Asian Americans Emerging as a Strong Voice Against Critical Race Theory - "According to CRT's victimization ledger, all whites are oppressors, and all "people of color" are oppressed. CRT argues that unequal economic outcomes among different races in our society result from white power and white privilege. Asian Americans punch a big hole in that worldview. As a group, their economic achievement has surpassed that of all other racial groups, including whites. Last year's Department of Labor statistics even showed that the median weekly earnings of Asian women surpassed white men's earnings. Values drive Asian Americans' economic success. Many believe in education attainment, stable marriages, delayed gratification, hard work and meritocracy. CRT attacks all these as "white" values, and the people who practice them as acting "white." Because Asian Americans' economic achievement and educational attainment resist CRT narratives, irritated activists have tried to eject Asian Americans from the "people of color" category. Last November, the North Thurston public school district in Washington state released an "equity report" in which it grouped white and Asian American students together, while placing everyone else in the "students of color" category. The school district only apologized after an outcry from the community's Asian American families. Even as victims of hate crimes, Asian Americans discredit CRT's assertion that racial prejudice only goes one way—from white people to people of color... CRT activists blame white nationalism for these hate crimes against Asian Americans. However, all perpetrators in these cases were non-Asian minorities. Asian Americans are concerned that CRT activists intentionally ignoring this inconvenient truth may result in the government misallocating resources and failing to protect Asian American communities from hate crimes. Asian Americans have felt the most harm from CRT in education. Activists claim that teaching math and science perpetuates "white privilege." They're more interested in indoctrinating kids with identity politics, intersectionality and race struggles. In an elementary school in Cupertino, California, where 94 percent of the students are non-white, a math teacher told third-graders in a math class that they live in a white-dominated culture, and had them rank themselves according to their "power and privilege" on an identity map. Chinese parents organized a protest, demanding the school stop teaching racism to their children and start teaching actual math instead. One Chinese parent explained that CRT's emphasis on dividing society into oppressors and oppressed based on skin color reminded him of the bloody class struggle in Mao's Cultural Revolution. Asian parents are also alarmed about attempts to change admissions standards for colleges and top high schools at the expense of Asian American children. CRT activists have been pushing for lowering admission standards—or the complete removal of difficult entrance exams—to top high schools because "too many Asians" are in good schools, and Asians are so "over-represented" that these schools are not "diverse."... Many Asian Americans believe education is the way to achieve upward mobility and the American dream. They see any attempt to limit their children's access to quality education as unjust exclusion. That's why CACAGNY calls CRT "today's Chinese Exclusion Act" and "the real hate crime against Asians." In an increasingly intolerant environment, calling out CRT takes tremendous courage. Those willing to speak up may face economic and reputational consequences. Asian Americans have spoken fearlessly and taken the lead to expose CRT's divisive and destructive nature. The rest of us should follow their example and join their effort to stop this harmful ideology from tearing apart our society."
Critical race theory is invading the nursery - "Back in the 1990s, the Commission for Racial Equality ran a billboard advertising campaign. ‘There are lots of places in Britain where racism doesn’t exist’, ran the slogan, alongside a picture of babies of varying skin tones, each with the word ‘here’ emblazoned across their forehead. How times change. The hysteria that greeted last week’s publication of the government’s Race and Ethnic Disparities report suggests this advert would be inconceivable today. It is no longer acceptable to claim there might be any place in Britain where racism does not exist. And this includes babies. Researchers have apparently discovered that babies display biases in favour of their own race from just nine months old... Newly published guidance from Birth to 5 Matters, a coalition of teaching unions and charities, recommends that nursery staff should receive training in ‘white privilege, systemic racism, and how racism affects children and families in early-years settings’. The key message is that under no circumstances must nursery teachers ignore differences in skin colour and treat all those in their care the same way. Doing this, the guidance warns, ‘simply allows the continuation of bias in a society which disadvantages people from black and minoritised groups. Instead of a colour-blind approach to race, more proactive anti-racism is needed.’ This involves ‘encouraging dialogue and conversation about difference’ in order to ‘evoke children’s strong sense of fairness’ through getting them to ‘recognise racist behaviours and develop anti-racist views’. It also requires staff to ‘break down false assumptions about everyone being able to succeed on their merits’. The exact details of particular lessons are not spelled out. Perhaps white babies will be fed last or left to cry for longer in order to compensate for their inherent privilege. Or perhaps black babies will be prevented from crawling until they learn they won’t succeed simply through effort and ability. Or maybe all picture books will be thrown out and replaced with Ibram X Kendi’s Antiracist Baby . One thing’s for sure: graduating nursery won’t mark the end of lessons in racial thinking for today’s tots. For decades, schools have challenged racism and promoted multiculturalism. In the wake of last summer’s Black Lives Matter protests, this has been ratcheted up with staff training, curriculum reviews, revamped reading lists, special assemblies, workshops and guest speakers. Schools can sign up to any number of anti-racist schemes offering lesson plans covering topics such as ‘the Windrush generation, activism, British identity, and diversity in the arts and science’. But this hasn’t stopped the teaching unions from arguing that still more must be done. They are calling for black history to be ‘taught across all subjects including maths, geography, food technology, science and music’... The emphasis campaigners place on the school – and now nursery – curriculum suggests adults have been written off as irredeemably racist. In a bid to construct society anew, anti-racist activists prefer to plough their efforts into children who are less likely to raise awkward questions. Sacrificing education itself in the fulfilment of this quest is considered a small price to pay. Unfortunately for young children, the teaching unions, as well as an array of charities and activists, seem only too happy to exploit them as unwitting pawns in their social and political experiment."
McAuliffe Calls Critical Race Theory a 'Right-Wing Conspiracy.' His Union Ally Says It's Needed to 'Teach the Truth' - "Virginia Democratic gubernatorial nominee Terry McAuliffe calls critical race theory a "right-wing conspiracy." One of his largest campaign backers says it's needed to "teach the truth." McAuliffe in June dismissed concerns over the teaching of critical race theory in Virginia schools as a "right-wing conspiracy … totally made up by Donald Trump" and Republican opponent Glenn Youngkin. Just one week later, however, National Education Association (NEA) president Becky Pringle said her educators "are not going to back down" from including critical race theory in public school curriculum. "We are not going to be afraid to teach it, because we know that to not teach it, we are not telling the truth," Pringle told CBS News... In addition to Pringle's pledge to fight for critical race theory, the NEA has partnered with the New York Times to distribute copies of the controversial 1619 Project "to educators and activists around the country to help give us a deeper understanding of systemic racism and its impact." NEA delegates in 2019 also directed the union to "incorporate the concept of 'White Fragility' into NEA trainings/staff development" and "educate members and the general public about the importance of reparations" at a total cost of $113,500. But the NEA is not the only major teachers' union backing McAuliffe while championing critical race theory. The American Federation of Teachers in April sent the Democrat $25,000 just days before union president Randi Weingarten defended teaching the 1619 Project in public classrooms. Weingarten called the project a "factual version of oppression in America," despite objections from prominent historians over its numerous "errors and distortions." Months earlier, the union leader pledged to send lesson plans stemming from the 1619 Project "directly to educators."
From 2021. Literally "this is not happening, and it's good that it is", on critical race theory being taught in schools
Battle Over Critical Race Theory - WSJ - "According to a recent YouGov survey, of the 64% of Americans who have heard about critical race theory, 58% view it unfavorably, including 72% of political independents. That’s a major liability for the political left. Sensing that they are losing control of the narrative on race, left-leaning media outlets have launched a furious counterattack. Liberal pundits at the New York Times , Washington Post, MSNBC and elsewhere have begun spinning a new mythology that presents critical race theory as a benign academic concept, casts its detractors as right-wing extremists driven by racial resentment, and portrays legislation against critical race theory as an attempt to ban teaching about the history of slavery and racism. All three charges are false. First, critical race theory isn’t an exercise in promoting racial sensitivity or understanding history. It’s a radical ideology that seeks to use race as a means of moral, social and political revolution. The left-leaning media has sought to portray it as a “lens” for examining the history of racism in the U.S., but this soft framing obscures the nature of the theory, which maintains that America is an irredeemably racist nation and that the constitutional principles of freedom and equality are mere “camouflages,” in the words of scholar William F. Tate IV, for white supremacy. The solution, according to prominent exponents of critical race theory such as Ibram X. Kendi, is to abolish capitalism and install a near-omnipotent federal bureaucracy with the power to nullify any law and silence political speech that isn’t “antiracist.” Second, the grassroots movement against critical race theory is nonpartisan, multiracial and mainstream. Parents have revolted against critical race theory training at high schools in liberal cities such as New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco. The most successful campaigns have been led by racial minorities who oppose the manipulative and harmful practices of critical race theory in the classroom. Asian-Americans in particular have argued that critical race theory will undermine merit-based admissions, advanced learning programs and academic standards. Third, state legislation about critical race theory bans a specific set of pedagogies—not teaching about history. Left-leaning media outlets have claimed that bills in states such as Idaho, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Texas would ban teachers from discussing racism in the classroom. This is patently false. The legislation in these states would simply prohibit teachers from compelling students to believe that one race “is inherently superior to another,” that one race is “inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive,” or that an individual “bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race.” The same bills explicitly say that teachers may and should discuss the role of racism in American history, but they may not shame or treat students differently according to their racial background. This issue isn’t going away. Critical race theory has taken a dominant position in many elite institutions, including public-school bureaucracies and the graduate schools training new teachers and professors. Parents, honest journalists and lawmakers should continue to combat the wave of misinformation, share stories about the damage critical race theory is doing to their communities, and develop a plan to combat it in local institutions. Critical race theory is a dangerous ideology that will take the nation into racial retrograde; Americans should have no hesitation in opposing it."
Supporting Elsa Tuet-Rosenberg shows how Australia’s institutions have been capture by activists | The Australian - "Elsa Tuet-Rosenberg, one of the activists involved in the doxxing of 600 Australian Jewish creatives, has a contract with the Australian Human Rights Commission with her company, Hue. Given this company is in receipt of public funds, and produces materials to be used in Australian schools, it is worth examining its work and overarching philosophy, and whether it is compatible with the AHRC’s remit. The first thing one notices about Hue’s website is that it does not limit itself to anti-racism. “Too often conversations about ‘Inclusion & Diversity’ are tokenistic and one dimensional,” the website reads. “The systemic nature of power & oppression is ignored, and there is no real investment in meaningful change.”... At first glance, one might wonder what gender affirmation has to do with racism. Why would a consulting agency dedicated to issues of race be in the business of transgenderism? It’s an important question because the answer sheds light on the all-encompassing nature of modern progressive activism. Today’s activism is shaped by a philosophical worldview known as critical theory. Developed by post-WWII academics such as Theodor Adorno and Herbert Marcuse, critical theory is an analytical framework that aims to identify and dismantle systems of power. It takes Karl Marx’s critique of capitalism and extends it into other domains, including race, gender, sexuality, nationality and indigeneity. Systems of power that need to be dismantled include white supremacy, patriarchy, cis-heteronormativity, colonialism and capitalism. This preoccupation with power is why social justice activism today comes in a package. The civil rights movements of the past focused on tangible results, such as making changes to legislation that would promote dignity and equality for all. But since racial, gender and, later, marriage equality have become formally enshrined by law, the focus of activists has shifted from the concrete to the abstract, with the goal now being to “dismantle power”. From the critical theory worldview, dismantling one system of power works towards dismantling other systems. This is why students carrying banners that read “Queers for Palestine” see no contradiction: it’s power that needs to be dismantled, not rights that need to be won. This gets us back to the AHRC. The AHRC’s remit is not to dismantle power. It is a statutory body funded by the Australian government and is tasked with ensuring compliance with Australian law, namely the Racial Discrimination Act. As an instrument of power itself, any attempt to “dismantle power” would become self-contradictory. The clash of worldviews doesn’t stop there, however. The Racial Discrimination Act of 1975 states: “It is unlawful for a person: (a) to refuse to allow another person access to or use of any place, by reason of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of that other person or of any relative or associate of that other person.” But a visit to Hue’s website, (which is linked to by the AHRC) suggests this rule has been superseded. Hue offers events and workshops for “people of colour only”. One event, titled “Power & Resilience (People of Colour only)” purportedly “creates a safe space for people of colour at your organisation to share, reflect, connect and learn without the impact of the white gaze … the session also explores strategies for coping and wellbeing under oppressive and racist systems”. Yet the Racial Discrimination Act does not include carve-outs allowing certain groups of people to be exclusionary or racist towards other groups of people because they feel they are living under “systems of oppression”. The legislation itself is blind to race – it simply prohibits discrimination. It’s worthwhile asking: does Hue – and the AHRC more broadly – see itself as above the law? Unlike the Racial Discrimination Act, the critical theory definition of racism is not colourblind. Any condemnation of racism is determined by the identity of the actors engaged in it, rather than by the racism itself. And this selective condemnation also applies to rape, torture and murder... In the critical theory worldview “land defence” now outranks prohibitions against mass rape and mass murder. The mistaken notion that today’s social justice activists are passionate advocates of equality and dignity for all, rather than the carriers of a radically sectarian moral framework, has allowed establishment institutions such as the AHRC to be duped into giving them access and influence. Activists with Tuet-Rosenberg’s worldview have effectively taken over institutions across corporate, non-profit and government sectors. Centre-leftists have no match for their zeal, and quickly find themselves defenestrated whenever there is conflict. With companies such as Hue in receipt of public subsidy, the Australian taxpayer is now funding a revolution."
The Moment in 1986 When Critical Race Theory Ousted the Civil Rights Movement - "[MSNBC's] segment – headlined “The GOP’s Fact-Free Freakout Over Critical Race Theory” – portrayed CRT as unobjectionable: “It’s a way of looking at race,” Crenshaw said, smiling. “It’s a way of looking at why, after so many decades – centuries, actually – since the emancipation, we have patterns of inequality that are enduring.” Crenshaw’s benign description has been adopted by many news outlets. They portray critical race theory as a rarefied tool used almost exclusively by law school professors, a “scholarly framework that describes how race, class, gender, and sexuality organize American life.” The claim that CRT is rarely taught outside the upper reaches of the academy is belied by numerous examples of its influence, including California's Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum, a nearly 900-page teaching guide for K-12 educators adopted in March, which refers to CRT throughout. It says teachers and administrators “should familiarize themselves with current scholarly research around ethnic studies instruction,” notably “critical race theory.” Critical race theory also informs the New York Times’ 1619 Project, which "aims to reframe the country's history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of Black Americans at the very center of the United States' national narrative." It is now taught in thousands of public school classrooms across the country. The modesty of Crenshaw’s claims also fails to square with the combative account of the origins of CRT presented in the 1995 book “Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings That Formed the Movement,” a textbook edited by Crenshaw and fellow radical academics Neil Gotanda, Gary Peller, and Kendall Thomas. In a foreword, the scholar and activist Cornel West declares that CRT is not just an academic approach but a “politically committed movement.” The radical intent of this activist ideology is apparent in its rejection of “traditional civil rights discourse,” promoting race-consciousness over yesteryear’s ideals of integration, assimilation and color-blindness. Given the chance, the key proponents of critical race theory turned on their baffled white allies, publicly accusing their fellow progressives of racist recidivism. That confrontation, at an obscure academic conference over 30 years ago, did much to shape today’s angry racial politics... The race-crits shared with the crits the view that the law is just power politics draped in robes. But the factions split over whether society was constructed on class or on race. The original crits thought of race as an expression of class, not as a distinct category... The race-crits viewed their erstwhile allies as just another group to be judged by the color of their skin – which, for most radical left-wing intellectuals at prestigious law schools, happened to be white. “At its inception in the late ’70s, Critical Legal Studies was basically a white and largely male academic organization,” according to Crenshaw. She described the crits as “a predominantly white left.” The race-crits’ insistence on seeing the world in black and white would soon lead the radicals to splinter... Crenshaw, writing without irony, noted that the race-crits’ assault on CLS as a white institution “drew a surprisingly defensive response.” Was it really so surprising? The crits sputtered that they were “allies rather than adversaries” and that their collective energies were best saved for the common cause of tearing down traditional institutions... Once they were largely freed of the stodgy views of the white radicals, the academics who practiced critical race theory developed an ideology that rejected the old-fashioned liberal goal of integration. They argued that integration meant the loss of African American identity and culture and likened assimilation to genocide. They embraced color-consciousness and black nationalism; they dismissed the old ideal of color-blindness as a sort of false-flag operation, calling it “an ideological strategy by which the current [Supreme] Court obscures its active role in sustaining hierarchies of racial power.” Kimberlé Crenshaw is notable not only for her role in critical race theory, but also in developing the concept of “intersectionality.”... Critical race theory is nothing if not ambitious. It “questions the very foundations of the liberal order,” according to CRT pioneer Richard Delgado. He writes that critical race theorists reject core tenets of classical liberalism including “Enlightenment, rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law."... Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, recently defended schools and schoolboards against activist parents who she claimed were trying to stop teachers “from teaching students accurate history.” But critical race theory isn’t about teaching history. It is an ideological movement, one that discourages integration, rejects color-blindness, and scoffs at the rule of law. For example, in a 2015 journal article, critical-race scholars and practitioners Maria Ledesma and Dolores Calderon celebrate CRT as a “revolutionary project” and encourage elementary schools to disparage color-blindness as “dog whistle racism.” Critical race theory came into its own by accusing friends and colleagues of racism. If that’s how allies are treated, should it be any surprise that parents and lawmakers opposed to what they see as the radical indoctrination of children should find themselves accused of racism too?"
So this is where the left wing talking about lying that CRT is about teaching accurate history comes from
How parents are fighting critical race theory in NYC schools - "Until last summer, Harvey Goldman had no idea that his 9-year-old daughter was learning about George Floyd’s death and Black Lives Matter as well as her own “white privilege” at the $43,000-per-year Heschel School in Manhattan. Now he’s part of an underground network of parents in NYC and around the country, many of whom are left-leaning, fighting what they believe is the undue focus on race by schools as part of the new “woke” culture. Many are reluctant to identify themselves publicly for fear of being labeled racist. But more are coming forward after Andrew Gutmann, the father of a 12-year-old girl at Manhattan’s posh Brearley School, wrote a scathing screed to administrators about their “anti-racism” obsession and went public... Goldman, a businessman, was shocked by the amount of negative and inappropriate “anti-racist” dogma he said was being aimed at his fourth-grader and her classmates. But when he reached out to the school with his concerns, administrators were “arrogant and dismissive”... the school suggested Goldman take his daughter out of the school, he said. So he did. The family moved to Florida where his daughter is enrolled in a public school that he vetted beforehand to make sure critical race theory (CRT) was not part of the curriculum... Though the Trump administration banned the use of federal funds for CRT training sessions for US agency workers, the Biden White House last week proposed using taxpayer money to encourage schools to incorporate it in classrooms... Many parents, like Goldman, and Bion Bartning, whose kids were enrolled in the $54,000-a-year Riverdale Country School, only got wind of the situation after Minneapolis cop Derek Chauvin killed Floyd in police custody last May or when they overheard evidence of it during their kids’ Zoom classes... he formed the Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism (FAIR) to combat CRT in schools and promote a “pro-human” agenda. More than 20,000 people have already joined... Bartning, who is Mexican and Yaqui on one side and Jewish on the other, said he was especially dismayed by how Riverdale and schools across the country force kids to label themselves based on their skin color. Sometimes kids are even given a palette and made to choose the color that best fits their skin... In New York City, anonymous open letters complaining about critical race theory and bias training have been sent in recent weeks to administrators at such elite institutions as the $55,000-per-year Dalton School and the Jesuit Regis High School... a math teacher at exclusive Grace Church in Manhattan published an open letter about what he called the “harmful” anti-racism and pedagogy at the school. He was later told to stay home. The “underground” network has spread to public schools, too. Two Manhattan mothers who have kids in city schools lead the NYC chapter of FAIR and are speaking up, like Gutmann, in part to encourage others. Maud Maron, a public defender with four children in local public schools who is also running for City Council, said she first ran across the so-called anti-racist ideology more than five years ago as part of her work on the Community Education Council. “It’s a really divisive, ugly orthodoxy and it’s a multi-million dollar industry as well,” Maron told The Post. “It’s also very insidious because on the face of it, who wouldn’t want to sign up to be less racist?” Maron, who said her kids have been exposed to CRT in their public schools, said the ideology “may have started with some good intentions but now it’s like a cult. If you don’t go along with them, they think you are evil. But people should know that you can survive even if you speak out. Stand your ground and say what you believe. Don’t apologize for simple truths.”... Chu said she’s been vilified for speaking out against CRT as an activist. “I’ve been called a ‘Karen’ and they’ve tried to pressure me into not speaking up,” Chu told The Post. “It can be very stressful, physically, emotionally and mentally. It feels like a mob is descending on you and calling you a racist for fighting for the kind of education you want for all children. it’s really nasty. I’ve seen it ruin lives.”... “It’s awful what’s going on there,” she said. “The fourth graders learned about astronauts and inventors — but only black ones. They no longer learn about Thomas Edison. The math curriculum is a joke; they’ve dumbed it down. No more birthday celebrations are allowed and no holidays are allowed. They did away with Columbus Day but now they celebrate the end of Ramadan and the Chinese Lunar Year.” Podcaster Megyn Kelly pulled her sons out of posh Collegiate last November after a letter allegedly circulated accusing white people of “reveling in state-sanctioned depravity” and comparing white children to “killer cops.”... “We are part of the silent majority — so far — who I hope can save these schools from continuing down the wrong path.”"
North Carolina Finds That Banning Indoctrination Is Hard - The Atlantic - "In numerous other states, legislators purporting to target critical race theory or “divisive concepts” have packaged sensible reforms—including prohibitions on requiring students to proclaim particular points of view—together with irresponsible clauses that are highly likely to discourage valuable instruction... Yet even harsh critics of this kind of legislation grant that North Carolina’s effort is less vulnerable to censorious abuses than those of other states... For lawmakers or parents to object to curricula that promote ideological dogma about race is neither illiberal nor authoritarian, any more than objecting to Lost Cause mythology in public schools is illiberal or authoritarian. Yet North Carolina’s relatively well-written bill illuminates a flaw in all such legislation: Any prohibition broad enough to exclude pernicious dogma risks prohibiting or chilling legitimate instruction, while any bill so narrow as to avoid a chilling effect is unlikely to effect significant change. The needle is extraordinarily difficult to thread... Democratic Representative Kandie Smith likened the bill to a “book burning” and said, “A small group of enraged individuals are looking to ban an entire concept of thought because it makes them uncomfortable.” But if the North Carolina bill passes, it won’t ban critical race theory. It will restrict teachers from promoting seven specific concepts that may overlap at times with CRT but are far from synonymous with it—and will do so mostly by banning the promotion of racial stereotypes in public schools. Indeed, the bill is best understood as an attempt to deploy the blunt tool of antidiscrimination law, an exercise that ought to confound many of its supporters and opponents alike... In the 1993 essay collection Words That Wound—a seminal text of critical race theory—the professors Mari J. Matsuda, Charles R. Lawrence III, Richard Delgado, and Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw provide a multifaceted intellectual edifice for overriding academic freedom, free speech, and First Amendment concerns and using state power against words that degrade or humiliate in education. In an ironic twist, proponents of the North Carolina legislation could argue for its passage by citing these critical race theorists, who argued in Words That Wound that less egregious forms of racism degenerate into more serious forms; that libels against entire racial groups are more damaging than slights aimed at individuals and are best treated as “outside the realm of protected discourse”; that racist messages trigger physiological injury and devastate self-esteem; that those who are denigrated for their race or gender benefit from laws that tell them they are not imagining the harm being done to them; that “the appropriate standard in determining whether language is persecutory, hateful, and degrading is the recipient’s community standard”; and that the classical liberal insistence on viewpoint neutrality when the state restricts speech entrenches abuses by people in power. Summing up their case for narrowing the First Amendment and limiting freedom of speech, the authors of Words That Wound declare in a joint introduction that “this is at bottom a fight to gain equal access to the power of the intelligentsia to construct knowledge, social meaning, ideology, and definitions of who ‘we’ are.” The same fight continues today, but with a noteworthy ideological flip... the bill’s opponents vastly exaggerate its potential harm when they claim, as did North Carolina’s ACLU chapter, that “rather than help young people get the most out of their education to help them grow into informed and engaged citizens, some lawmakers want to practice censorship and impose an alternate version of American history—one that erases the legacy of discrimination and lived experiences of Black and Brown people, women and girls, and LGBTQ+ individuals.” If passed, this bill will result in no such erasure... some Democrats are talking as if any step to contest preferred progressive curriculum on race is verboten––as if no legitimate disagreements exist about how best to educate and acculturate young people"
From 2021. Regulating what kids are taught in school is not about free speech, though
