fingertips. Or we can strive for greatness. The choice is ours, but the red pill requires us to accept:
  • That liberty is a higher priority than safety and security
  • That we are responsible for the conduct of our own lives
  • That we accept accountability for our own successes and failures
  • That there are no victim classes – only outcomes which we individually determine
A number of years ago, my employer sent me to attend a seminar. The attendees included people from consumer goods manufacturers, the biomedical industry, and one defense contractor — me. The instructor started the seminar by having everyone introduce themselves and describe what their work involved. When I said that I was a defense contractor, the instructor snidely commented, “Oh, peace is your profession.” It was a reference to the slogan the Strategic Air Command adopted in 1957. I responded, “No. Supporting those who defend liberty is our business.” The whole class erupted in laughter. That’s when I realized that for many people, defending liberty was considered an obsolete and absurd notion. It seems the blue pill has been in general use for a while now.

All Joe needed to do was provide normalcy rather than demand unity — and issue everyone their daily dose of the blue. Instead, Joe has behaved like an unsupervised child in a candy store, indulging his every wish. He shocked the body politic with too much radicalism, too fast — and it has awakened the citizenry for a brief moment. Joe “red pilled” the body politic.

In reality, the blue pill (leftist propaganda) is losing its efficacy. Once people know propaganda is propaganda, they stop believing the propaganda. I know this is a difficult concept for the left to grasp, but when one catches someone lying to them, they’re less likely to believe future lies. The propagandists overplayed their hand. The propaganda is no longer convincing.

At the same time, Joe has hit us with an unprecedented level of radicalism which runs counter to logic and common sense. We need a higher dosage of the blue pill to avoid seeing the truth, at the very time the pill is losing its potency. Some of us have become underdosed. Truth and reality are beginning to intrude on the leftist matrix. Just when we’ve discovered that we’ve been lied to, we’re being asked to believe bigger lies. The populace is getting a glimpse of reality and now must choose — blue pill or red pill – leftist propaganda or our lying eyes.

We can take the blue pill and choose to continue living in a leftist dreamscape. It’s a choice to be subjects in a modern-day Matrix in which our masters feed us, shelter us, and determine every aspect of our lives. It’s the life of slaves — pampered perhaps — but slaves nonetheless.

Or we can take the red pill and accept that life’s challenges are an inherent part of the human condition. It’s a more difficult path — particularly in the short term. But it offers endless possibilities. I refuse to be anyone’s subject. I chose to chart my own future. I’ll take the red pill.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Time for a Coalition of Free American States
Patriotic Patriotism America Symbol Usa Flag


I want to make a suggestion. It is past time for some type of “coalition of free American states.”

States have a long history of creating partnerships with each other. Law enforcement task forces, farming cooperatives, river management boards, and collegiate sports conferences all benefit individual states through regional collaborations and are common throughout the United States. It is also common for state attorneys general to coordinate lawsuits against the federal government.

Republican governors and Democrat governors meet at party retreats to strategize how best to advance their respective parties’ interests. And innumerable lobbying and legal groups work every year to promote the passage of nearly identical statutory language in state legislatures across the country.

What I have in mind is more substantial — the formation of a coalition of free states whose explicit purpose is to reduce the power of the federal government over individual states and their citizens while banding together to lessen the inevitable retaliatory blows the federal government will initiate against the states in response.
Although America’s constitutional form of limited government was designed specifically to maximize the liberty of citizens and maximize the power of states at the expense of the federal government, the accumulation of power has flowed only in one direction — away from individual states and individual citizens and toward the national government in D.C.

This phenomenon is so natural throughout history that it was a chief concern of the Founding Fathers themselves. Thomas Jefferson, a shrewd student of human nature, was blunt: “Experience hath shewn [sic], that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.”

Let’s be honest: the federal government hasn’t looked in tip-top shape for a long time, and now it’s a train wreck waiting to happen.

It’s made up of millions of petty bureaucrats who couldn’t care less about “serving the public.” Rather, they use their sinecures to exert power over (and not on behalf of) Americans and turn a tidy profit in the process. As was made clear while President Trump was in office, the president’s prerogative is routinely thwarted by an unelected administrative Leviathan that has no foundation in the Constitution’s division of government but does move to the Democratic Party’s marching orders.

Congress is made up of below-average-intelligence scoundrels and prima donnas who pretend to be statesmen and lawmakers while outside lobbyists, corporate kingmakers, and foreign governments write the laws that punch the rest of us right in the gut. And the federal courts have become home to too many political hacks camouflaged in priestly robes who distort the rule of law in pursuit of partisan objectives.

Notwithstanding the timely re-emergence of fiscal conservatives every few years who promise to have an answer to America’s budgetary crisis and looming financial Armageddon, nobody honestly believes there is any way to arrest America’s runaway debt explosion and unfunded liabilities spiraling past 250 trillion dollars while one quarter of the money supply now in circulation has been created out of thin air in just the last year.

Meanwhile, the U.S. military is engaged in war in some eighty countries — or nearly half the nations on the planet — and most Americans have no idea what kind of fighting is being done on their behalf or why. They do know that while the federal government finds the logistical legerdemain to engage in global conflict, it cannot (and will not) be bothered to use any of that skill to secure the southern border — preferring instead to enable drug-traffickers and criminal gangs to wage war against American citizens while at the same time demanding that Americans relinquish their Second Amendment rights to self-protection.

But do not worry. Have no fear. We have an Intelligence Community in America that is keeping everyone safe by reading all of our emails and text messages, spying on our phone calls, and generally making sure that any American objecting to the State-enforced political correctness struggle sessions of the day be added to the government’s growing list of “extremists.”

The same bunch of propagandists who could be counted on to push the Russia hoax for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, and who will now make sure that the origins of the Wuhan Virus get covered up for the political benefit of Joe Biden, are the wizards who regularly engage in national disinformation campaigns against the American people for their own good. Was the CIA lying about Russian bounties being paid for the killing of American soldiers in Afghanistan in order to manipulate White House policy? Sure. Is military intelligence pushing UFO sightings today to distract the American people from emerging crises on the horizon? Maybe. Is there any check whatsoever on the powers of the Intelligence Community? Not likely. Does anyone in Congress seem to care? Nope.

At some point, the whole federal government is at risk of crashing down under the weight of its own extravagance. Maybe the Ponzi scheme set up by Treasury and the Fed falls over like a Jenga tower in the near future, or U.S.-NATO provocations against Russia succeed in making us the beneficiary of a cyber- or EMP attack that takes out half the nation’s electrical grid, or the Democrats’ dance with woke fascism finally awakens enough Americans to the abundant threats to their freedom that people start pushing back. It’s as economist Herbert Stein adroitly pointed out: “If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.” Then what?

Well, it’s back to first principles, and those states prepared to exist without an overarching national government will survive. Just as it was during America’s founding, personal and economic freedoms will determine everything. Those states that respect families and religious liberty, reward knowledge and hard work, secure property rights while limiting welfare, and protect economic and intellectual liberty over regulation will dig themselves out from whatever mess lands our way.

Rumble video on website 28:08

States that abandon currency manipulation by backing money with gold and silver will prosper. In turn, innovation and social wealth will rise. The same foundations in liberty that made America exceptional will redound to states’ future survival and success.

The Democrats are on the wrong side of liberty. The federal government has strayed entirely too far from the clear meaning of the U.S. Constitution, and its increasingly Marxist proclivities promise only further betrayal. For American freedom to survive, the states must again do the heavy lifting. It’s time for a “coalition of the willing” to come together again.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Dismantling the Racialists’ Medievalism
Calling out the bluff and bluster of critical race theory’s fake ”white supremacy culture” list.

By Stanley K. Ridgley
May 28, 2021

If you’ve any interest at all in the current roiling contretemps over “critical race theory,” then you’ve seen “The List,” which is a compendium of 15 qualities that purportedly constitute “white supremacy culture.

The List is ubiquitous, in workshops on campuses, in corporate diversity sessions, in secondary school programs, and in New York City education workshops for teachers. Versions of the List appear on government websites, on “anti-racist” nonprofit sites, and have made it onto the Race, Research, and Policy Portal of Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center.

The List even briefly appeared on the Smithsonian Website for the National Museum of African American History in 2020, before someone with risk management sense took it down.

According to a recent essay in The American Mind, the List is used in Denver Public Schools as well as the newly infamous Loudoun County public school system in Virginia. Authors Frederick M. Hess and J. Grant Addison note:
In Loudoun County, Virginia, one of the nation’s wealthiest counties, the Dismantling Racism Workbook used to train teachers this summer highlighted ‘15 Characteristics of White Supremacy Culture,’ including a weird admixture of positive and negative stereotypes, including ‘perfectionism,’ ‘progress is bigger, more,’ ‘right to comfort,’ and ‘defensiveness.’
This List does, indeed, appear in a manual called the Dismantling Racism Workbook, a non-academic tract published by DR Works, a now-defunct organization based in Durham, North Carolina.

This workbook made one of its most infamous appearances in New York City at the behest of the city’s controversial Department of Education chancellor, Richard Carranza. Carranza is controversial chiefly because he believes in critical racialist ideology, and virtually all of his statements and actions substantiate this.

Shortly after assuming his post in 2018, Carranza ordered that all teachers and administrators—125,000 employees in all—be subjected to a $23 million program of mandatory “implicit bias” training.

Bluff and Bluster in the Big Apple
So in May 2019, critical racialist ideology came to life for New York’s unsuspecting teachers and administrators, who found themselves subjected to “training” run by a shadowy nonprofit called the Center for Racial Justice in Education (CRJE). It offered the List drawn from the racialist document Dismantling Racism: A Workbook for Social Change Groups, one of several cut-and-paste versions circulating.

The event caused a brief kerfuffle in the press, but with its typical short attention span, the media moved on. Questions remained.

Who generates this racialist material, where, and why? Is it the result of sophisticated theorizing? Did this “White Supremacy Culture” emerge in the findings of an extensive, multi-year social science study?

Of course, the most obvious question is: Where did this list originate?

You can be forgiven if you believe that the list was generated from social-science studies using academic research methods to create knowledge, or perhaps a survey that engaged feedback from thousands of subjects. Or perhaps you believe that this list of “White Supremacy Culture” emerged from a careful theoretical exposition offered by university faculty with standing and respect.

But you already know that it was none of these things, don’t you?

You suspect that the entire edifice of critical racialism sits on a foundation of fakery and fiction, storytelling, and superstition. Your suspicions are spot on, and the “White Supremacy Culture” list is one of the most egregious examples.

As with all of critical racialist material, it’s traceable to the unsubstantiated opinions of a mere handful of critical racialists. The author of the List is Tema Okun, a would-be academic. Okun has been trading in the lucrative racialist workshop industry since at least the mid-1990s when she was a disaffected corporate trainer.

The List appeared in Okun’s 2010 dissertation written for an obscure “school of education” program at the University of North Carolina-Greensboro. Her work itself is a parody of scholarship, a personal narrative of her days working with nonprofits, variously called “Grassroots Leadership,” “ChangeWork,” and “DRWorks.” The dissertation is what is called, in the lingo, an “autoethnography” of Okun as a workshop facilitator. Okun spins a tale of her time with off-campus nonprofits and the people with whom she was consorting at the time.

Readers are free to judge its quality for themselves. The List in her dissertation first appeared in an article Okun wrote for ChangeWork in 1999.

But as for the List itself, where did Okun get it? What was the source Okun used for the List in the original article?

Let’s allow Okun to tell us in her own words, found on page 29 of her dissertation.
Sometime in the mid-1990s, I arrived home after a particularly frustrating consultation with an organization I was working with at the time. In a flurry of exasperation, I sat down at my computer and typed, the words flowing of their own accord into a quick and dirty listing of some of the characteristics of white supremacy culture that show up in organizational behavior. The paper I wrote in such a frenzy on that afternoon so many years ago lists 15 behaviors, all of them interconnected and mutually reinforcing—perfectionism, a sense of urgency, defensiveness and/or denial, quantity over quality, worship of the written word, the belief in one ‘right’ way, paternalism, either/or binary thinking, power hoarding, fear of open conflict, individualism, progress defined as more, the right to profit, objectivity, and the right to comfort.
Okun simply concocted the list, like some medieval alchemist.

She made it up, then put it into an article, then put it into a workbook, then used the workbook as part of her dissertation, then published her dissertation as a book with an obscure independent publisher, and she continues to promulgate this fraudulent List today with the help of hundreds of folks who, most likely, don’t know better and who repeat it in a way designed to legitimize it. As Nobel Laureate economist Daniel Kahneman observes, “A reliable way to make people believe in falsehoods is frequent repetition, because familiarity is not easily distinguished from truth.”

Are you surprised that this is the origin of the List?

Are you surprised that a disaffected diversity hack scribbled the List in a fit of pique and then cobbled it into an article in 1999, which now appears nationwide in materials presented as fact to the nation’s schoolchildren, teachers, corporations, and college students?

This is how academic fakery enters the popular consciousness to become conventional wisdom. It becomes ritualized, repeated, and unquestioned until its origins become obscured.

GettyImages-1283923404.jpg

Hyoung Chang/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

Medievalism Comes Back Strong
Fakery such as the Okun list of “white supremacy culture” becomes part of what anthropologists call a myth-dream or collective story for an ideology. The process is like that found in primitive magic-driven societies, which provide excellent examples of communities constructed around a core myth-dream, like the one we deal with here—Okun’s list of “white supremacy culture.” Let’s look at the similarities.

Take, for instance, the Pacific Island communities in Melanesia, where storytelling and myth-building are conventional ways of understanding the world. The core myth of a society is eventually ritualized, and it becomes a “historical truth” that is referenced but never challenged as the foundation of a growing corpus of stories and narratives.

The Melanesian cargo cult, for example, has been studied for decades. It’s grounded in magic thinking that exemplifies this process of developing the collective story. As time goes by, the ritualized “truth” enters into the stream of what is commonly believed. It contributes to what the anthropologist Kenelm Burridge calls an increasingly secure “lodgement”:
Once a statement or proposition is given consent it becomes True, a part of truth, assuming an existence which is not necessarily contingent on explicit withdrawal of consent. For, having achieved objectivity or truth in a myth a statement may persist in the myth long after those who retail or who listen to the story say they discount its validity for the present. Then the statement becomes a historical truth. And, so it would seem, the longer a statement is contained in a myth as truth the longer it will persist. New truths, or rather, statements which are becoming truths, and which are expressed in the additions of individual storytellers, are extremely vulnerable to, and dependent upon, consent. But once the first tentative consent begins to harden into solid approval the lodgement becomes more and more secure, more and more independent of explicit consent or inarticulate dissent.
Moving from primitive Melanesian myth-building back to the United States, we can see that Okun’s “white supremacy culture” list is fast becoming a primitive “lodgement.” It is her contribution to the critical racialist myth-dream. Critical race theory, which is more properly labeled critical racialist ideology, is constructed of these types of “lodgements.” Okun’s list is just one fabrication. There are others.

A Litany of Racialist Fabulism
Here some of these fabrications—“lodgements”—of the critical racialist myth-dream and those who made them up or popularized them:

“White privilege”? Popularized by Peggy McIntosh in the late 1980s and into the 1990s; McIntosh was a comparative literature professor who specialized in the poetry of Emily Dickinson and who today bizarrely claims to be a “senior research scientist.”

“Racism as prejudice + power”? Concocted by a teaching assistant called Patricia Bidol in 1971 and published in a pamphlet for use in Detroit schools.

“White fragility”? Popularized in the 2000s by a woman named Robin DiAngelo, who falsely claims to be a sociologist and who lifted the term from a person by the name of David G. Allen, who apparently coined it sometime in the 1990s. DiAngelo carries a lot of baggage.

“Racial microaggression”? Conjured by psychiatrist Chester Pierce in 1970 and given new life in the 2000s by racialist psychologist Derald Wing Sue, whose entire program was substantially debunked in 2017 by Emory University psychologist Scott Lilienfeld.

“Racial fatigue”? A relative newcomer in the lexicon that purports to describe a psychological reaction to “battling racism,” as in: “I’m so exhausted.” This concept is popularized by diversity workshoppers such as Mary-Frances Winters, who runs a consultancy called The Winters Group.
In all of these, the technique is to simply fabricate something ideologically useful, to pass it off as fact, and then to circulate it with bluff and bluster. It demonstrates the power of medievalist thought, action, and repetition to achieve legitimacy as a ritualized “truth,” a secure lodgement in the critical racialist myth-dream.

The effervescence of this neo-medievalist turn in our discourse should give us pause. If we ask ourselves how fearful peasant villagers in the feudal middle ages could have been so easily duped by the fakery of pseudoscience and magical thinking, we need only look at ourselves in the 21st century to witness how the same kind of medievalist superstition has found a comfortable home in America’s respected institutions. The fraud of Okun’s “white supremacy culture” and its sibling fabrications is not just tolerated, it is celebrated and propagated. It is taught to our children, and it is imposed in the workplace.

As for Okun, she is still active and even maintains a website created in 2021 called “White Supremacy Culture,” where she continues to propagandize the List she fabricated in 1999. She has parlayed her efforts into a gig at Duke University’s Human Rights Center.

The unintended irony of Okun’s list is that the title of her dissertation is The Emperor Has No Clothes. Given that the “white supremacy culture” list is a primitive document, sourced from the fevered imagination of a disgruntled ideologue, and passed along in ignorance, the description fits. Meanwhile, the racialist medievalism that it represents continues its assault against logic, reason, and the scientific method.

We began dismantling medievalism three centuries ago. Perhaps it’s time to finish the task with its racialist descendant.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Abramson: Critical Race Theory Versus American Exceptionalism

SATURDAY, MAY 29, 2021 - 11:30 PM
Authored by Bruce Abramson, op-ed via The Epoch Times,

Over the past few weeks, legislatures, school boards, and parents have risen to challenge critical race theory (CRT) as a divisive ideology that teaches our children to become racists.

Their objections have brought this once-obscure academic theory to the front pages of newspapers around the country.


Demonstrators gather in front of Los Alamitos Unified School District Headquarters in protest of critical race theory teachings in Los Alamitos, Calif., on May 11, 2021. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

They’ve also raised some burning questions: What is CRT? What makes it so objectionable? How can this central pillar of “antiracist” training be racist?

The answer begins, as so many do these days, with the progressive penchant for the redefining—or rather, deconstruction—of words. “Antiracist” training is racist because progressives have redefined “racism.”

CRT scholars have been clear and consistent on this matter. The “antiracism” they’re preaching isn’t the “anti-racism” of Martin Luther King Jr. Nor is it opposition to the discriminatory treatment most Americans oppose when speaking against racism. CRT contends that the “systems” defining modern American life are irredeemably racist. It calls for a revolutionary upheaval, laying waste to every existing governmental, legal, economic, cultural, social, communal, and familial institution.

CRT’s “antiracism” explicitly requires compensatory discrimination against “white people,” rather than equal treatment for all. To further this goal, K–12 CRT programs emphasize and heighten racial identity, segregate students by racial group, discriminate in their treatment of these groups, and teach that racial tension is unavoidable.

CRT also embodies an absolute and total rejection of American exceptionalism. One consequence of that rejection is that CRT has become a shorthand for the entire constellation of anti-American neo-Marxist theories dominating today’s political left. Whereas Marx cast history as a struggle among economic classes, contemporary Marxists believe that struggles among races and genders to be at least as important. CRT sees the entire American experiment of extolling individual liberty as white supremacism seen through the lens of good public relations.

Though CRT’s blurring of culture clashes may give its advocates a talking point, it’s hardly one of consequence. Just as Marx missed the incredible adaptivity of capitalism and the benefits it confers upon poor workers, CRT’s loathing of America blinds it to the adaptive and evolutionary role American exceptionalism has played in combating discrimination.

There was nothing exceptional about the first African slave ships to arrive in the New World in the early 17th century. Slavery had been around throughout recorded history. Every known culture, everywhere in the world, had embraced inequality. Captives taken from conquered cities, warring tribes, or disfavored faiths had long been sold into bondage. People were born into a station in life and expected to behave accordingly. Few even bothered to question such “structural inequalities.” No human society had ever embraced the radical idea that “all men are created equal,” much less tried to put it into practice.

That is, until July 4, 1776, when a slaveholding plantation owner named Thomas Jefferson declared it to be the foundational creed of a new nation. That foundation was truly exceptional. It sent the young America on a collision course with all of past history. One after another, the time-honored institutions of inequality fell before this revolutionary American ethos.

Four score and seven years later, Abraham Lincoln reiterated Jefferson’s proposition as part of the fight to end slavery. A century after that, King galvanized the nation to end Jim Crow. Over the next few decades, the United States not only dismantled all legal and most social barriers to black advancement, but also adopted numerous set asides and preferences to promote the full integration of its black citizens into the American dream. In 2009, America inaugurated its first black president.

Those steps were all exceptional and proper sources of American pride. Yet viewed through the lens of CRT, they merely masked increasingly subtle forms of anti-black racism and white supremacism.

CRT’s ability to reach such a conclusion reveals just what type of “theory” it is. CRT relies upon the reasoning that has served as the hallmark of conspiracy-theoretic thinking: Evidence—like slavery—tending to support the argument that the United States is racist is taken at face value, while evidence tending to negate it—like the elevation of King to the forefront of this country’s heroes—is inverted into support. To critical race theorists, CRT is self-evidently true. All relevant evidence, no matter what it appears to say, is taken as confirmation.

CRT is a toxic, racist, anti-American conspiracy theory. At its heart is a denial of the American exceptionalism that has done more than any other ideology to combat inequality and discrimination. CRT has no place in our schools. America’s children should learn that their nation introduced new notions of equality to the world—and dedicated its history to broadening their applicability. They should learn to embrace America’s foundational ideal and take pride in the way it has developed throughout our history.

True advocates for diversity and inclusion should love no country on earth more than the United States. Our exceptional nation has taught the world that broad equality under the law provides a far better path to stability and prosperity than the perpetual struggle among divided groups ever could. That’s why true opponents of racism oppose CRT—in our schools and elsewhere.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Removing The Bedrock Of Liberalism
What the "Critical Race Theory" debate is really about.

Ibram X. Kendi, the most popular purveyor of CRT, promotes his new book, “Stamped: Racism, Antiracism, and You”, on March 10, 2020 in New York City. (By Michael Loccisano/Getty Images)
As the origins of our current moral panic about “white supremacy” become more widely debated, we have an obvious problem: how to define the term “Critical Race Theory.” This was never going to be easy, since so much of the academic discourse behind the term is deliberately impenetrable, as it tries to disrupt and dismantle the Western concept of discourse itself. The sheer volume of jargon words, and their mutual relationships, along with the usual internal bitter controversies, all serve to sow confusion.

This conceptual muddle also allows everyone to have their own definition and gives critical theorists the opportunity to denounce anyone from the outside trying to explain it. So it may be helpful to home in on what I think is a core point. No, I’m not a trained critical theorist. But no one should have to be in order to engage a field of thought with such vast public ramifications. But I have spent many years studying political theory, which is why, perhaps, I am so concerned. And, for me, the argument is not really about race, or gender, or history, or identity as such.

It’s about epistemology at its most basic. Which, of course, is just a fancy word for the question of what we can know and how we can know it. It’s the beginning of everything in any political system. Get it right, and much good follows. Get it wrong, and we’re in deep trouble.

In his forthcoming book, “The Constitution of Knowledge,” Jonathan Rauch lays out some core principles that liberal societies rely upon. These are not optional if liberal society is to survive.

And they are not easy, which is why we have created many institutions and practices to keep them alive. Rauch lists some of them: fallibilism, the belief that anyone, especially you, can always be wrong; objectivity, a rejection of any theory that cannot be proven or disproven by reality; accountability, the openness to conceding and correcting error; and pluralism, the maintenance of intellectual diversity so we maximize our chances of finding the truth.

The only human civilization that has ever depended on these principles is the modern West since the Enlightenment. That’s a few hundred years as opposed to 200,000 or so of Homo sapiens’ history, when tribalism, creedalism, warfare, theocracy or totalitarianism reigned.

The genius of liberalism in unleashing human freedom and the human mind changed us more in centuries than we had changed in hundreds of millennia. And at its core, there is the model of the single, interchangeable, equal citizen, using reason to deliberate the common good with fellow citizens. No ultimate authority; just inquiry and provisional truth. No final answer: an endless conversation. No single power, but many in competition.

In this open-ended conversation, all can participate, conservatives and liberals, and will have successes and failures in their turn. What matters, both conservatives and liberals agree, is not the end result, but the liberal democratic, open-ended means. That shift — from specifying a single end to insisting only on playing by the rules — is the key origin of modern freedom.

My central problem with critical theory is that it takes precise aim at these very core principles and rejects them. By rejecting them, in the otherwise noble cause of helping the marginalized, it is a very seductive and potent threat to liberal civilization.

Am I exaggerating CRT’s aversion to liberal modernity? I don’t think I am. Here is how critical theory defines itself in one of its central documents. It questions the very foundations of “Enlightenment rationality, legal equality and Constitutional neutrality.” It begins with the assertion that these are not ways to further knowledge and enlarge human freedom. They are rather manifestations of white power over non-white bodies. Formal legal equality, they argue, the promise of the American experiment, has never been actual equality, even as, over the centuries, it has been extended to everyone. It is, rather, a system to perpetuate inequality forever, which is the single and only reason racial inequality is still here.

Claims to truth are merely claims to power. That’s what people are asked to become “awake” to: that liberalism is a lie. As are its purported values. Free speech is therefore not always a way to figure out the truth; it is just another way in which power is exercised — to harm the marginalized. The idea that a theory can be proven or disproven by the empirical process is itself a white supremacist argument, denying the “lived experience” of members of identity groups that is definitionally true, whatever the “objective” facts say. And our minds and souls and institutions have been so marinated in white supremacist culture for so long, critical theorists argue, that the system can only be dismantled rather than reformed. The West’s idea of individual freedom — the very foundation of the American experiment — is, in their view, a way merely to ensure the permanent slavery of the non-white.

And nothing has really changed since the beginning: slavery, segregation, mass incarceration are just different words for the same experience of oppression. Our world is just a set of interlocking forms of oppressive structures, and has been since the West’s emergence.

I know all this sounds highfalutin. But I honestly don’t think what I have described is a “straw man.” It is rather the core argument. I also know that the vast numbers of people who have adopted this rejection of foundational liberal principles often know only bastardized versions of this, and believe that they are merely helping encourage racial sensitivity and tolerance.

But notice what CRT is not. It is not an open-ended inquiry into buried history, a way openly to acknowledge the true brutality and evil that white supremacy once was, to stop whitewashing the past, and to face squarely the evils that America has contained — evils that continue to echo today. That project is a profoundly worthy one, and overdue. Countless historians, black and white, operating in the liberal tradition, have done this. They need to do more of it. We have indeed prettified and air-brushed the near-genocidal system of labor camp gulags this country once designated to people entirely because of their “race.” We have forgotten some of it because it is convenient. If this were the central thrust of CRT, I’d be among its strongest defenders.

The 1619 Project is a case in point. It doesn’t just expose some of the hideous past we’d rather forget. It insists that “white supremacy” is the definition of the United States, that its true founding was therefore 1619, that its core principle from the get-go was not freedom but slavery, that slavery is the true basis for American wealth, that the police today are the inheritors of slave patrols, that only black Americans fought to end slavery, and so on. It insists that the Declaration of Independence was “false”, not merely imperfectly implemented, and designed to obscure the real project of racist oppression. And its goal is the dismantling of liberal epistemology, procedures, ideas and arguments in order to revolutionize what cannot by definition be reformed.

This is what makes CRT different. When it began, critical theory was one school of thought among many. But the logic of it — it denies the core liberal premises of all the other schools and renders them all forms of oppression — means that it cannot long tolerate those other schools. It must always attack them.

Critical theory is therefore always the cuckoo in the academic nest. Over time, it throws out its competitors — and not in open free debate. It does so by ending that debate, by insisting that the liberal “reasonable person” standard of debate is, in fact, rigged in favor of the oppressors, that speech is a form of harm, even violent harm, rather than a way to seek the truth. It insists that what matters is the identity of the participants in a debate, not the arguments themselves.

If a cis white woman were to make an argument, a Latino trans man can dismiss it for no other reason than that a white cis woman is making it. Thus, identity trumps reason. Thus liberal society dies a little every time that dismissal sticks.

Every time a liberal institution hires or fires someone because of their group identity rather than their individual abilities, it is embracing a principle designed to undermine the liberal part of the institution. Every university that denies a place to someone because of their race is violating fundamental principles of liberal learning. Every newspaper and magazine that fires someone for their sincerely-held views, or because their identity alone means those views are unacceptable, is undermining the principles of liberal discourse. Every time someone prefers to trust someone’s subjective “lived experience” over facts, empiricism and an attempt at objectivity, liberal society dies a little.

And every student who emerges from college who believes that what matters is whether you are on “the right side of history” rather than whether your ideas can be tested by the ruthless light of open debate is a student who does not have the ability to function as a citizen in a liberal society. The ability to respect and live peaceably alongside people with whom you vehemently disagree is a far harder skill than cheering on one of your own. And yet liberal institutions are openly demonstrating that it is precisely this kind of difficult toleration they will not tolerate.

I’m sorry but this matters. It’s not the only thing that matters right now, I know. But if we remove the corner-stone of liberal democracy — the concept of a free, interchangeable citizen using reason to deliberate the common good with her fellow citizens, regardless of any identity — then it is only a matter of time before it falls. This does not mean ignoring or overlooking the real struggles that African-Americans in particular have endured and continue to endure. It is to insist that we can do better — within a self-correcting, open liberal system — without surrendering to tribalism, race obsessiveness, or utopian attempts to force racial justice which violate the core guardrails against tyranny we rely upon for the survival of liberal democracy.

This debate is not about whether you are a racist or an antiracist. The debate is about whether, in your deepest heart and soul, you are a liberal or an anti-liberal. And of those two options, I have no doubt where I stand. Do you?
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Woke TV: 'Systemic racism' featured in 127 episodes
Viewers learn justice system 'designed to punish people of color'

WND Staff
By WND Staff
Published May 30, 2021 at 10:20am

Since the death of George Floyd in police custody one year ago, more than 127 episodes of various television shows have promoted "systemic racism," Black Lives Matter or defunding the police.

Among them are CBS' "FBI: Most Wanted and NCIS: Los Angeles," NBC's "Chicago PD" and "Superstore," and CW’s "Black Lightning," noted comedian and columnist Kevin Downey Jr. in a column for PJ Media.

In a homage to Breonna Taylor, an espisode of "Black Lightning" featured a no-knock raid in which a black woman was killed.

"Did the episode mention the real-life Breonna allowed her ex-boyfriend to use her address and car to sell drugs?" Downey asked. "Did the episode show her current boyfriend fire his gun illegally through a door and hit a cop? Did the show mention Breonna was hit in the crossfire?"

He said the point of the episode is obvious: "Breonna died because cops are racists who can’t wait to kill black people."

The ABC show "The Rookie" featured a character arguing “the criminal justice system is inherently biased, designed to punish poor people, and people of color."

The only way to fix it, the character says, is to "defund the police."

NBC's "This Is Us" aired a pro-Black Lives Matter season premiere just before the November 2020 election. The show's creator, Dan Fogelman, explained it felt "almost irresponsible not to take on the moment," suggesting his aim was to prevent the reelection of Donald Trump.

In the season premiere of "Law and Order," Capt. Olivia Benson was chastised by the New York Police Department's Internal Affairs office. She was told that some cops "never see themselves as racist but are in denial about their complicity in the systemic racism of the NYPD."
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Rep. Crenshaw and Sen. Cotton announce launch of military whistleblower form

On Friday, Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) announced the launch of a web form where military service members can report their stories without fear of reprisal.

Rep. Crenshaw and Sen. Cotton announce launch of military whistleblower form


James AnthonyThe Post Millennial

May 29, 2021 1:48 PM2 Mins Reading
On Friday, Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) announced the launch of a web form where military service members can report their stories without fear of reprisal.

"Enough is enough. We won’t let our military fall to woke ideology. We have just launched a whistleblower webpage where you can submit your story. Your complaint will be legally protected, and go to my office and @SenTomCotton," tweeted Crenshaw on Friday.

1622411081588.png

"With written permission we will anonymously publish egregious complaints on social media and tell the country what’s happening in our military," Crenshaw continued.

"For too long, progressive Pentagon staffers have been calling the shots for our war-fighters, and spineless military commanders have let it happen. Now we are going to expose you."
The form can be found here, where users immediately read a disclaimer:

"We advise that whistleblowers use your personal resources and contact information when communicating submitting this form, and that you do not use your work equipment or work contact information. Further, do not submit classified information or other information barred from release through this form or by email."

"Various U.S. laws at the federal, state and local level prohibit retaliation against whistleblowers for providing information to Congress. However, you still take serious risks when you report allegations of wrongdoing. We recommend that you consult an attorney experienced in whistleblower law for further guidance. We respect your confidentiality, and we will use your contact information only to follow up with you regarding your submission. You may submit a disclosure anonymously. However, please be aware that anonymous disclosures may limit our ability to respond to the information that you provide."


This measure is felt by many to be necessary in the wake of a recent scandal where the newly-formed Space Force's Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier had his post taken away after criticizing what he saw as Marxism within the military.

Many people have since rushed to Lohmeier's defense after the incident, helping him and demanding that his role in the Space Force be reinstated.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Dan Crenshaw Launches Whistleblower Page to Receive Complaints on Military Wokeness

WASHINGTON, DC - SEPTEMBER 17: House Homeland Security Committee member Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) questions witnesses during a hearing on 'worldwide threats to the homeland' in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill September 17, 2020 in Washington, DC. Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-MS) said he would issue a …
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
KRISTINA WONG29 May 2021452

Navy SEAL veteran Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) on Friday announced he had launched a page for whistleblowers to go and report complaints on wokeness spreading in the United States military.

He tweeted:
Enough is enough. We won’t let our military fall to woke ideology. We have just launched a whistleblower webpage where you can submit your story. Your complaint will be legally protected, and go to my office and @SenTomCotton.
He added:
With written permission we will anonymously publish egregious complaints on social media and tell the country what’s happening in our military.
For too long, progressive Pentagon staffers have been calling the shots for our warfighters, and spineless military commanders have let it happen. Now we are going to expose you.
— Rep. Dan Crenshaw (@RepDanCrenshaw) May 28, 2021
1622412545696.png

The page advises whistleblowers to use personal devices and contact information when submitting information, and to not submit classified information.

As the Biden administration looks to crack down on “extremists” in the military without yet having defined the term, some conservatives in the military have come forward to report political persecution.

Most notably, Air Force Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier has come forward with stories of such persecution in podcast interviews and in his book, “Irresistible Revolution: Marxism’s Goal of Conquest & the Unmaking of the American Military.”

In his book, he recalls attending the Pentagon’s top strategy school and bringing up psychologist Jordan Peterson with his thesis advisers and being told that mentioning Peterson was like mentioning “Hitler.”

Lohmeier was fired from command at Space Force after he appeared on several podcasts discussing his book.

In one interview on the Information Operations podcast he said: “What you see happening in the U.S. military at the moment is that if you’re a conservative, then you’re lumped into a group of people who are labeled extremists if you voice your views.”
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Unroll Thread

@RobertGReeve - Robert G. Reeve Robert G. Reeve at @RobertGReeve
Download PDF

I'm back from a week at my mom's house and now I'm getting ads for her toothpaste brand, the brand I've been putting in my mouth for a week. We never talked about this brand or googled it or anything like that. As a privacy tech worker, let me explain why this is happening.
First of all, your social media apps are not listening to you. This is a conspiracy theory. It's been debunked over and over again. But frankly they don't need to because everything else you give them unthinkingly is way cheaper and way more powerful.

Your apps collect a ton of data from your phone. Your unique device ID. Your location. Your demographics. Weknowdis. Data aggregators pay to pull in data from EVERYWHERE. When I use my discount card at the grocery store? Every purchase? That's a dataset for sale.

https://video.twimg.com/tweet_video/E2NC7INXMAIxSXL.mp4 .02 min

They can match my Harris Teeter purchases to my Twitter account because I gave both those companies my email address and phone number and I agreed to all that data-sharing when I accepted those terms of service and the privacy policy.

Here's where it gets truly nuts, though. If my phone is regularly in the same GPS location as another phone, they take note of that. They start reconstructing the web of people I'm in regular contact with.

The advertisers can cross-reference my interests and browsing history and purchase history to those around me. It starts showing ME different ads based on the people AROUND me. Family. Friends. Coworkers.

It will serve me ads for things I DON'T WANT, but it knows someone I'm in regular contact with might want. To subliminally get me to start a conversation about, I don't know, ****ing toothpaste. It never needed to listen to me for this. It's just comparing aggregated metadata.
The other thing is, this is just out there in the open. Tons of people report on this. It's just, nobody cares. We have decided our privacy just isn't worth it. It's a losing battle. We've already given away too much of ourselves.

"We spotted a senior official at the Department of Defense walking through the Women’s March ... His wife was also on the mall that day, something we discovered after tracking him to his home in Virginia."

So. They know my mom's toothpaste. They know I was at my mom's. They know my Twitter. Now I get Twitter ads for mom's toothpaste. Your data isn't just about you. It's about how it can be used against every person you know, and people you don't. To shape behavior unconsciously.

Apple's latest updates let you block apps' tracking and Facebook is MAD. They're BEGGING you to just press accept and go back to business as usual. Block the **** out of every app's ads. It's not just about you: your data reshapes the internet.

The internet is never going to be the wacky place it was when I had a Livejournal and people shared protean gifs in the form of YTMNDs. Big business has come to suck the joy (and your dollars) out of it. At least make it hard for them.

Oh, this post is my Twitter high score. If you like D&D consider sticking around, my account is 85% tabletop RPG development and 15% leftist politics.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
1622414576700.png

1:47 min

Gen. Arbuckle: 'We Are in Great Danger of Losing Our Republic'
Bannons War Room Published May 29, 2021
Rumble — General Joseph Arbuckle returns and says he “couldn’t sit back and do nothing” as he saw the nation spiraling into Marxism.

+++++++++++++++++++++

Rep. Scott Perry Urges Fellow Veterans to Enter Politics to Save Military From Marxism 1:21 min
Rep. Scott Perry Urges Fellow Veterans to Enter Politics to Save Military From Marxism
Bannons War Room Published May 29, 2021

Rumble — Brigadier General Perry urges fellow veterans to get involved and serve on school boards or run for elected office.

++++++++++++++++++

Gen. Welch Explains CCP Threat: We Fight for Freedom, They Fight for Control 2:19 min
Gen. Welch Explains CCP Threat: We Fight for Freedom, They Fight for Control
Bannons War Room Published May 29, 2021
Rumble — Brig. Gen. Bill Welch, U.S. Air Force (RET) explains why the Chinese Communist Party is a very concerning adversary.

++++++++++++++

Gen. Arbuckle: 'We're Being Taken Over Without a Shot Being Fired' 9:35 min

Gen. Arbuckle: 'We're Being Taken Over Without a Shot Being Fired'
Bannons War Room Published May 29, 2021
Rumble — Gen. Joseph Arbuckle says the greatest threat is now not foreign, but domestic.
https://rumble.com/vgobwr-koala-being-taken-from-the-ground.html
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Campus 'diversity' training challenged as unconstitutional compelled speech

Civil liberties watchdog FIRE prevails in one of two First Amendment complaints at University of Oklahoma, Rutgers Law School.

By Greg Piper
Updated: May 30, 2021 - 10:20pm

Two public universities responded very differently to recent allegations of unconstitutional "compelled speech."

Rutgers University's law school apparently told its student government to ditch a requirement that student organizations host events on critical race theory to be eligible for funding.

The University of Oklahoma, on the other hand, refused to stop requiring faculty and staff, including some graduate students, to complete a diversity training that requires them to say things they don't necessarily believe.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), which initiated both complaints, shared portions of the OU training video that it considers unconstitutional with Just the News.

They show that participants are not allowed to move forward in the training until they give a single approved answer to scenarios involving disabilities, gender identity and cultural differences in the workplace.

OU consulted with its software vendor, EverFi, in response to FIRE's complaint that the training amounts to compelled speech. A university spokesperson gave Just the News the same statement it gave the civil liberties group.

The training "does not impose specific ways of thinking, but instead, presents situational examples of how to engage with the broader world in a way that is understanding of all people and perspectives," the statement said. "EverFi's training modules are based on best practices and data gathered by the company's researchers and developers."

While the university claimed it will consider "relevant legislative initiatives" when reviewing the training, it did not mention any constitutional issues the training may raise.

View: https://youtu.be/Ov0SqljUiDE
1:09 min

Imposed CRT 'lens' not viewpoint-neutral
The Student Bar Association at Rutgers' law school in Camden, N.J., added a diversity and inclusion section to its constitution last fall.

Any student group seeking funding of $250 or more must plan at least one event "through the lens of Critical Race Theory, diversity and inclusion, or cultural competency," the amendment reads. According to FIRE, 19 of 22 student groups requested more than $250 last fall.

The Federalist Society chapter at the law school claims the policy amounts to compelled speech and "may stifle the establishment of new student organizations" that disagree with CRT or have no position on it, Nick DeBenedetto, president of the right-leaning law student group, told FIRE.

The civil liberties group warned Rutgers President Jonathan Holloway that mandatory student activity fees at a public university must be distributed in a viewpoint-neutral manner regardless of whether a student government is tasked with distribution.

It doesn't matter that student groups can choose their own topics, because being required to use the "lens" of CRT forecloses events that are critical of the theory, FIRE said. The "lens" options for diversity and inclusion and cultural competency also have no objective criteria, it added.

The May 17 letter drew a quick response from the administration, according to an about-face issued by the SBA's current and elected presidents May 23.

SBA leaders met with administrators to discuss alternatives, but "due to the strict deadline" — FIRE requested a response by May 28 — "and the constitutional issues presented," they removed the language entirely.

"We hate the idea of backing down, just because the 'other guys' say so, and we hate that we have to factor in those that oppose measures to foster diversity and inclusion," the letter reads. While they believe they can pass the constitutional amendment "or something similar again," now is not the time to "dig our heels in."

The law school didn't respond to a request to tell Just the News what administrators told SBA leaders, and whether the amendment raised red flags for the law school last fall.

Diversity training compels speech
Like the CRT mandate, the University of Oklahoma's diversity training goes back to last fall. A graduate student who is also a staff member, Elizabeth Owen, took issue with the faculty and staff training and its required correct answers.

In one scenario, where a coworker says he's "tired of all this transgender stuff," she chose the wrong answer: "I agree. Political correctness can be so tiring." The video rewound so she could choose from the remaining two answers.

Just the News viewed a six-minute recording of scenarios from the training that show a person responding to each, some correctly and others incorrectly. "We take issue with any question where the school requires a particular response in order to complete the training," a FIRE spokesperson said.

Five scenarios are text only. Each has three options for answers.

One says coworkers should invite a diabetic employee to happy hour rather than assume he can't eat anything and leave him out. Another says a hiring manager whose department is full of whites and Asians should not hire from an application pool dominated by them, but should ask recruiters to expand their talent pipelines.

A professor who said women scientists have to work harder, because most famous scientists are men, hurt his female students by evoking stereotypes of differences in ability, another scenario concludes.

The video scenarios have multiple parts, each of which must be answered correctly to continue. In the transgender discussion that Owen flubbed, the correct answers are asking the coworker why he's upset and telling him to respect his gender-transitioning colleague's wishes, treat her with dignity and recognize that it took courage for her to speak up.

"Excellent choice!" the scenario ends when answered correctly in full. "By being understanding and neutral you may have helped Michael empathize with Sarah's situation a bit more."

The user answered incorrectly in a scenario where a new employee says he doesn't drink alcohol. When a coworker tells the user the employee's not a good fit in the office culture, the user wrongly answered that they didn't have to invite him to events with alcohol.

"Try again!" the narrator says. The correct answer, after the auto-rewind, is planning some events without alcohol: "Great choice! A commitment to diversity includes making sure social events don't exclusively cater to the majority's cultural preferences and habits."

FIRE told the university in November that requiring users to answer correctly to complete the training was prohibited by a Supreme Court decision against requiring students to salute the American flag. It can constitutionally share its "preferred response" to each scenario without saying users "should" agree.

The civil liberties group also filed a public records request to OU seeking all diversity training materials. It didn't receive a response for the next four months, when OU said FIRE must come to campus to view the online training under the terms of its contract with EverFi.

The university told Just the News it doesn't have a "contractual right to copy, or transmit a copy of the Module." Outside entities are also prohibited from even creating "derivative works based on the training." (FIRE told Just the News the six-minute version it shared is protected by fair use.)

FIRE filed another public records request earlier this month seeking OU's contract with EverFi and any communications between the two since its November letter. A spokesperson said it hasn't received records yet.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Will Eliminating Standard Tests Really Reduce Racial Disparities In Education?

MONDAY, MAY 31, 2021 - 02:00 PM
Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Below is my column in the Hill newspaper on the announcement that the University of California will now join the “test-blind” movement and end the use of the SAT and ACT in its admissions decisions. Some have called for the change to increase diversity in the schools, particularly after California voters refused to change the long ban on affirmative action in education under state law.



Here is the column:

The Supreme Court will decide early next month whether to take a new case on the use of race in college admissions. For decades, the court has fractured on the issue and left an unintelligible morass. A challenge brought by Asian students at Harvard could bring clarity, including a possible rejection of the use of race as an admissions criterion.

However, the massive California university system has just taken an action that could make such challenges more difficult in the future. University of California President Janet Napolitano announced that the ten schools in the system will no longer base admissions on standardized tests — joining a “test-blind” admissions movement nationally.

Without standardized testing, it would be difficult to prove the weight given to race in admissions.

Advocates for greater diversity in admissions have long opposed the use of standardized tests as disfavoring minority applicants. Many have decried standardized testing as vehicles for white supremacy. Indeed, education officials like Alison Collins, vice president of the San Francisco Board of Education, have declared meritocracy itself to be racist.

Napolitano responded to such criticism with a Standardized Testing Task Force in 2019. Many people expected the task force to recommend the cessation of standardized testing. The task force did find that 59 percent of high school graduates were Latino, African-American or Native American but only 37 percent were admitted as UC freshman students. The Task Force did not find standardized testing to be unreliable or call for its abandonment, however.

Instead, its final report concluded that:
At UC, test scores are currently better predictors of first-year GPA than high school grade point average (HSGPA), and about as good at predicting first-year retention, [University] GPA, and graduation.”
Not only that, it found:
“Further, the amount of variance in student outcomes explained by test scores has increased since 2007 … Test scores are predictive for all demographic groups and disciplines … In fact, test scores are better predictors of success for students who are Underrepresented Minority Students (URMs), who are first generation, or whose families are low-income.”
In other words, test scores remain the best indicator for continued performance in college.
That clearly was not the result Napolitano or some others wanted. So, she simply announced a cessation of the use of such scores in admissions. The system will go from two years of “optional” testing to a “test-blind” system until or unless it develops its own test.

Ending standardized testing will have a notable impact on legal challenges to the use of race in college admissions. Last November, Californians rejected a resolution to restore affirmative action in college admissions.

The Supreme Court has issued a series of 5-4 decisions that have ruled both for and against such race criteria admissions — but even justices supporting such systems have expressed reservations. The author of the 2003 majority opinion in Grutter v. Bollinger, Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, said she expected “that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.” That 25 years is about up.

Reports indicate that significant differences remain on such scores, particularly for Asian students. The Harvard Crimson reported that “Asian-American applicants to Harvard earned an average SAT score of 726. White applicants earned an average score of 713, Native American and Native Hawaiian applicants an average score of 658, Hispanic American applicants a score of 650, and African American applicants a score of 622.” Yet, during that same period, “Asian-Americans saw the lowest acceptance rate of any racial group.”

In Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, the litigants cite a study finding that Asian Americans needed SAT scores that were about 140 points higher than white students; the gap with admitted African American and Hispanic students is even greater.
The Supreme Court has allowed race to be considered in overall admission decisions, but has stressed that it cannot be used as a determinative or dominant factor. Judicial reviews, therefore, often focused on the objective standardized scores to deduce the weight given to race. Most of us agree that admissions should be based on a holistic review of applicants and not just their scores or GPA. This includes achieving greater demographic, socio-economic, racial and other forms of diversity. However, standardized scores remain highly valuable as objective comparisons of all applicants to guarantee a system based on meritocracy, including within such groups.

In the Harvard case, the scores are particularly important because the litigants allege that subjective factors were systemically used to disfavor them on issues such as likability and personality. While the lower courts ruled for Harvard, the trial judge did note that there may have been bias in favor of minority admissions and encouraged Harvard to deal with such “implicit bias” while monitoring “any significant race-related statistical disparities in the rating process.” But what if there are no “statistical disparities” because there are no objective statistics?

The elimination of scores has a pronounced impact on students. While it will likely allow for greater diversity in admissions, it also removes a way for students to distinguish themselves in actual testing of their knowledge of math, English and other subjects. Yes, there are other ways to distinguish themselves, like community service and high school projects. Yet, as found by the UC task force, these tests do have a predictive value on success. Indeed, at a time when the United States is losing ground on math and science, the elimination of such testing could undermine our competitive position in a global economy; countries like China demand high levels of objective performance in areas like math and science.

There is an alternative. Rather than eliminate standardized scores due to the disparity in performance of racial groups, we should focus on improving the performance of minority high school students in these areas.

Testing results reflect a continuing failure of our public schools. The top-spending public school districts are also some of the worst-performing districts. New York topped the per capita spending, at $24,040 per kid. Yet, according to a 2019 study, over half of New York City public school kids cannot handle basic math or English. On tests, Asian kids shows a 74.4 percent proficiency in math, with a 66.6 percent proficiency for whites, 33.2 percent proficiency for Hispanics and 28.2 percent proficiency for African Americans.

Instead of addressing the failure to educate kids in these communities, the push is to get rid of the testing itself.

The deficiencies will remain — but the ability to expose them will be gone.

Eliminating standardized scores will not erase true racial disparities in our educational system. Indeed, it may only exacerbate them.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Update — General Flynn issues statement — I did not call for a coup!
Posted by Kane on May 31, 2021 3:28 pm

1622496735240.png
UPDATE

The videos you see below have been manipulated, according to this new statement from General Flynn.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1399129297240084489
.29 min

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1399141771997745156
.37 min

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1399236699746668546
2:19 min
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Delta Employees Circulate Scathing Letter Condemning the Company CEO’s Woke ‘Fascism’
by Kyle Beckerabout 3 hours ago
DELTACEOLETTER-758x413.jpg


Delta employees are circulating a ‘scathing’ anonymous letter that was obtained by Dr. Karlyn Borysenko, who shared it on social media and in a podcast.

The letter, signed by a 20+ years Delta Airlines Employee, was posted online. It is called “Ed Bastian and Death of Reason at Delta Airlines” in a reference to the company’s “Woke” CEO. The letter will be transcribed below:

PAGE1DELTA.jpg


“Against the advice of colleagues the following concerns regarding Delta’s CEO, Board of Directors (BOD) and management are submitted anonymously for fear of reprisal,” the letter begins. “The purpose of this letter is to convey executive and management practices detrimental to all employees, the company and social relations.”

“Recently, a DL flight attendant (Lady MAGA), while not representing Delta, was terminated for posting political content on social media which some Delta management deemed disagreeable,” it continues. “Delta claims employees represent the company 24/7 and can therefore terminate any employee should they express opinions management finds unacceptable even when not representing the company. But what when management does the same?”

“When employees are uniformed or in service of the company they are expected to abide by proper protocol and should be reprimanded or terminated when representing Delta’s brand in unflattering fashion,” the letter added. “But if Delta isn’t mentioned Delta has no say in how employees express themselves, none.”

“The change of our executive/management body SHOULD be to build our brand, hire employees of merit, provide the best customer service, build a strong company and create value and profit for stockholders,” it stated. “That’s all. It IS NOT and SHOULD NOT be the charge of Delta management to:
  • Contribute to political campaigns;
  • Endorse social causes;
  • Build brand based upon personal social or political beliefs;
  • Contribute money to nor distribute pins promoting racist marxist pseudo-terrorist political groups;
  • Conduct hiring, firing or promotions based upon race, gender, gender preferences, quotas or political affiliation, etc…;
  • Pander to political, social and racial causes and the leaders thereof;
  • Seek favoritism from political parties via implementation of party agendas;
  • Implement policies pitting company against individual employees;
  • Implement policies pitting company against customers requiring employees to isolate, humiliate, remove and banish customers from the airline;
  • Mandate how customers chew their food;
  • Projibit common lexison so not to ‘offend’, nor;
  • Take public positions on the legitimacy or illegitimacy of state election practices and reforms thereof.
“Our company should do none of those things,” the letter went on. “Yet, on Delta’s behalf, our executives and management routinely adopt and enforce absurd policies based upon their own fashionable socio-political whims void of reason and common sense. These managers crave peer approval, are insecure, vindictive and enact their gross intolerances they profess to reject.”

“Such corporate activism, combining business with political (or business and state) agendas, is, in fact, fascism,” the letter says, definitively.

“These practicioners seek political approval and privilege between corporate and political leadership to the detriment of citzens ultimately resulting in loss of liberty rendering free individuals slaves of corporate/political do-gooder statism,” it continued. “This is not leadership.

And at Delta NO employee should be forced to surrender personal freedoms of thought and expression to nebulous intolerant zealot managers no matter the political ‘moral’ objection. No free person should surrender free expression to politically illiterate managerial statist wonks just to be employees. We love our great airline. But, more importantly, we are Americans first.”

PAGE2DELTA.jpg


“Bastian era managers, especially throughout covid, have done all the aforementione and have proven a fiscal disaster throughout covid while pitting company against customer and employee against employee with unwise political social justice agendas,” the letter added. “Yet, somehow, while merging politically inept behavior into company policy and enacting the worst fiscal policies in company history executives saw fit to rewarded themselves with handsome, vastly underserved bonuses. Don’t be fooled into thinking Bastian is engineering a great Delta revival. The business was always there. Great leaders fight the absurd. They do not capitulated to it.”

“Delta management deemed fitting to terminate an employee who displayed personal political expression outsider their company roll,” it continued. “However, Mr. Bastian routinely attaches his personal political beliefs to the Delta brand. Mr. Bastian, we employees actually get along great without your help. Your job is to promote our brand, not to create racial divisions, advance political pet projects nor support socio-marxist racial organizations.”

“And, while representing Delta you publicly boasted manipulating Georgia State voter law – Mr. Bastian, you should not use Delta as a plaform to virtue signal your personal (apparently, political) ambitions,” the letter went on. “It’s not your place. If you feel you must tell everyone how virtuous you are, then maybe… And if Lady MAGA deserved to be fired for expressing political opinion then you definitely deserve the same treatment. Remember, even Delta requires positive identification in advance of boarding an airplane.”

“Shareholds, appoint an executive team capable of keeping personal political agendas out of operations,” it advised. “Concentrate on principles of professionalism and merit throughout void of woke, racist and sexist political reverse persecution. No one person or management body should be allowed to mold this airline in their own utopian image. We don’t need petty, insecure, pandering, virtue signaling yes-bots forcing political censorship, racism and soft bigotry of low expectations on our fine institution.”

“Appoint a competent CEO to rebuild and maintain our great airline,” the letter added.

“Remove Ed Bastian and his supporting teams from top down, every last one of them. Begin again rebuilding this great airline free of corporate activism. Delta, and everyone working herein, would be better served with management free of woke, foolish, pious, 24/7 racist politically naive views. As presently composed executive/management are a social justice disaster and not as bright as they think.”

Delta Airlines was one of over 200 companies that blasted Georgia’s election integrity laws. In April, the Georgia House rewarded the company by stripping it of a $35 million tax break due to the CEO’s inappropriate social justice activism.

Dr. Borysenko commented on the letter in the video below:

View: https://youtu.be/3sGJlYHjHeI
11:29 min

The anonymous employee’s letter is much like the tip of a glacier. If one employee is willing to risk his employment by sending such a heated message to the company’s management, you can be sure that there are far more employees who would like to send it the same message.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Exclusive: General Michael Flynn Responds to Media Smears over His Appearance at God and Country Rally on Memorial Day Weekend

By Jim Hoft
Published May 31, 2021 at 4:54pm
general-flynn-god-and-country.jpg


General Mike Flynn was a featured speaker this weekend at the For God and Country Rally in Dallas, Texas over Memorial Day Weekend.

general-flynn-sather.jpg

General Flynn with Jordan Sather and a third unidentified man

General Flynn and Trump Attorney Sidney Powell lit up the crowds and were a HUGE HIT at the pro-Trump and anti-Marxist rally this weekend.

Both General Flynn and Sidney Powell were honored at one point during the weekend for their work on election integrity and saving the republic from the Marxist horde.

At one point during the weekend General Flynn sat on a panel and was asked if why what happened in Myanmar can’t happen here? The question was in reference to the military overthrow of the leadership after accusations of massive voter fraud in the last election.

General Flynn suggested coups can happen anywhere — although we have never had this happen in America up to this point despite several prior elections riddled with fraud.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1399129297240084489
.29 min

The leftist media was looking for something to take the focus off of the failed Biden presidency and the forensic audits of the 2020 election.

They used this one line to attack the honorable general and the entire conference.
flynn-sun-fake-news.jpg

On Monday General Michael Flynn sent The Gateway Pundit his response to the latest media smears.
From General Michael Flynn–
Based on MSM lying and twisting:
I put this out:
Let me be VERY CLEAR – There is NO reason whatsoever for any coup in America, and I do not and have not at any time called for any action of that sort.
Any reporting of any other belief by me is a boldface fabrication based on twisted reporting at a lively panel at a conference of Patriotic Americans who love this country, just as I do.

I am no stranger to media manipulating my words and therefore let me repeat my response to a question asked at the conference: There is no reason it (a coup) should happen here (in America).
The left just will not give this man a break.

You will NEVER find a more honorable man than General Michael Flynn.
 
Top