Teaching About Racism

 

(AFP/Getty Images/Andrew Caballero-Reynolds)

Should concepts of critical race theory be part of classroom instruction?

By Ruth Terry

Introduction

In 2020, critical race theory (CRT) became a political wedge issue, as conservative legislators, educators and parents sought to ban CRT from K-12 schools, even as many K-12 educators denied that it was being taught. Critics also took aim at diversity training programs in workplaces and universities. A legal framework pioneered in the 1970s, critical race theory maintains that racism is commonplace and systemic within legal and social structures, and it centers the history and lived experiences of marginalized people. Measures to ban CRT or its underlying concepts from classrooms have been proposed in nearly 30 states and enacted in at least eight. In the corporate sector, some employees are pushing back on diversity training that asks workers to reflect on racial bias and privilege, with some filing lawsuits. Despite widespread debate, there is little consensus among either opponents or proponents about what constitutes critical race theory within curricula and workplace trainings. Still, the controversy continues to rage in legislative assemblies, school board meetings and on social media.

About the Author

Ruth Terry is a Black and Puerto Rican American freelancer based in Istanbul. She earned a master's of public administration and worked in nonprofit fundraising before transitioning to journalism in 2010 — a career shift that began with a nonprofit best practices column for a regional business magazine. Since then, Ruth has written about food, culture, race and travel for national and international outlets, including Al Jazeera, National Geographic, Nature, The New York Times, The Washington Post and Time.

Source

CQ Press ~ CQ Researcher ~  In-depth reports on today’s issues.

*NOTE* We at vapac send respect and appreciation for the opportunity to share Ruth Terry's work. To join their conversation and get to know more about their work visit 

• Twitter  @Ruth_Terry
• Twitter @cqresearcher

Is Texas and its Department of Criminal Justice For Real?

 

Placing the onus and responsibilty on prisoners to boil water to a rolling boil only exposes how malfeasant Texas prison officials are, because how do they possibly expect prisoners to boil water to a roll?

By vapac

National Public Radio [NPR] Michel Martin Opportunistic and Selective Definition of Harm and the American Prisoner

On 1/22/22; National Public Radio, NPR Michel Martin once again gave us another installment of her performance journalism.

At the conclusion of an interview with a representative of the prison information advocacy group Prison Policy on the gross negligence, malfeasant, the covid-19 pandemic, and its murderous toll on the American prisoner by the prison official. Michel Martin demanded that the prison reform advocate defend why NPR's audience should care that prisoners are being killed by prison officials gross negligence and malfeasance, under the specious and spurious strawman logic that prisoners are in prison because of harm they have caused and done.

Harm and the American  prisoner 

 Let us once and for all put to rest and to quote the Emperor Haile Selassie I the first by way of Bob Marley in the defiance of "War"       is discredited and utterly abandoned      No one is in prison because of a supposed or actual harm done. Because if as Michel Martin asserts, harm done, then she would've long since found herself in prison considering the organic harm her misinformation and misleading work as a functionary of corporate media has done to Americans and American public.

The American prisoner is imprisoned because of one thing and one thing only. Law and it's court process either by conviction or a supposed guilty plead deal. 

 Asserting as Michel Martin did on 1/22/22 that the expression of care and concern for fellow human should be conditioned on the speculation and idealisitc practices of prison and imprisonment as based on a social interaction that can and is easily changed and reformed is rediculous and only reveals why laws are broken.

Instead of Michel Martin seizing the opportunity, the covid-19 pandemic has presented to expose the prison officials failings and the inherent antagonisms of imprisonment as social speech in 2022 she succumbed to cowardice and fear of crossing a supposition held by the stus quo. As if the existence and social fact of the American prisoner isn't a revelation that regardless of how a type of political exploitation specifically Republicans and their "white" evangelical hucksters scream about law, order and justice      our human condition is firmly planted, rooted in the injustices of the futile pursuit of supremacy      to which we have the Michel Martins of corporate media to thank and indict.

I'm William Thorpe in solitary confinement at the Wainwright Unit of the Texas prison system exiled from the Virginia prison system.

Absolute Power Corrupts, The Virginia Department of Corrections [VADOC] and The Press

On February 16, 2022; True to the adage that absolute power corrupts; the Virginia Department of Corrections [VADOC] issued a press release, proclaiming that Virginia's press and corporate media coverage of its activities was "inaccurate" and "skewed."

We have patiently waited, watching, listening for a response from Virginia's press and corporate media that would calmly remind VADOC that not only does: 

United States Constitution Amendment 1

Speaks against....."Abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.....

But The Constitution  of Virginia

At Section 12. Freedom of speech and of the press declares....."That the freedoms of speech and of the press are among the great bulwarks of liberty and can never be restrained except by despotic governments, that any citizen may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right, that the general assembly shall not pass any law abridging the freedom of speech of the press"  

So in light of the above excerpts representing the fair and just bulwarks of our social compact. Why then would a function of Virginia's executive, the Virginia Department of Corrections not only seek biased and favorable press coverage but would seek to intimidate Virginia's press into self-censorship and what is appalling and sad is this continuing kowtow of Virginia's press to the corrupted demand of the Virginia Department of Corrections.

The Virginia Department of Corrections is a fact of the commonwealth organized violence and violence in all of its forms and expression exist for itself. Requiring a distilled level of transparency if there is to be accountable justification of the rule of law.

We state that the VADOC element or the prison official is no greater or lesser than the imprisoned and prisoner in their charge         Because both exist as creations of the rule of law and if the rule of law isn't to succumb to and become a selective narrative which VADOC clearly anticipates that by its February 16, 2022 press release reminder it does then Virginia's press and corporate media has to actually do what our constitutional privileges demand. We call Virginia's press to account

By vapac

Is The Virginia Department of Corrections [VADOC] Counting Dead and The Terminally Ill Released Prisoners In Its Claims of Low Recidivism? By William Thorpe

Virginia Republicans abolished parole as part of the Commonwealth's imprisonment scheme in 1995. Parole only exist now for the imprisoned prior to 1995 and the geriatric prisoner. [see VA. code 53.1] so any measure of recidivism is dealing with 2 types of prisoner groups:.

• Those imprisoned before 1995 who are either completing their sentence, geriatric parole or the lucky few who get parole.
• And those imprisoned after 1995 with sentences lesser than the 27 years since the abolish of parole.

So now to examine VADOC's claim of low recidivism. Let's begin with the recidivism of the second group. Virginia historically is an inordinate amount of sentence state. So the pool of prisoners, since 1995 who have been released to then return to prison is a small and minuscule percentage to actually and accurately factor for claim of low recidivism by VADOC officials, considering that the post abolish of parole prisoner is serving a lengthy sentence, staying in Virginia's prisons longer      which the director of Virginia prison system, Harold Clarke has relatively acknowledged. So the only pool of prisoners whose release is significant enough to reflect and support recidivist speculations are those imprisoned prior to 1995. Most of the pre parole abolish prisoners have been imprisoned anywhere from 50 years to 1 year which subsequently is a relative small pool in comparison with the post parole abolish 1995 imprisoned to the present. Now despite the practicality of recidivism claims for the pre parole 1995 prisoner, the reality is those prisoners, because of specific factors as age, being dead and infirm are not enough to make any recidivist based claims on. What we ask VADOC to clarify and explain is, in the best of times Virginia's grant of parole is stingy and the majority of prisoners being released pre 1995 are elderly and most with terminal illness, who are dying within 2 years of release.

So the fact of the matter is VADOC has to be including dead prisoners, disabled and infirm prisoners, the terminally ill released prisoner who can never return and will not return to prison in its claims of low recidivism and not only is it disingenuous but it is outright deceptive and insidious to claim something which the circumstances surrounding the claim are patently distorted.

I'm William Thorpe held at the Wainwright Unit of the Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice in solitary confinement because Virginia exiled me to Texas