White House orders whitewashing of history
- Thread starter Cuddles
- Start date
Yeah he's going full on racist, sadly I don't think it will lose him any votes.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...american-propaganda/ar-BB18J1ip?ocid=msedgdhp
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...american-propaganda/ar-BB18J1ip?ocid=msedgdhp
So it's racist to believe the most qualified person should get the job? The Trump derangement syndrome is real with you guys.
I can't believe you people think getting rid of a racist propaganda is racist. Clown world.
You call it racist propaganda, sensible people call it American history, you know, unlike racist propaganda statues.
Critical race theory demonizes whites in order to promote other races and virtuous. If you changed the colors it would be racist, evil, white supremacist, etc. Doesn't pass any reasonable smell test. Critical race theory is not American History. Idiot. There's a whole industry of hucksters making millions on the divisive racial propaganda.
I think you're actually retarded. Your TDS is starting to effect your brain.
you need to get past what the WH is peddling in their memo and what in fact is being taught in that training, not what some butt hurt trumper fed back to Trump et.al. Idiot.
It's not "critical race theory" to recognize that slavery or Indian land grabs propped up white land owners' wealth and their progeny's in certain states, it's just observation of facts.
inb4, we should not teach Nazi's Kristallnacht and Jewish stolen wealth because it's "critical race theory"
I think you're actually retarded. Your DTS is starting to affect your brain.
Last edited:
You mean like erasing all evidence of the confederacy? I understand why the left wants that ugly chapter to be gone because it paints a direct line to the democratic slave traders which dominated the confederacy and the subsequent decades on which Democrats did everything possible to keep the black man on some sort of plantation. Late as the nineties the democratic slave masters were creating new plantation with their criminal justice oppression of blacks which formed the largest slave labor prison system in the world which still runs today. To date Trump is the only person who has actually done something of substance to address that. Just more inconvenient truths of democratic history.
Of course the sixth party system was when the republicans drew all the southern racists to them.
Democrats And Republicans Platform Switch Throughout US History
Ash C June 24, 2019
The two major political parties in the United States, now called Democrats and Republicans, have went through many changes throughout history. Their ideologies, stances, and even platforms have switched in numerous instances. Typically, these big changes usually happen around the time of major legislative changes and political events, such as the Civil War in the 1860’s, and Civil Rights in the 1960’s. Historians have put these changes into perspective by writing out a timeline, coining the “Party Systems”, also known as the different eras of the United States political parties.
The First Party System
The first party system emerged way back in the days when Democrats and Republicans were coexisting under the umbrella of Anti-Federalism. The Federalists stood for a strong national government with a national bank and a strong economic and industry system, which were the ideals of an aristocratic “big government“ party more popular in the North. The Democratic-Republicans had a “small government” platform in support for a limited government with an emphasis on farmers’ and states’ rights, mainly favoured in the South. The smaller government was more “for the people” and achieved dominance after the 1800 Presidential election, and went on to become the Democratic Party in the next party system.
The Second Party System
The second party system occurred as the Federalists slowly died out and the Democratic-Republicans were in power. The two-in-one party had internal disagreements surrounding major political issues. They broke down into several factions mainly over the issue of slavery, and these tensions eventually led to the Civil War which separated the one party into two.
The Third Party System
The third party system was a time of extreme industrial and economic expansion. The Democrats were supported by southern social conservatives in rural areas who did not want slavery to end, while the Northern Republicans were embraced by northern progressive liberals who strived to end slavery once and for all. This era is defined by bitter conflict and striking party differences.
The Fourth Party System
The fourth party system is defined by the rise of “the Progressive Era“ and immigration. After Reconstruction came the Gilded Age where both parties embraced progressivism. But then Teddy Roosevelt left the Republican Party, leading the way for many progressive Republicans. The Democratic Party became increasingly progressive as the Republican platform started to become more conservative and pro-business. With the rise of media, the events of World Wars, the Fed, the income tax, voting rights, and the rise of the modern state, more switches happened as a result of the major changes in social climate.
The Fifth Party System
The fifth party system was kickstarted by the Great Depression. Franklin D. Roosevelt made up the New Deal Coalition which consisted of new social welfare programmes bringing together under-privileged, working class, and minority groups. Many African-Americans made the switch here: they had previously been supporters of the Republican Party due to the freeing of slaves, but they were in support of the Democrats now.
The Sixth Party System
The sixth party system appears to have begun with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when the Democrats officially lost their long-term dominance with the voters in the South as the Republican Party became popular in rural and suburb areas. The Democratic Party started to attract people of colour and white urban progressives. It was increasingly seen as the aristocratic party favoured in the North and in big cities. A complete 180 from how it was back in the 1800s.
Some historians and political commentators have argued that we are actually in our seventh party system now in 2019. This theory however has been one of controversy and not been fully confirmed or agreed upon. But the other “platform switches” stated above are not myths — as evidenced in the voting map over time, or from the historic party platforms. These party switches are definitely complex, but they are all a part of American history, and these major changes should be taken under consideration especially in the debate of party loyalty.
Democrats And Republicans Platform Switch Throughout US History
The two major political parties in the United States, now called Democrats and Republicans, have went through many changes throughout history. Their ideologies, stances, and even platforms have switched in numerous instances. Typically, these big changes usually happen around the time of major legislative changes and political events, such as the Civil War in the 1860’s, and Civil Rights in the 1960’s. Historians have put these changes into perspective by writing out a timeline, coining the “Party Systems”, also known as the different eras of the United States political parties.
The First Party System
The first party system emerged way back in the days when Democrats and Republicans were coexisting under the umbrella of Anti-Federalism. The Federalists stood for a strong national government with a national bank and a strong economic and industry system, which were the ideals of an aristocratic “big government“ party more popular in the North. The Democratic-Republicans had a “small government” platform in support for a limited government with an emphasis on farmers’ and states’ rights, mainly favoured in the South. The smaller government was more “for the people” and achieved dominance after the 1800 Presidential election, and went on to become the Democratic Party in the next party system.
The Second Party System
The second party system occurred as the Federalists slowly died out and the Democratic-Republicans were in power. The two-in-one party had internal disagreements surrounding major political issues. They broke down into several factions mainly over the issue of slavery, and these tensions eventually led to the Civil War which separated the one party into two.
The Third Party System
The third party system was a time of extreme industrial and economic expansion. The Democrats were supported by southern social conservatives in rural areas who did not want slavery to end, while the Northern Republicans were embraced by northern progressive liberals who strived to end slavery once and for all. This era is defined by bitter conflict and striking party differences.
The Fourth Party System
The fourth party system is defined by the rise of “the Progressive Era“ and immigration. After Reconstruction came the Gilded Age where both parties embraced progressivism. But then Teddy Roosevelt left the Republican Party, leading the way for many progressive Republicans. The Democratic Party became increasingly progressive as the Republican platform started to become more conservative and pro-business. With the rise of media, the events of World Wars, the Fed, the income tax, voting rights, and the rise of the modern state, more switches happened as a result of the major changes in social climate.
The Fifth Party System
The fifth party system was kickstarted by the Great Depression. Franklin D. Roosevelt made up the New Deal Coalition which consisted of new social welfare programmes bringing together under-privileged, working class, and minority groups. Many African-Americans made the switch here: they had previously been supporters of the Republican Party due to the freeing of slaves, but they were in support of the Democrats now.
The Sixth Party System
The sixth party system appears to have begun with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when the Democrats officially lost their long-term dominance with the voters in the South as the Republican Party became popular in rural and suburb areas. The Democratic Party started to attract people of colour and white urban progressives. It was increasingly seen as the aristocratic party favoured in the North and in big cities. A complete 180 from how it was back in the 1800s.
Some historians and political commentators have argued that we are actually in our seventh party system now in 2019. This theory however has been one of controversy and not been fully confirmed or agreed upon. But the other “platform switches” stated above are not myths — as evidenced in the voting map over time, or from the historic party platforms. These party switches are definitely complex, but they are all a part of American history, and these major changes should be taken under consideration especially in the debate of party loyalty.
Last edited:
Teaching American History belongs in schools in the greater context of a history class talking about each society's accomplishments and shortcomings. Indoctrination is the idea that you must accept that due to circumstances beyond your control you are born with original sin and cannot be healed. This is the principle of critical race theory.
I had to take a few women's study's courses in my undergraduate degree to graduate because I live in a state that moves further left every single year. I have actual personal experience with the indoctrination of Critical Race Theory and wrote several papers arguing against the idea because it runs contrary to the idea of egalitarianism that is a core tenant of classical liberalism.
Let's start with a quote from a great man:
I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.
That's MLK. Keep that quote in your head while you read the below on CRT:
Critical race theory rejects core tenants of true liberalism: color blindness, merit, and role modeling in particular. It hinges on the theory of systemic racism where, despite anyone's best efforts, all problems can be associated to white people who are guilty of the original sin of racism. Among other things it proposes "whiteness" is a property. Ostensibly this is to get around the true liberal idea that race exists but we should work towards merit. By consciously saying someone is "white", but not referring to their race, this builds disdain towards the "dominant race" in the form of indoctrination. A very important thing to do when you're building a case towards the more extreme "original sin" argument of CRT. Critical race theory is also the origin of the idea that constitution was written, and has been modified, to harm non-white races despite the very document existing as evidence to the contrary. Brown v. Board of Education, the 14th amendment, and several other landmark cases show that this is not true in general. Moreover, that power structures exist exclusively to disenfranchise non-whites. The existence of affirmative action, title 9, and several other anti-discrimination laws at least pose evidence that this is not true in general. In fact CRT rejects affirmative action because it's not strong enough.
The term to describe the left's view on race, through CRT and other similar far-left literally fascist viewpoints, is "bigotry of low expectations". The proponents of CRT elude to the fact that other races, blacks in particular, are incapable of achieving in a merit based society and thus need help from the "dominant" race. It reads like something a KKK grand dragon would say. CRT exists to perpetuate the idea of the intellectual superiority of whites. It may not be obvious through listening at the surface level but when you understand that the entire underpinning of the theory is that certain races cannot be helped, and cannot alone succeed to merit, you realize that it's actual a true white supremacist philosophy colored up and packaged to be fed to angry masses. CRT proposes that without the intervention of white liberals other non-white races are incapable of success.
This sort of idea that some races are incapable of succeeding in a merit based society is bigotry of low expectations. The simplest most basic form of racism. However these hucksters, consultants from BLM and other organizations, believe this to be true prima facie. CRT is a massive problem in our universities, companies, and the federal government. This is a good step towards preserving a meritocracy which, in my opinion, is the only way a society can succeed.
tl;dr, your personal anecdote is relevant to the WH memo how?