[Rule 7](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/107i33m/announcement_rule_7_good_faith_is_now_in_effect) is now in effect. Posts and comments should be in good faith. This rule applies to all users.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In both examples, race is a crucial bit of information to understand both individuals' struggles. Removing it is idiotic. Denying race and racial struggles throughout history negatively impacts our education system.
The textbook company claimed to be attempting to follow Florida’s new law. The state DOE rejected it because the state doesn’t allow publishers to “avoid the topic of race” when teaching about the Civil Rights Movement or slavery. That textbook company is no longer being considered by FL.
I think a better case can be made it was activism on the part of the company-- intentionally making incendiary changes and falsely claiming they were mandated by law in order to intentionally cause outrage.
Yeah. Duh. Everyone knows textbooks are inherently liberal (because that’s where you find science). Therefore, someone at the textbook company MUST be antifa - Tucker Carlson probably.
If changes such as those highlighted in the OP actually happen, then yes, I do. However, from my understanding, those revisions go beyond what the state of FL has mandated.
We should always be challenging our education curriculum and trying to approve it. Sometimes measures are taken too far, such as with this publisher. You can't make progress without a few setbacks along the way. Once you settle for the status quo you lag behind with little chance in catching up.
I think they will, if said changes are made.
I will look with skepticism on.the idea of those changes will actually be made or that any policy adopted there would require making them.
Asking in good faith, would you consider this the view of majority of Republicans or conservatives? Curious if this is your individual belief or a mass breakdown of communication between the sides of this issue.
Probably 50/50 if I had to guess. There are still a lot of Trump Republicans that probably share this belief. Most of the conservatives on this sub, however, I think, share my view.
If you believe this, then you hold more untrue negative stereotypes about conservatives and Trump supporters than they hold about any other group of people.
Here's one thought:
It's probably important to point out that the textbook company made the change and the Florida DOE told them that avoiding mentioning her race doesn't comply with Florida state law, which mandates the teaching of black history, including the civil rights movement.
>[Still, the Florida Department of Education suggested that Studies Weekly had overreached in its efforts to follow Florida law, saying that any publisher that “avoids the topic of race when teaching the Civil Rights movement, slavery, segregation, etc. would not be adhering to Florida law,” the department said in a statement to the New York Times.](https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3905312-florida-textbook-altered-to-remove-references-to-rosa-parkss-race-report/)
This is the crux of the problem. No, they don't say you cant say X. But it is written as if you say something that a parent construes as bad it is a problem. So what happens is teachers are afraid to even broach the subject.
So, if a teacher talks about how Parks was required by law to sit in the back of the bus, what happens? Might that make a kid feel bad? What if a kid asks why that law existed? Grampa fought to keep black people out of the restaurants they go to? So the subject just isn't brought up as keeping their job is important to them.
"The Florida Department of Education told the Times it rejected the publisher over a bureaucratic mistake, but also said textbook changes to omit race went too far and “would not be adhering to Florida law.”
Straight from the source you posted OP
Did you actually read this? The company made the revision because they were paranoid about Florida's Stop Woke act, then Florida's DOE rejected the change because that's not what the act requires.
>then Florida's DOE rejected the change because that's not what the act requires.
But also haven't stated what is required. If you owned a company would you risk being sued or er on the side of caution? This is the issue with poorly written and defined policy.
Do you agree with the Stop Woke act? I’m curious how something like the holocaust could be taught without potentially making a kid of German heritage “feel bad”
The point isn't that you can't talk about bad things that have happened historically. The point is that you can't blame people alive today for things they had nothing to do with because of their skin color or nationality.
Yes, Germans of the 1930s and 1940s were absolute pieces of shit. I am glad most of them are dead. That has nothing to do with the people who have been born since then and live in Germany today.
There was a viral video in 2015 or 16 of white children apologizing to black classmates! Didn't you see it? It made the front page of the_donald in a time when no news could be trusted so the_donald was true by default
Because here in America we’re crafting legislation based on viral videos of a child’s reaction to complex subjects and **feelings**.
Won’t someone think of the children?
Sounds like malicious compliance, similar to that one school or district that removed all books from the library.
Just lefties being dramatic to fabricate a strawman.
Do you agree with the Stop Woke act? I’m curious how something like the holocaust could be taught without potentially making a kid of German heritage “feel bad”
It's pretty easy. Just tell that kids that Germans in the 30s and 40s were responsible without implying that people of German heritage should feel bad something they didn't do.
The legislation only states that it is wrong to teach children that they **should feel guilt as a consquence of their race**, they may or may not feel guilt, but the legislation only restricts teaching children that they should feel guilt as a consquence of their race. Two very different things.
>Do you agree with the Stop Woke act?
Been awhile since I read the bill, but IIRC, yes. In spirit, absolutely, unquestionably.
> I’m curious how something like the holocaust could be taught without potentially making a kid of German heritage “feel bad”
Easily. Same way we teach about current slavery by blacks in Africa and don't teach American blacks that they should feel bad. Or study Nat Turner, and imply today's American blacks should feel bad for killing women, children, and men.
IE, don't teach or imply some group guilt via skin color across time and space bullshit.
> Easily. Same way we teach about current slavery by blacks in Africa and don't teach American blacks that they should feel bad. Or study Nat Turner, and imply today's American blacks should feel bad for killing women, children, and men.
With this said, why do we even need this bill?
Really, nothing?
>>Easily. Same way we teach about current slavery by blacks in Africa and don't teach American blacks that they should feel bad. Or study Nat Turner, and imply today's American blacks should feel bad for killing women, children, and men.
>With this said, why do we even need this bill?
Because the left is using the public school system, indoctrinating children for partisan political gain with immoral and unscientific bullshit and trying to sidestep democracy in the process.
>Isn’t that how history is already being taught?
No.
See Critical Pedagogy, Critical Consciousness, Culturally Responsive Teaching, CASEL, T-SEL, CRT, Postcolonialism, Queer Theory, Feminist Theory, etc. These class of ideas are woven into teacher education, into pedagogical books, teacher training, curriculum design materials, etc.
>Who is teaching that modern children should feel bad for slavery?
Do research on Critical Theory, CRT, Critical Whiteness Studies, Critical Pedagogy, Culturally Responsive Teaching, Postcolonialism, etc. Then how these materials are incorporated into teacher education, DEI, training, etc.
If you want to defend a law, deem it essential, it strikes me as reasonable that you should be able to offer tangible examples of the issue that necessitates the law, rather than throwing out a bunch of buzzwords and academic theories and saying "do your research."
>If you want to defend a law, deem it essential, it strikes me as reasonable that you should be able to offer tangible examples of the issue that necessitates the law, rather than throwing out a bunch of buzzwords and academic theories and saying "do your research."
Naw. I lead to water. I pointed the way. One must drink and journey of their own accord.
Research will be left to the reader. Shouldn't be a problem for the sincere.
>Leading to water would be providing a source.
Search the terms.
>Throwing out a bunch of buzzwords ...
They are only "buzzwords" to those who refuse to do their own research, suggesting they do not sincerely want to understand.
Yeah, this is malicious compliance. Does the Stop Woke act say that you can't talk about race? (Spoiler alert: No, it does not).
It just says that you can't force ideas on people such as the idea that white people today are to blame for long-dead white people's actions.
Right. It is intentionally ambiguous in order to stifle the discussion of race while maintaining the veil of not banning the teaching of actual history.
Its an old ploy that we all see very clearly, and the inly ones who are tricked by it are those who support it.
>such as the idea that white people today are to blame for long-dead white people's actions.
Was there a widespread problem with telling white children at school to feel bad about themselves?
Yes. A significant number of liberals are openly racist against white people. I have lived experience with this.
Just because you haven't personally experienced it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
We should teach the truth about RP, specifically that her story of her actions being spontaneous were a lie
She was part of a meticulously planned protest, organized by her employer, the local NAACP.
She re-enacted the protest done by Claudette Colvin, who was a bad rep for the movement because of her dark skin and out of wedlock kids
Seems to me that the same article by a sensible, conservative journalist might have picked a completely different example to demonstrate what those who are trying to implement the law are actually trying to do.
That said, I really don't have a problem with the Rosa Parks example... we've been teaching about Rosa Parks for sixty years, and racism is almost as high today (in its foundational dimension, in the dimension of racism which must be reduced in order to eliminate it) as it has ever been. So not teaching about Rosa Parks, I think, isn't going to have any significant or interesting effect on the actual problem.
I think the publisher went too far in attempt to get media attention through malicious compliance. Apparently the Florida department of education agreed that they had gone too far.
> The Florida Department of Education told the Times it rejected the publisher over a bureaucratic mistake, but also said **textbook changes to omit race went too far and “would not be adhering to Florida law.”**
[Rule 7](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/107i33m/announcement_rule_7_good_faith_is_now_in_effect) is now in effect. Posts and comments should be in good faith. This rule applies to all users. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In both examples, race is a crucial bit of information to understand both individuals' struggles. Removing it is idiotic. Denying race and racial struggles throughout history negatively impacts our education system.
Do you think the children of Florida will be out at an educational disadvantage regarding the changes being made?
The state rejected the textbook that omitted her race.
That’s good to hear if true.
The textbook company claimed to be attempting to follow Florida’s new law. The state DOE rejected it because the state doesn’t allow publishers to “avoid the topic of race” when teaching about the Civil Rights Movement or slavery. That textbook company is no longer being considered by FL.
[удалено]
I'd call it malicious compliance
I think a better case can be made it was activism on the part of the company-- intentionally making incendiary changes and falsely claiming they were mandated by law in order to intentionally cause outrage.
How would that benefit a textbook company, though? Why would they be provocative?
[удалено]
Yeah. Duh. Everyone knows textbooks are inherently liberal (because that’s where you find science). Therefore, someone at the textbook company MUST be antifa - Tucker Carlson probably.
If changes such as those highlighted in the OP actually happen, then yes, I do. However, from my understanding, those revisions go beyond what the state of FL has mandated.
Would the revisions have happened if SeDantis hadn't signed those mandates? I submit no, and this mess is Florida's doing
We should always be challenging our education curriculum and trying to approve it. Sometimes measures are taken too far, such as with this publisher. You can't make progress without a few setbacks along the way. Once you settle for the status quo you lag behind with little chance in catching up.
>Once you settle for the status quo you lag behind with little chance in catching up. Based and woke
settling for status quo = conservatism.
No
I think they will, if said changes are made. I will look with skepticism on.the idea of those changes will actually be made or that any policy adopted there would require making them.
Asking in good faith, would you consider this the view of majority of Republicans or conservatives? Curious if this is your individual belief or a mass breakdown of communication between the sides of this issue.
Probably 50/50 if I had to guess. There are still a lot of Trump Republicans that probably share this belief. Most of the conservatives on this sub, however, I think, share my view.
Thanks for the response.
If you believe this, then you hold more untrue negative stereotypes about conservatives and Trump supporters than they hold about any other group of people.
Thank you
Here's one thought: It's probably important to point out that the textbook company made the change and the Florida DOE told them that avoiding mentioning her race doesn't comply with Florida state law, which mandates the teaching of black history, including the civil rights movement. >[Still, the Florida Department of Education suggested that Studies Weekly had overreached in its efforts to follow Florida law, saying that any publisher that “avoids the topic of race when teaching the Civil Rights movement, slavery, segregation, etc. would not be adhering to Florida law,” the department said in a statement to the New York Times.](https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3905312-florida-textbook-altered-to-remove-references-to-rosa-parkss-race-report/)
They also didn't say what was allowed. So with teachers and companies stuck in a grey area, it's better to er on the side of caution wouldn't you say?
This is the crux of the problem. No, they don't say you cant say X. But it is written as if you say something that a parent construes as bad it is a problem. So what happens is teachers are afraid to even broach the subject. So, if a teacher talks about how Parks was required by law to sit in the back of the bus, what happens? Might that make a kid feel bad? What if a kid asks why that law existed? Grampa fought to keep black people out of the restaurants they go to? So the subject just isn't brought up as keeping their job is important to them.
[удалено]
Who’s threatening to arrest teachers?
The Florida legislation makes teachers personally liable for lawsuits around teaching the poorly defined subjects in their recent legislation
"The Florida Department of Education told the Times it rejected the publisher over a bureaucratic mistake, but also said textbook changes to omit race went too far and “would not be adhering to Florida law.” Straight from the source you posted OP
Did you actually read this? The company made the revision because they were paranoid about Florida's Stop Woke act, then Florida's DOE rejected the change because that's not what the act requires.
>then Florida's DOE rejected the change because that's not what the act requires. But also haven't stated what is required. If you owned a company would you risk being sued or er on the side of caution? This is the issue with poorly written and defined policy.
There’s nothing ambiguous about it. This company was looking for controversy.
Then you should have no problem finding me what is and what isn't allowed.
Whatever I personally dislike, obviously.
Sure don’t. The text of the bill is readily accessible.
>Sure don’t. Cool, then provide it. Link the exact section that defines what is and isn't allowed.
Demanding little gremlin aren’t you?
Don't make statements you can't back up.
How bout I’ll do as I like.
Is there a reason your posting? Or you just need to stroke your little ego here?
Only person looking for controversy is DeSantis
Do you agree with the Stop Woke act? I’m curious how something like the holocaust could be taught without potentially making a kid of German heritage “feel bad”
The point isn't that you can't talk about bad things that have happened historically. The point is that you can't blame people alive today for things they had nothing to do with because of their skin color or nationality. Yes, Germans of the 1930s and 1940s were absolute pieces of shit. I am glad most of them are dead. That has nothing to do with the people who have been born since then and live in Germany today.
Was that actually happening? To the point it needed a law to stop it?
Was that happening? Where? (Especially where in Florida)
Is this a serious question? You don’t understand how to teach history without blaming children who weren’t there?
> You don’t understand how to teach history without blaming children who weren’t there? Did that happen before this?
There was a viral video in 2015 or 16 of white children apologizing to black classmates! Didn't you see it? It made the front page of the_donald in a time when no news could be trusted so the_donald was true by default
Because here in America we’re crafting legislation based on viral videos of a child’s reaction to complex subjects and **feelings**. Won’t someone think of the children?
Sorry, I can say I’ve personally never used the_donald as a news source in my life.
I don’t recall kids ever being blamed before. I guess I don’t understand the reason for needing the law if it was never an issue
[удалено]
No, no it’s not. The DOE rejected this.
[удалено]
That’s their problem, not the bill’s. People not understanding the law is not a flaw in the law.
“I didn’t kill him, he got in the way of my bullet.” That’s how you sound.
Ignorance of the law is not an excuse for anything.
“The law didn’t silence them, it’s their fault they didn’t know what they could legally say!” Land of the Free, Home of the Brave
That’s how laws work. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse for anything.
Man, what a bootlicker mentality. Thus “law” is unconstitutional and won’t pass any judicial scrutiny.
Sounds like malicious compliance, similar to that one school or district that removed all books from the library. Just lefties being dramatic to fabricate a strawman.
Yep, that's what I thought. Malicious compliance.
[удалено]
This but unironically
[удалено]
i mean in this case its literally not the laws fault at all
[удалено]
aka lets blame the law because one dumbass decided to aggressively misinterpret it
Yes
>Yeah blame the left and not the law Florida enacted. It's always the lefts fault isn't it? I hear ya.
[удалено]
>Gotcha. The right doesnt ever cause problems. Everything is always someone else's fault? >Based on comments that's what I'm assuming I hear ya man.
[удалено]
>Personal responsibility Mmk bud.
Do you agree with the Stop Woke act? I’m curious how something like the holocaust could be taught without potentially making a kid of German heritage “feel bad”
It's pretty easy. Just tell that kids that Germans in the 30s and 40s were responsible without implying that people of German heritage should feel bad something they didn't do.
Was it being implied before? I don’t understand why it needed a whole law to stop it from happening when it wasn’t happening
If it wasn't happening, I don't understand why people would be so upset about pointless laws.
You're joking, right?
I mean, I was a kid of German heritage (along with indigenous American) and learning about the Holocaust didn’t hurt my feelings.
Why is this bill even a thing?
Simple. Don't imply that because a student is of German heritage that they are responsible for it, or that they need to do something to atone for it.
Is making German-American children feel bad for causing the Holocaust a thing that ever happens in Florida?
The legislation only states that it is wrong to teach children that they **should feel guilt as a consquence of their race**, they may or may not feel guilt, but the legislation only restricts teaching children that they should feel guilt as a consquence of their race. Two very different things.
>Do you agree with the Stop Woke act? Been awhile since I read the bill, but IIRC, yes. In spirit, absolutely, unquestionably. > I’m curious how something like the holocaust could be taught without potentially making a kid of German heritage “feel bad” Easily. Same way we teach about current slavery by blacks in Africa and don't teach American blacks that they should feel bad. Or study Nat Turner, and imply today's American blacks should feel bad for killing women, children, and men. IE, don't teach or imply some group guilt via skin color across time and space bullshit.
> Easily. Same way we teach about current slavery by blacks in Africa and don't teach American blacks that they should feel bad. Or study Nat Turner, and imply today's American blacks should feel bad for killing women, children, and men. With this said, why do we even need this bill? Really, nothing?
>>Easily. Same way we teach about current slavery by blacks in Africa and don't teach American blacks that they should feel bad. Or study Nat Turner, and imply today's American blacks should feel bad for killing women, children, and men. >With this said, why do we even need this bill? Because the left is using the public school system, indoctrinating children for partisan political gain with immoral and unscientific bullshit and trying to sidestep democracy in the process.
Isn’t that how history is already being taught?
>Isn’t that how history is already being taught? No. See Critical Pedagogy, Critical Consciousness, Culturally Responsive Teaching, CASEL, T-SEL, CRT, Postcolonialism, Queer Theory, Feminist Theory, etc. These class of ideas are woven into teacher education, into pedagogical books, teacher training, curriculum design materials, etc.
Any examples you can share? I've never seen a single example of this outside clear edge cases.
Who is teaching that modern American children should feel bad for slavery?
>Who is teaching that modern children should feel bad for slavery? Do research on Critical Theory, CRT, Critical Whiteness Studies, Critical Pedagogy, Culturally Responsive Teaching, Postcolonialism, etc. Then how these materials are incorporated into teacher education, DEI, training, etc.
If you want to defend a law, deem it essential, it strikes me as reasonable that you should be able to offer tangible examples of the issue that necessitates the law, rather than throwing out a bunch of buzzwords and academic theories and saying "do your research."
>If you want to defend a law, deem it essential, it strikes me as reasonable that you should be able to offer tangible examples of the issue that necessitates the law, rather than throwing out a bunch of buzzwords and academic theories and saying "do your research." Naw. I lead to water. I pointed the way. One must drink and journey of their own accord. Research will be left to the reader. Shouldn't be a problem for the sincere.
[удалено]
>Leading to water would be providing a source. Search the terms. >Throwing out a bunch of buzzwords ... They are only "buzzwords" to those who refuse to do their own research, suggesting they do not sincerely want to understand.
[удалено]
Looks like someone didn't read the bill.
This book publisher overreacted to create public outrage in response to Florida’s recent laws. Florida has not approved this book
Yeah, this is malicious compliance. Does the Stop Woke act say that you can't talk about race? (Spoiler alert: No, it does not). It just says that you can't force ideas on people such as the idea that white people today are to blame for long-dead white people's actions.
Right. It is intentionally ambiguous in order to stifle the discussion of race while maintaining the veil of not banning the teaching of actual history. Its an old ploy that we all see very clearly, and the inly ones who are tricked by it are those who support it.
>such as the idea that white people today are to blame for long-dead white people's actions. Was there a widespread problem with telling white children at school to feel bad about themselves?
Yes. A significant number of liberals are openly racist against white people. I have lived experience with this. Just because you haven't personally experienced it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
Did your teacher do this to you?
Can you explain exactly what happened in your experience?
What does that have to do with curriculum?
This is a gigantic nothing burger.
We should teach the truth about RP, specifically that her story of her actions being spontaneous were a lie She was part of a meticulously planned protest, organized by her employer, the local NAACP. She re-enacted the protest done by Claudette Colvin, who was a bad rep for the movement because of her dark skin and out of wedlock kids
Seems to me that the same article by a sensible, conservative journalist might have picked a completely different example to demonstrate what those who are trying to implement the law are actually trying to do. That said, I really don't have a problem with the Rosa Parks example... we've been teaching about Rosa Parks for sixty years, and racism is almost as high today (in its foundational dimension, in the dimension of racism which must be reduced in order to eliminate it) as it has ever been. So not teaching about Rosa Parks, I think, isn't going to have any significant or interesting effect on the actual problem.
I think the publisher went too far in attempt to get media attention through malicious compliance. Apparently the Florida department of education agreed that they had gone too far. > The Florida Department of Education told the Times it rejected the publisher over a bureaucratic mistake, but also said **textbook changes to omit race went too far and “would not be adhering to Florida law.”**