Really easy to do.

It certainly does mention black and white. White are oppressors, everyone else is oppressed. That is racist. Predominant culture privilege exists in every country, why single out whites in one of the most diverse countries in the world? It’s about promoting Marxist style cultural revolution. Oppressors and oppressed is classic divide and conquer dogma from communists.

There is a history of minorities being oppressed. Not just here, but pretty much everywhere there is a minority and a majority.

The white majority passed laws that benefitted white people over other races. I'm sorry if that upsets you, but it is an observable historical fact.

Looking at laws to identify whether they are written fairly is about identifying oppression as a step to removing it. Problems generally don't go away with neglect.

It is not racist to point out that X% of crime is being committed by black people -> that is a fact, or at least a metric we have. To then imply that all black people should be judged by that is racist.

It is not racist to point out the history of oppression in the US or that most of it was performed by the white majority. To imply that all white people should be judged by that would be racist, but that isn't the point of CRT.

Yes. Whites are the majority and voted time and time again to destroy racist content in our countries laws and structure. We voted time and time again for women's rights, gays rights, people of non white origins rights.

Critical Race Theory ignores all of these decisions that were made - some in my 42 years of life, that destroyed the racist problems structured in our government. It relies on decisions made in the 1770s and through our past -- then completely ignores all the choices against racism that were reflected in white voting and white lawmakers to undo racist constructs.

Which is ridiculous because of the idea that apples don't fall from trees. Our white kids today and modern white adults would have more genetically and ideologically in common with the people that put stops to the racist constructs, than we would with the 1800s Americans. But they are being taught that they are racist by association.

Is a BS Marxist division tactic.

"Is a BS Marxist division tactic"

And not surprisingly, it is a tactic that comes from the very Party that continues to fuel the flames of racism, the Democrat Party.

Honestly, I do not think they ever got over us taking their slaves away from them.

Take their slaves away? They merely adjusted.

Here's some truth. Better teach it in school cuz truth and history, right? Yeah right, like that would EVER happen. It's not racist to teach history but it IS when you point the finger at children who never had anything to do with said history.

I don't remember my high school teacher pointing a finger at the German exchange student in the class after the lesson that included Hitler.

Exactly.

lol bigly sad

What school did you go to. They have been teaching the Holocaust and slavery in history classes for the last 40 or 50 years. 😂

So if teachers taught that the black crime rates are high because black people are inherently criminal, you'd have no problem with that?

Go educate yourself instead of muttering leftist bs defending generational guilt.

Duck, dodge, dive lol

lol coming from someone that doesn't answer questions! Where is your chart that displays crime by socioeconomic status and by race? Also again why so sensitive?

Where did you go to school? I was taught about slavery and the Holocaust. It’s not like it wasn’t or hasn’t been taught. No one is reacting to that, it’s been taught for decades.

Nope, but they didn’t point a finger at a school age kid and scream whitey’s guilty, that’s bullshit. Guilty for something they weren’t around to do nor may have their ancestors have been around, as many white people arrived in America after 1865. Many black people arrived after 1865 as well and weren’t descended of American slaves either.

They are being deliberately obtuse. They realize the difference between teaching history and pointing the finger at children who did nothing. They just believe in generational guilt.

Sigh, the point was not that slavery or the holocaust was not taught. The point is just because history is taught doesn't mean fingers are pointed at children of descendants or children that happen to have a similar skin color. I was taught about asian internment during ww2. I didn't feel guilt because my grandparents were alive during that time. It does help shape my view of the world particularly when I hear things like "Kung Flu."

Teaching that white children are racist oppressors because of the color of their skin is racist. If you support that so are you, you’re just ok with it applied to whote people. That doesn’t make you less racist it just makes you more biased.

"Has it always been this high since slavery ended?"

NOW we're getting somewhere!

Lyndon Johnson: "I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for 200 years."

Once the Democrats hooked an entire segment of the population on welfare, and then skewed it to benefit unwed mothers, the sudden lack of fathers in the home led to this downtrend. This was not a problem immediately following the end of slavery, because the black family was largely intact. By the time Democrat policies were done with them, here we are.

And it was not accidental that Planned Parenthood targeted black neighborhoods either. In New York City, more black babies are murdered than are born. You cannot tell people that it is OK to murder their own children and not expect the lesson to be extrapolated beyond this.

A subculture in the largely Democrat run big cities has long been in place, and we see the fruits of Democrat efforts every day. There is not a single Democrat policy, either at face value, or in its implementation, that does not flow from corrupt hearts. One of the most insidious would be the notion of so many liberals that it is Big Government that is responsible to handle charity; "After all, that's why we pay taxes!", or so the liberal mantra goes.

Your 'mileage' may vary, as not all liberals think these things, but if you support them you are complicit nonetheless.

You are VERY good at blowing the smoke of the hypothetical to ignore the reality of the facts.

Planned Parenthood clinics were specifically targeted in predominantly black neighborhoods throughout the country. That anyone could have walked in their regardless of skin color is irrelevant to that fact. That more black children are murdered than are birthed in NYC is also a fact that is the result of said targeting. But, as a liberal who supports the murder of unborn children, you are OK with this fact by default, and I am calling you a racist for trying to obscure these basic facts.

As for LBJ "likely not saying that", the person who quoted him says otherwise, Snopes notwithstanding. I realize that it is damning towards the Democrat Party, especially because everything they have done since then only supports the notion.

As for getting that info-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FszQelEQ2KY

"The NYC is apparently an outlier." Much of what I have seen you comment on this site is pure assumption- clearly you do not like your views to be assaulted with facts.

"People's motives are unknowable in most cases." And yet we have their actions to point us to what they truly believe, and what Democrats did and continue to do lines up precisely with LBJ's racist comment. Actions speak louder than words, something liberals continue to miss.

"Do the Republicans who stand against abortion all really care, or would they sneak and get their wife or daughter one if needed?" Hardly a justification for murder, regardless of such a hypocrisy.

"The assumption that POC are just being manipulated and don't know what's good for them isn't a nice one." There is hardly anything I have ever read from a liberal that is more rich than this one- congratulations! Presumably then you have zero problem with Voter ID, in spite of the fact that the overriding liberal narrative is that Voter ID is racist because it prevents POC from being able to vote. Not unlike that idiot Biden's assertion that POC do not know how to access the Internet. Nowhere is such a belief more on display than in the Democrat Party and the liberal Media. This is also a nice example of projection on your part, given that you misdirected the concept outward.

"PragerU - Ugh." Classic ad hominem. A priori dismiss the accuracy of the content without first seeing it. Ad hominem is the tool of the loser- you have tipped your losing hand ahead of time. But I do remember what it means to be a liberal, and how hard it is to deal with information that disproves all you hold dear. That struggle you feel inside is not because what PragerU presents is "propaganda", though neither does it prove they are right, but that struggle is due to your conscience trying to tell you something. You might consider giving it a listen sometime.

Now you get it! No more should young black children be guilted for actions they had no part of then young white children should be guilted as colonizers and inherently racist.

I don't really think you understand the full extent of CRT, or you'd see it for what it is.

I made a point, then instead of addressing the point, you deflected to defending black crime rates, which is fine but seemingly intentionally missing the point, which is a common tactic when debating leftists. Altho, unless an alt playing for effect, you do seem fairly honest, altho I'm starting to wonder with this comment thread.

If I send you a righty link, you'll disregard it. If I send you a lefty link, it won't address the truth. Such is the situation today, unfortunately.

All sources are suspect. Send it and I'll read it.

If I missed the point, it was unintentional.

He doesn't actually ever talk about CRT. Just because it's a black guy doing the straw man attack doesn't change the fact that CRT doesn't say it is individual white kids fault.

His analogy he uses at the beginning to debunk CRT is actually the purpose of CRT. He identified that it wasn't his friends fault that they were being given an advantage with the lunch cards/lunch line. They were benefiting from a policy they didn't write. CRT is supposed to expose those issues so you don't have disadvantaged people mad and the ones he's mad at not understanding why.

Every color of people has been oppressed at some point in history- many currently so, and often by other people of the same color.

And you are assuming what the point of CRT is. You are very trusting of all things liberal, and clueless about the alternatives.

I have read up on what CRT is and I've listened to an interview with one of its authors. I am trusting of pretty much nothing, but blind distrust is equally silly. If it is what you say it is, apparently nobody knows about that.

Anything can be turned to dark purpose, so you may find a few people who profess to be using it and saying bullshit, the same as people using the scientific method can come to bad conclusions. That doesn't invalidate it as a method or assessing and analyzing.

Why is it that White people passed laws that benefitted the founding culture and it’s members only what bothers you. It doesn’t bother you that all other countries were established the same way? Why vilify and denounce only whites and America for it? The Hypocrisy is real. America has actively progressed and promoted and supported diversity more than most other countries I. The world. If you find a racist law by all
means amend or remove it, however the law isn’t racist just because white people created that law. Laws against murder are not racist regardless of commits the most of them.

I think you misunderstand the point of it all. I don't see groups actively trying to stop kids from learning about apartheid or WWII. Nobody objects to teaching about other countries and how they have acted or continue to act. How much of my class time was focused on WWII and the evils of concentration camps vs the Indian relocation act and Japanese Interment camps? Hint, those were barely touched on. Things like the Tulsa Race Massacre / Black Wall Street weren't even covered. I learned about those separate from school, and honestly not even in college. Somebody told me about it and I didn't believe them.

We spend more time learning about America than the rest of the world. We also obviously have a more direct interest in what happened here. Plus the vested interest in pretending that POC aren't affected by and shouldn't talk about that past.

The law isn't racist because white people created it - I find this to be an ambiguous statement.

Not all laws created by white people are racist. Some laws were created by white people were racist on purpose. Some laws are written from a place of fear and end up discriminating. Some laws were written with implicit bias. Some laws like literacy tests with grandfather clauses were clearly 100% aimed at keeping black people from voting.

Laws against Murder aren't racist, but selective enforcement is. Emmett Till was a 14 year old killed for flirting with a white woman and the mob was found not guilty after admitting they did it. Now that was 1955. But racism didn't just go away. It went underground. It now tries to justify itself instead of being blatant.

A police officer killed Philando Castile on camera and wasn't found guilty of even involuntary manslaughter. George Gomez killed while open carrying in Vegas. I could list more...

I think you misunderstand that critical race theory is divisive and identifies people as members of groups in order to pit them against each other. It intersects with the current teaching against individualism and classifying people based on external characteristics. It literally teaches to judge people by the color of their skin. The communist twist to MLK’s teaching,

I was taught about the mistreatment of slaves and black Americans. I was taught about the civil rights movement. I don’t need to recite every incident to understand what happened. I don’t remember being taught about every battle in WW2 but I know the basic causes, reasons, results, and impact on the future. The fact is I didn’t need to know each individual battle to understand the war.

why is bringing up black crime statistics ok, but pointing out other disparities is identity politics?

I'm not an expert on CRT, and even question whether it should be taught to younger kids because of its complexity, but it really isn't what you say it is. Even a casual look shows that it's core concept is that race is arbitrary. The point is classifying people based on differences in appearance and then discriminating is something that happens. How do you identify that group based discrimination is occurring of you refuse to see groups? If a rapist were targeting Asian women, it wouldn't be racist to point that out. We have racism in our past and, I hate to tell you, it didn’t go away. Can look at things like Jim Crow and assume that it just went away? That the influence in policies and laws disappeared? That is naive at best.

The bad part about systemic racism is it can exist without animosity. A law or policy might have been passed during Jim Crow and have underlying assumptions about race. Enforcing that law by a fully ‘colorblind’ person can still have negative effects. CRT is supposed to teach you to look at a law and evaluate whether it is fair or whether it was written with explicit or implicit bias. Black inferiority or inferiority of any race is white supremacy the same was supremacy.

MLK was a socialist. Do you know what turns people to socialism instead of capitalism? Rigging the system. Black People were oppressed, sent to poorer schools, forbidden opportunities, and then told to take personal responsibility for not having made it. There is still disparity in schooling and attempts to remedy that are labeled racist by conservatives. Some have definitely climbed up, but that doesn’t prove things are fair.

Every incident - no. But Tulsa? “The attacks burned and destroyed more than 35 square blocks of the neighborhood – at the time the wealthiest Black community in the United States”. They flew over in planes and dropped burning turpentine balls on buildings. The fire department was repeatedly turned away. 150-300 estimated killed. Thousands were rounded up and held. And it was made to disappear. Newspapers that wrote about it are curiously absent from archives.

I don’t think I brought up black crime statistics.

Nothing wrong with pointing out disparities. It’s the extent of the problem and what should be done about it that the disagreement occurs. When you base everything on race and identity you fall into the trap of racism, not equality. Of course that’s the point. You have people who don’t want equality they want preference to redress “equity”. That is a denunciation of of the american ideal that they denounce in the teaching. Accepting the equity argument is simply saying one group is inherently inferior and must be helped up by others. That’s more racist than any white supremist slogan.

Should Tulsa be taught? Yes and it appears it is. There is actually quite a bit of controversy over the death toll.

“ The claim that the Tulsa Race Massacre is the worst riot in U.S. history, and can't be found in any history books, is rated PARTLY FALSE, based on our research. While it is true the event was devastating to the Black community and to Tulsa, differing opinions over the number of casualties make it difficult to classify the massacre as the worst riot in the country's history. The claim that it is missing from history books is false. The state of Oklahoma has curriculum on the massacre, it is included in national textbooks and a historical account of it has been in publication since 1982.”

lol which race do you think they're being critical of? Oh yeah, the one that is inherently racist and caused everyone else's problems, so CRT says.

What "interests" do non-racist white people have that would not include all people?

Ironically, you are the best example of what is wrong with CRT.

The new deal had caveats put in on behalf of southern democrats to get their votes for it.

There are several examples of ways black people were explicitly treated differently, but the most straightforward were provisions that the wage scale was different for African Americans than whites.

Poll taxes, interracial marriage laws, etc.

Benjamin Tillman, a South Carolina governor and U.S. Senator, speaking on the floor of the Senate in 1900:
We of the South have never recognized the right of the negro to govern white men, and we never will. We have never believed him to be the equal of the white man, and we will not submit to his gratifying his lust on our wives and daughters without lynching him.

The first successful federal prosecution of a lyncher for a civil rights violation was in 1946. By that time, the era of lynchings as a common occurrence had ended. Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. succeeded in gaining House passage of an anti-lynching bill, but it was defeated in the Senate, still dominated by the Southern Democratic bloc, supported by its disfranchisement of blacks.

Literacy tests with attached grandfather clauses -> They wanted to block black voters but didn't want to block poor white voters who were also illiterate. The solution was to pass exceptions that allowed people to be exempt from the requirement if their ancestors were able to vote before emancipation.

Nixon declined to enforce the Fair Housing Act which forbade discrimination in housing.

Want more?

Why would I need "more" of the actions of Democrats? Seriously, nearly all of this was born in their racist little hearts.

Wouldn't is simply be more effective to ban all Democrats/liberals than foisting the nonsense known as CRT on us? That action is needed is hardly proof that CRT is above reproach.

Your problem is that you cannot see who the real heroes were, and who the devils still are. Democrats fought tooth and nail against civil rights, and it wasn't until they had re-enslaved blacks to the Government that they started claiming to be all about civil rights. Their actions have proved otherwise. You are right, it was VERY hard to get here, and the major hurdle to do so was the Democrat Party.

The real heroes were Americans. And the real villains were Americans. Parties shift and people on both sides have voted for things that turned out to be horrible ideas.

Your cute little graph does not show a "party switch". It shows what happens when you let illegals vote, and some of the effects of a liberal education.

It most definitely does not support the Nixon era party switch.

Believe what you will. It wasn't a total switch. Both parties morphed over time and voters moved accordingly. Northern democrats adopted more liberal ideologies and adopted social programs that helped black and minorities. This began to shift support in those states. In the south where it was Dixiecrats and republicans, black voters chose the Dixiecrat democrats. But this made the south unreliable - they would vote for local Dixiecrats, but were less likely to vote Democrat for president.

When Strom Thurmond, who led the filibuster of the civil rights act for the the Democrats left the Democratic party, where did he end up?

Finish this sentence for me:

The party with the most diversity in the senate and congress and supported in the northern states is the ______ party.

The confederate flag flying, small government, states rights party supported in southern states is the _____ party.

The party that elected a black President is the _____ party.

Republicans/Conservatives kept their values about support for businesses so it wasn't so much a switch as an evolution for both parties, but the end points look pretty familiar.

All you have to do is ask yourself one question. Is generational guilt okay? Would teaching that the fact Arabs use to castrate their black slaves, because Arabs are inherently racist, notice how I keep saying that, be okay when children of Arabic descent are sitting in that classroom? History has been taught very diversly (sic) for decades, why do you think people are taking a stand (kinda) now?

If pointing out the black crime rate isn't racist (it isn't) then pointing out that groups have done something should be the same.

It isn't the fault of the teacher that some people can't hear bad things about people who look like them without taking it as an attack.

I really tried with you. Yet you deflect time and again. Can't answer my very simple question. I was wrong about you. You only pretend to be honest. My bad.

"You only pretend to be honest. My bad."

Anyone that is a liberal cannot be honest- they are first and foremost dishonest with themselves. They have to lie to themselves each and every day, telling themselves that their worldview makes sense. In light of all we see around us, and all we know, their worldview is utter nonsense. That they defend it as they do is proof of what I am asserting.

Sleeping Dragon might be an alt. It's possible. Yet it's also possible he might be someone honestly searching for truth. I was a liberal once, it's not a completely bad stance, tho many think that of conservatives. Having said that, SD seems to retreat when presented certain facts. But he still is more honest than most leftists. I could be wrong but he seems willing to digest some facts that most leftists won't.

Ex-liberal Democrat myself.

Most young people are. A result of emotion.

Those all looked like rhetorical questions to me. But OK.
Is generational guilt OK - no. You are only guilty of your own actions. If you continue to take advantage of a situation, then you have guilt there, but that is out of scope.

Teaching anyone facts is not racist.

Why are people pushing back now? They have always pushed back, its just on social media now.

https://time.com/5889051/history-curriculum-politics/

In 1923 Oregon passed a law on the selection of textbooks stating that books could not be used that speaks slightingly of the founders of the republic, or of the men who preserved the union, or which belittles or undervalues their work.

The United Daughters of the Confederacy considered themselves a textbook watchdog and pushed the Lost Cause narrative. They are the reason people think that the civil war wasn't about slavery.

Okay. Lets teach this fact.

Kf89, that you? Okay. White bad. Not white good. Go back to 1923. Grasping at any straws. Anything to deflect from actual racism today. I personally don't think anyone should be effected negatively because of their melanin.

Who is KF89? Your belief that that is what people are saying doesn't make it true.

I'm getting bored of this circle. What specific thing do you thing is being taught to make white people feel guilty? Because all they should be teaching is facts.

Is. Generational. Guilt. Okay?

No. People are only guilty for things they do. But if fragility causes someone to not be able to read history without feeling guilty, that doesn't mean we don't teach the facts.

To clarify, history should not be taught to make people proud or feel guilty. It should convey history as accurately as possible.

"To clarify, history should not be taught to make people proud or feel guilty. It should convey history as accurately as possible."

You do understand that this is precisely the opposite of what the liberals in control of education do, right? All of these lockdowns and school closings have resulted in a wide spread parental movement, after parents had to work with the schools to teach their kids at home. They found out just how much nonsense their children were being taught, like CRT type material, and they are rising up across the country. While this is a good byproduct of the poor choices made regarding lockdowns, I would hardly have recommended we destroy thousands of businesses to get here.

There are videos out there of teachers literally demanding that white students admit their guilt for merely being white. Does this represent what the majority of teachers do? The real problem is, who knows? The curriculum being foisted on teachers everywhere is making it harder and harder for them to avoid it, and yet keep their jobs. And there are examples of teachers having to go to court just to rectify actions taken against them when they stand for what you describe as the purpose of teaching history.

You are on the wrong side if you believe what you said here, and I believe you do believe it.

Screw it. He seemed legit. Until exposed. Ignorance can only be spread so far. Then it became willful ignorance.

I found one where a teacher tried to get a student to acknowledged that people were two different races in a picture. I didn't see much else. Can you provide links or maybe search terms.

I believe it or I wouldn't say it.

You simply aren't trying hard enough, but in the process of doing your thinking for you, I am finding more examples than I had previously come across.

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/12/28/mom-sues-school-for-forcing-son-to-take-anti-white-class-in-first-lawsuit-of-its-kind-1010240/

You said videos. Videos of this because of home schooling.

https://nypost.com/2016/07/01/elite-k-8-school-teaches-white-students-theyre-born-racist/

You said a video. Most of this is second and third hand "parents report that their kids told them that the teacher said..."

The slide though - I feel like your issue with these slides is an assumption of guilt and racism instead of trying to understand what they mean.

Understanding the challenges that POC have had to endure is about developing empathy. Ruby bridges is still alive, she was born in 1954. This isn't stuff that happened in the distant past.

POC have more challenges that white people and that's a fact.

Teachers are trying to teach kids about those additional challenges POC endure and some parents or students are trying to make it about them. It is extremely narcissistic.

Admittedly, unrelated, but telling nonetheless: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jun/14/missouri-teacher-out-after-berating-straight-stude/

Ok, the kid sounds annoying, but her behavior is unprofessional.

She totally called him a dick though and then tried to say it was dip.

Haha yeah, that's what it was UNTIL CRT. Get a grip.

And the majority of whites have voted time and time again to undo racist agendas in our country. Critical Race Theory just ignores this aspect.

Critical race theory is a way of analyzing and viewing the law - whether someone chooses to ignore something or not is on that individual.

Critical race theory is a basis for attaining power. It is an off shoot of Marxist critical theory. In order to attain power they must create racial division by attacking whites and calling them racist oppressors and POC the oppressed. It ignores all other social causes for inequality and places blame and directs hatred towards the predominant founding white culture.

"Critical race theory is a basis for attaining power."

Do you genuinely believe that?

Do you not see that racism didn't immediately end because slavery became illegal?
Do you not understand that the atrocities and injustices have a legacy that impacts the lives of black kids today?
Do you not appreciate that the only way to move closer to equality and to rebalance the power is through action not passivity?
White people are the majority, white people hold the balance of power, white people are not being oppressed.
Racial division ALREADY EXISTS, white people created it when they decided poc were property, racial division continues today in a multitude of ways, most notably in how poc are treated disproportionately more harshly by the criminal justice system than white people.

"The United States criminal justice system is the largest in the world. At yearend 2015, over 6.7 million individuals1) were under some form of correctional control in the United States, including 2.2 million incarcerated in federal, state, or local prisons and jails.2) The U.S. is a world leader in its rate of incarceration, dwarfing the rate of nearly every other nation.3)
Such broad statistics mask the racial disparity that pervades the U.S. criminal justice system, and for African Americans in particular. African Americans are more likely than white Americans to be arrested; once arrested, they are more likely to be convicted; and once convicted, and they are more likely to experience lengthy prison sentences. African-American adults are 5.9 times as likely to be incarcerated than whites and Hispanics are 3.1 times as likely.4) As of 2001, one of every three black boys born in that year could expect to go to prison in his lifetime, as could one of every six Latinos—compared to one of every seventeen white boys.5) Racial and ethnic disparities among women are less substantial than among men but remain prevalent.6)"- sentencingproject.org

Delgado states it in his CRT book. I believe it is used to belittle whites and denounce America as a tactic of Marxist theology. It supposes that the way to raise up POC is to diminish whites. Kendi openly states that as well. Discrimination against oppressors is acceptable and all whites are oppressors so anti white racism is supported. Do you believe that? First you have to believe you are an oppressor if you are white. Do you go to the police station and confess to murders you didn’t commit?

I notice you leave out Asians. They had a long history in this country including racism and discrimination. What are their statistics for possibility of going to prison? Why is it lower? Cultural? Stronger family traditions? What is it that these minority people who suffered the same type of discrimination do not maim, rob, beat and murder other people and end up in prison. How have they succeeded? Whiteys fault again?

Same type of discrimination - no. Black People were slaves, and not just slaves, but hereditary slaves. Many cultures that have practiced slavery consider the child free. Not so in America. Coming here willingly and suffering through discrimination and being brought here, deprived of your culture, robbed of all autonomy is different.

The model minority stereotype for Asians ignores the cause. Prior to 1965 (I think that’s the year) we had strict restrictions on Asian immigration. Asian immigrants were even blocked from naturalization. After those restrictions were lifted, immigration numbers went up, but at that time we favored allowing immigration of wealthier and higher educated people.

As of 2017, 71% of Asian Americans were not born in the US < I’m assuming that means they are naturalized

You realize Chinese and other Asians were in this country in the 1800’s as well. They built many of the railroads in the west. San Francisco had a large asian population and Asian ghettos. Samey same types of discrimination.

Not all blacks are descended of slaves and most whites weren’t slave owners. You paint a broad swath of incrimination based on race. That’s racist itself. As I preciously many blacks and whites came to the country after 1865 and weren’t here to be painted with your brush of hate.

I did not mean to imply that all white people owned slaves or all black people were descended from them.

But as a nation we allowed it. Several of our founders were against slavery but made the 3/5 compromise anyway. I don't know what would have l happened if they hadn't. there would have still been slaves in those colonies if they had refused to join the Union. It is complicated. there were multiple fugitive slave acts. There were people fighting against it, so to say all white people were part of it does a disservice.

There are Asians who have been here, true, but the majority of Asian Americans arrived after 1965. So while I see what you are trying to say, the numbers are extremely weighted by the new arrivals. The existing Asian Americans didn't lift themselves out of poverty in amazing numbers - we brought in richer more educated Asians.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Asian_Americans
Most Asian Americans have arrived after 1965.[5] These individuals make up one-quarter of all immigrants who have arrived in the U.S. since 1965, and 59% of Asian Americans are foreign-born.

A basis for obtaining power...Nope.

Pretending racism doesn't exist anymore or that we should all be color blind is more likely a method of ignoring remaining inequality in an effort to retain power

POC live in greater poverty than white people. That is at least in part based on the racial disparity and practices of the past. I know its almost the religion of America that people can achieve anything with hard work, but acknowledging that some people have further to climb than others is just reality.

How come asians climb well? Being colorblind is the ultimate goal of not judging people by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. Rejection of this ideal and categorizing people racially has created greater division, mayhem and outright death. Ginning up hatred will never achieve the goal. Hate only breeds hate. Screaming whitey bad from the rooftop doesn’t give you the high ground.

And if I thought there was a group encouraging hate, I wouldn’t support them.

Why are you so convinced that’s what’s happening? I’m pretty sure it’s a mix of confirmation bias Av and propaganda.

Yes you can find a few nuts saying nutty things, but I can find the same for anything. Why is it so much more likely that there is no significant discrimination anymore than it is that people are being discriminated against?

Contrary to your colorblind argument, I think you see a group that you don’t belong to attacking people in a group that you do belong to and assume the attack is directed at you.

I am white but I don’t draw any tribal line on that. I’m an American. Anybody discriminating against a fellow American for melanin is not to be tolerated. White, black, Asian, etc. pointing out that we had racist laws isn’t discrimination - its fact

So truthfully I don’t believe racism is the problem. The belief that one race is superior to all others is a fringe belief for all supremists be they black, white, brown, or Asian. I think prejudice and bigotry are still a problem and I believe all races practice it. I have seen Mexicans discriminate against blacks and Vice versa. The basis of their discrimination was blatant based on their words. Legislating prejudice is tricky. There are many factors at play in addition to prejudice that keep some from advancing. It is very easy to say white people are the problem, but it won’t solve all the real problems. It actually is a leftist dogma that the problem with America is Americans and their belief in equality not preference.