this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2025
57 points (73.6% liked)

Ask Lemmy

28054 readers
1545 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

My pov is that CRT (critical race theory) and related policies, like DEI, put an undue emphasis on race instead of on poverty, and the resulting effect is that policies which are aimed at helping minorities seem like “favoritism” (and called as such by political opponents), which makes a growing population of poor whites (due to the adverse effects of wealth inequality) polarized against minorities.

Separately, the polarization is used by others who want to weaken a democratic nation. For democracies, a growing immigrant population of more poor people will cause further polarization because the growing poor white population believes that “they’re taking our jobs”. This happened during Brexit, this happened with Trump, and this is happening now in Germany and other western democracies.

I know that there are racist groups who have an agenda of their own, and what I am saying is that instead of focusing on what are painted as culture war issues, leftists are better off focusing on alleviating systemic poverty. Like, bringing the Nordic model to the U.S. should be their agenda.

So, maybe I am wrong about CRT and DEI and how it’s well-meaning intentions are being abused by people who have other goals, but I want to hear from others about why they think CRT and DEI help. I want to listen, so I am not going to respond at all.

— Added definitions —

CRT: an academic field used to understand how systems and processes favor white people despite anti-discrimination policies. Analysis coming out of CRT is often used to make public policy.

DEI: a framework for increasing diversity, equity and inclusion; DEI isn’t focused on race or gender only, but also includes disability and other factors (pregnancy for example) which affect a person.

— —

Okay , so end note: I appreciate the people who commented. I questioned the relevancy of CRT/DEI previously out of an alarmed perspective of how aspects that highlight group differences can be used by others to create divisions and increase polarization. But I get the point everyone is making about the historical significance of these tools.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Ok, now that you've added those very basic descriptions. Be honest, could you have done that without looking it up?

Now that you presumably know that both of these things are primarily educational, and not actual favoritism. What is it about them that you think makes poor white people so angry? I'm also curious why you think it's just poor people that take issue with this? The biggest public detractors are all quite wealthy.

Edit: I'm sorry but this process is going to involve a lot of questions. That's just how this works if we're both trying to be constructive.

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I am not angry about anything, and I didn’t look them up now, tbh. The issue I find is that well-meaning and useful policies are painted as something they’re not, or used by others to create polarization. So, my pov is that leftists and progressives are better off focusing on poverty alleviation. If minorities face generational wealth issues (they do) then poverty alleviation policies that don’t single them out in particular will be harder to attack by political opponents.

[–] earphone843@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 day ago

The problem is that systemic racism is a large part of why minority groups are in poverty in the first place.

You can't address poverty in minority groups without addressing the racism.

You're also falling for the fallacy that this is an either or situation. You can fight systemic racism and other underlying causes of poverty at the same.

There's nothing wrong with educating people on specific issues related to specific demographics. That's why BLM existing isn't saying that other races don't matter.

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Would you say that the New Deal policies are the types of policies that you are talking about. The ones enacted by the US government during the recovery from the depression?

I didn't say you were angry, I was asking why you think it makes poor white people angry.

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think policies in the Nordic model are more along those lines, tbh.

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Ok, but Critical Race Theory is specifically referring to US policy and the history of racism and it's affect on public policy.

I'm curious where you think critical race theory is taught and why poor why people are so upset about it?

Do you know that the New Deal era policies enacted by the US government were inherently racist? That they were constructed to favor white people, and jobs that were traditionally given to white people?

For example jobs that were held primarily by black men and women were straight up excluded by social security.

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You’re right, that’s why Title VII and VIII were written to address those aspects

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Ok, but I think you are missing the point. Critical Race Theory is education. Who is hostile to education, to history, to the reality of how he got where we are?

How can we construct new race blind legislation if we completely ignore the history of racial inequity and its direct affects on legislation?

Those same people who angrily oppose the education initiatives that are CRT and DEI just as angrily oppose any program even resembling the Nordic approach to poverty reduction.

I think you are asking the wrong questions. Why are these people opposed to both education and economic and racial justice?

Do you think that if leftists completely dropped any support for DEI and CRT that their opponents would suddenly support programs that aggressively attack wealth inequality?

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

Do you think that if leftists completely dropped any support for DEI and CRT that their opponents would suddenly support programs that aggressively attack wealth inequality?

No, but US wealth inequality is going to worsen now because of the US Dept. of Education being gutted, which is worse than DEI going away. I think education and welfare programs will make easier policies for majority of voters to vote for. More of the US population is poor than a minority of some kind. The danger I was alarmed by (admittedly a knee jerk reaction) is that increasing polarization is going to be used by authoritarians to win and install their own preferred systems. Poverty reducing efforts like in the Nordic model will be popular, but also something some types of politicians cannot favor because of their prior party stance.

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 5 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

Why do you think one is a direct result of the other? Also no they are very not popular. The same people fuming about DEI are very much against any social programs.

[–] blazeknave@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Reading this as a third party... Someone came to learn and you're being unnecessarily hostile.

This isn't "why is it my responsibility to tell you, the offender, how to be decent" - it's strangers opting in to inform strangers. Just prefix with your assumptions about definitions, and answer.

You familiar w flies, honey, vinegar, etc?

[–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Fun fact: flies actually prefer vinegar.

[–] blazeknave@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

🤦 omg I never registered the fruit fly apple cider vinegar traps as vinegar nor as more effective than honey

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Feel free to take time out of your day to enact your preferred approach.

[–] blazeknave@lemmy.world 0 points 4 hours ago
  1. Lol you're suggesting "being the one who makes the effort entitles one to be a dick"
  2. "It's not my job to educate people on" what being a dick is
  3. I believe that's technically whataboutism since none of my words were responded to directly
[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

Should be a salaried position^ 🫡