Fascinating how actual Government censure-ship and "cancel culture" gets little lift on HN. Meanwhile, private companies banning people is viewed as the road to fascism.
This is actually were the often cited Popper quote become relevant. "No tolerance for the intolerant" - On itself it is a concept prone to failure and you should be careful about the context it was ushered in and his personal history.
Right now CRT is a lens that allows racism and discrimination, the oppressed is allowed to oppress the oppressor, even if that should be impossible.
But it is well known that CRTs followers do have some kind of problem with freedom of speech. Comes with forcing prescriptive language maybe.
==Right now CRT is a lens that allows racism and discrimination, the oppressed is allowed to oppress the oppressor, even if that should be impossible.==
This is non-substantive drivel. It also isn't relevant to the article because the children's book has nothing to do with CRT. It happens to be about a black boy and was written by a black man.
It's almost like the government is using fear of CRT to censor what it's citizens can read. Your response is the perfect explanation of why it's a move that works for them politically.
==But it is well known that CRTs followers do have some kind of problem with freedom of speech. Comes with forcing prescriptive language maybe.==
Another non-substantive attack. This article is about the government using CRT as cover to censor things they don't like. No need to focus on the perspective of CRT followers, they aren't and weren't involved in this decision.
This is not a way to deal with it, if only that would relegate it to a position they want to be in as oppressed. I think the CRT lens is more restricting than enlightening and I don't believe in prescriptive language too much. If CRT allows objections, it should or at least could be taught. If it doesn't, they are right to ban it.
But Texas prohibiting something does raise questions. But since we have seen some enforced "diversity" training, they seem to have some merit with their case to ban it.
4 comments
[ 4.3 ms ] story [ 18.5 ms ] threadRight now CRT is a lens that allows racism and discrimination, the oppressed is allowed to oppress the oppressor, even if that should be impossible.
But it is well known that CRTs followers do have some kind of problem with freedom of speech. Comes with forcing prescriptive language maybe.
This is non-substantive drivel. It also isn't relevant to the article because the children's book has nothing to do with CRT. It happens to be about a black boy and was written by a black man.
It's almost like the government is using fear of CRT to censor what it's citizens can read. Your response is the perfect explanation of why it's a move that works for them politically.
==But it is well known that CRTs followers do have some kind of problem with freedom of speech. Comes with forcing prescriptive language maybe.==
Another non-substantive attack. This article is about the government using CRT as cover to censor things they don't like. No need to focus on the perspective of CRT followers, they aren't and weren't involved in this decision.
But Texas prohibiting something does raise questions. But since we have seen some enforced "diversity" training, they seem to have some merit with their case to ban it.