“Diversity, equity and inclusion” a euphemism for “critical race theory”
The editorial “A win for education,” May 22, is wrongheaded in two ways.
First, the editorial claims that voters in the May school board elections repudiated most “reactionary” school candidates. How does the Times Union Editorial Board know that voters rejected candidates because the candidates oppose critical race theory and support parental involvement in what their children are taught? Many factors go into who’s chosen for school boards, such as the people’s familiarity or friendship with candidates, longevity in office, and many local issues that
may concern the voters.
Second, in a representative republic, parents have a right to choose school boards that reflect their views, even if the Times Union Editorial Board dislikes their opinions. After all, educators serve at the behest of the parents, or as the dictum goes, in loco parentis.
Critical race theory advocates cloak themselves in the euphemism “diversity, equity and inclusion,” which is hard to gainsay, while claiming to oppose the nebulous concept of systemic racism: If you’re white, you’re, prima facie, an oppressor, but if you’re Black, you’re automatically oppressed. It’s inherent in skin color.
Mark Levin, in his book “American Marxism,” sees critical race theory as communism
repackaged: “... (F)or the Marxist and the critical race theoretician, the past is evidence of manipulation, exploitation, mistreatment and corruption of different classes of people. America is, therefore, an irredeemably contemptible society that must be relentlessly condemned and ultimately toppled.”
Should children be taught that?
Eric Retzlaff Schenectady