@Ciaran
I don’t pay too much attention whether people want to label a thing CRT or not, I’m more interested in what is actually being taught. Whether you’re a person that thinks it is a very limited scope of topics, or more broad, it’s hard to claim that the people who oppose the general broad concept are just pulling it out of thin air (not claiming you said that, just speaking in general terms.)
For example, the National Education Association, the largest teacher’s union in the country, has embraced the broad definition and embraced teaching it.
Provide an already-created, in-depth, study that critiques empire, white supremacy, anti-Blackness, anti-Indigeneity, racism, patriarchy, cisheteropatriarchy, capitalism, ableism, anthropocentrism, and other forms of power and oppression at the intersections of our society, and that we oppose attempts to ban critical race theory and/or The 1619 Project.
C. Publicly (through existing media) convey its support for the accurate and honest teaching of social studies topics, including truthful and age-appropriate accountings of unpleasant aspects of American history, such as slavery, and the oppression and discrimination of Indigenous, Black, Brown, and other peoples of color, as well as the continued impact this history has on our current society. The Association will further convey that in teaching these topics, it is reasonable and appropriate for curriculum to be informed by academic frameworks for understanding and interpreting the impact of the past on current society, including critical race theory.
Now again, with such a broad topic it’s hard for me to say I would oppose any and all topics people might fit in there. Specific things, like the 1619 project, I oppose.
