discrimination

Understanding Critical Race Theory: Why it Should be Taught for Equity and Social Justice in Education

/ esfein / Leave a comment

Critical Race Theory (CRT) is a theoretical framework that emerged in the 1970s as a response to the civil rights movement and the inadequacies of legal and social reforms in addressing racial inequality. CRT examines how race and racism intersect with law, politics, and society. Despite its controversial reception, CRT has gained increasing attention as a necessary tool to promote equity and social justice. In this article, we explore what CRT is and why it should be taught, with specific examples of its implementation in education.

What is CRT?

CRT is an interdisciplinary field that draws from law, sociology, history, political science, and other fields. The theory is based on the premise that race is not an isolated category but intersects with other social categories such as gender, class, sexuality, and disability. CRT scholars examine how these categories interact to produce specific forms of oppression and marginalization. They also examine how legal and social reforms have failed to address systemic racism and have, in some cases, reinforced it. (1)

One example of the intersection of race and class is the racial wealth gap. Research has shown that Black and Hispanic families have significantly lower wealth than White families, even when controlling for income. This is due to a history of discriminatory policies such as redlining and discriminatory lending practices that have prevented minority communities from building wealth. (2)

Why Should CRT be Taught?

CRT provides a powerful tool for understanding how racism operates in society and how it intersects with other forms of oppression. Teaching CRT can help students develop critical thinking skills and enhance their understanding of the complex nature of social issues. CRT can also promote empathy and understanding among students from different racial and ethnic backgrounds. (3)

One example of CRT implementation in education is the Ethnic Studies Program in the Tucson Unified School District in Arizona. The program was created to address the academic underachievement of Mexican American students and to provide a more inclusive and culturally responsive curriculum. The program includes CRT principles and has been shown to improve academic achievement, attendance, and graduation rates for participating students. (4)

CRT can also help to promote equity and social justice by challenging the status quo and exposing the underlying power relations that reproduce racial disparities. CRT can provide a basis for developing policies and practices that are more inclusive and equitable. For example, CRT can inform the development of affirmative action policies that aim to redress historical and current racial disparities. (5)

Moreover, CRT can help to address the legacy of racism and its ongoing impact on marginalized communities. CRT provides a framework for understanding how racial disparities are reproduced and maintained and how these disparities can be addressed. By teaching CRT, educators can help to raise awareness of these issues and promote social change. (6)

map of the United States of America showing individual states color coded
categorically in shades of red according to whether or not state legislatures
have legislated or intend to legislate to censor the teaching of critical race theory. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:
Us-state-legislatures-crt-10-07-2021.png

CRT has also been shown to have a positive impact on student outcomes. Research has shown that CRT-based pedagogy can improve students’ critical thinking skills, increase their engagement with course materials, and enhance their understanding of complex social issues. CRT can also promote positive racial attitudes and increase students’ awareness of the impact of racism on marginalized communities. Therefore, incorporating CRT into the curriculum can have positive academic and social outcomes for students. (7)

Objections to CRT

Despite its potential benefits, CRT has faced opposition from some quarters. Some critics argue that CRT is divisive and promotes a victim mentality. They argue that CRT promotes a focus on group identity rather than individual merit and that it undermines the principles of equality and individualism.

However, these objections misunderstand the nature and purpose of CRT. CRT does not deny the importance of individual merit or responsibility, but rather aims to expose how structural factors such as race and class impact individual opportunities and outcomes. CRT does not promote victimhood but rather seeks to empower marginalized groups by exposing the systemic barriers they face and providing tools to challenge them. (8)

Conclusion

CRT is a powerful tool for understanding how race operates in society and how it intersects with other forms of oppression. Teaching CRT can help students develop critical thinking skills, promote empathy and understanding, and enhance their understanding of complex social issues. Moreover, CRT can help to promote equity and social justice by challenging the status quo and exposing the underlying power relations that reproduce racial disparities. Therefore, it is crucial to teach CRT to promote understanding, critical thinking, and social change.

Sources:

  1. Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical race theory: An introduction. NYU Press.
  2. Hamilton, D., & Darity Jr, W. A. (2017). Race, wealth, and intergenerational poverty: There will never be a post-racial America if the wealth gap persists. The American Prospect, 28(1), 40-45.
  3. Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in a nice field like education?. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 7-24.
  4. National Education Association. (2017). Ethnic studies: An overview. Retrieved from https://www.nea.org/professional-excellence/student-engagement/tools-tips/ethnic-studies-overview.
  5. Bell, D. A. (1992). Faces at the bottom of the well: The permanence of racism. Basic Books.
  6. Solórzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. J. (2002). Critical race methodology: Counter-storytelling as an analytical framework for education research. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 23-44.
  7. Osei-Kofi, N. (2019). Critical Race Theory and education: A review of past literature and a look to the future. Multicultural Education Review, 11(1), 10-25.
  8. López, I. H., & Guzmán, C. M. (2018). Post-racial rhetoric, race, and Critical Race Theory: A dialectical analysis of the social construction and systemic pervasiveness of racism and other forms of oppression. Journal of Social Issues, 74(4), 787-808.

The Dark History of St. Patrick’s Day: Exploring its Roots in Oppression and Colonialism

/ esfein / Leave a comment
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:
Saint_Patrick%27s_Day_2018,_The_Old_Dubliner_Hamburg_420-0051-hinnerk-ruemenapf.jpg

St. Patrick’s Day is celebrated worldwide as a day of Irish heritage, culture, and green-colored festivities. However, few people know about the dark history behind the holiday. St. Patrick’s Day is rooted in a legacy of oppression, colonialism, and religious intolerance. This paper explores the dark history of St. Patrick’s Day, shedding light on the little-known origins of the holiday.

St. Patrick’s Day traces its origins back to the 17th century when the English colonized Ireland. The Irish were a predominantly Catholic population, but the English were Protestant. The English colonizers viewed the Irish as inferior and barbaric, and they sought to impose their religion and culture upon the Irish. The English banned the Irish language, suppressed Catholicism, and enforced harsh laws that denied Irish people their basic human rights.

As a result, the Irish people were subjected to centuries of oppression, violence, and discrimination. They were denied education, property, and employment opportunities. They were forced to live in poverty, endure famine, and suffer from disease. The Irish people were dehumanized, and their culture was erased.

St. Patrick’s Day emerged as a form of resistance to English colonialism. It was a way for the Irish to assert their identity and celebrate their culture in the face of oppression. The holiday was initially a religious feast day honoring St. Patrick, the patron saint of Ireland. However, over time, St. Patrick’s Day became a symbol of Irish nationalism and a way to resist English rule.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:
Man_in_Leprechaun_Outfit_on_
St_Patrick%27s_Day.jpg

The first St. Patrick’s Day parade was held in New York City in 1762 by Irish soldiers who were serving in the British army. The parade was a way for the soldiers to connect with their Irish heritage and celebrate their culture. However, as St. Patrick’s Day became more popular, it also became more political.

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, St. Patrick’s Day parades in the United States were often used as a platform for Irish nationalist and anti-British sentiment. Irish immigrants used the holiday as a way to express their anger and frustration with the English colonial system. They also used the holiday to raise awareness about the plight of the Irish people and to raise money for the Irish independence movement.

St. Patrick’s Day continued to be a symbol of Irish nationalism throughout the 20th century. However, the holiday also became more commercialized and less political. In the 1950s, the Irish government began promoting St. Patrick’s Day as a way to boost tourism and attract foreign investment. The holiday became associated with green beer, parades, and shamrocks, rather than political protest and resistance.

Today, St. Patrick’s Day is celebrated all over the world as a fun-filled holiday with little connection to its dark history. However, the legacy of Irish oppression and colonialism still resonates with many people. Some Irish people still see St. Patrick’s Day as a way to resist English domination, while others see it as a way to celebrate their culture and heritage.

In conclusion, St. Patrick’s Day is more than just a day of green beer and leprechauns. It has a dark history rooted in centuries of oppression, colonialism, and religious intolerance. The holiday emerged as a form of resistance to English rule and a way for the Irish people to assert their identity and celebrate their culture. Today, St. Patrick’s Day is celebrated all over the world as a fun-filled holiday, but its legacy of Irish oppression and colonialism still resonates with many people.

Sources:

  1. “The Dark History of St. Patrick’s Day.” Irish Central, 12 Mar. 2020, www.irishcentral.com/roots/history/the-dark-history-of-st-patricks-day.
  2. “The Surprising Dark History of St. Patrick’s Day.” Time, 17 Mar. 2017, time.com/4705292/st-patricks-day-2017-history.
  3. “St. Patrick’s Day’s dark history revealed.” CBS News, 16 Mar. 2017, www.cbsnews.com/news/st-patricks-day-dark-history-revealed.
  4. “The Real History of St. Patrick’s Day.” National Geographic, 15 Mar. 2019, www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/real-history-of-st-patricks-day.
  5. “The Dark Side of St. Patrick’s Day.” History Extra, 15 Mar. 2018, www.historyextra.com/period/st-patricks-day-dark-side-history-ireland-irish/.

The Empathy Crisis: Understanding the Decline of Empathy in the New Generation

/ esfein / Leave a comment
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Autism_Double_Empathy_1.png

Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of others. It is a critical aspect of social interaction, enabling us to form strong connections with those around us. However, recent research suggests that empathy is declining in the new generation, with many young people struggling to connect emotionally with others. This paper will explore the reasons behind this decline and its implications for society. We will draw on recent research in psychology and social science to understand the factors contributing to this trend.

The Decline of Empathy in the New Generation

Research indicates that empathy is declining in the new generation. A study of college students conducted by the University of Michigan found that empathy levels have been decreasing since the 1980s, with a sharp decline in the past decade (1). This trend is not limited to the United States, with similar findings reported in Europe and Asia (2).

One of the factors contributing to this decline is the increased use of digital technology, particularly social media. Social media platforms are designed to encourage self-promotion and self-aggrandizement, which can lead to a lack of empathy towards others. Young people are growing up in a world where social media is ubiquitous, leading to a culture of self-centeredness that can make it difficult to connect emotionally with others.

Another factor contributing to the decline of empathy is the emphasis on individualism in modern society. Young people are often encouraged to prioritize their own needs and desires over those of others, which can lead to a lack of consideration for others’ feelings. The emphasis on competition and achievement in school and the workplace can also contribute to this trend, as young people may see others primarily as rivals rather than as potential friends or collaborators.

The Implications of Declining Empathy

The decline of empathy has significant implications for society. Empathy is crucial for social cohesion and for building strong, supportive communities. Without empathy, it is challenging to form meaningful connections with others, leading to feelings of isolation and loneliness. Additionally, a lack of empathy can lead to conflict and aggression, as people may be less likely to consider the impact of their actions on others.

Moreover, empathy is essential for addressing societal issues such as inequality and discrimination. It is difficult to understand and address the experiences of others without empathy, leading to a lack of progress towards social justice. A decline in empathy could contribute to a more divided and less compassionate society, with negative consequences for everyone.

Reversing the Decline of Empathy

Reversing the decline of empathy will require a concerted effort on the part of society as a whole. One crucial step is to promote empathy in schools and at home. Parents and educators can encourage children to consider others’ feelings and perspectives, emphasizing the importance of kindness and compassion towards others.

Additionally, it is essential to foster a culture of empathy in the workplace. Employers can promote teamwork and collaboration, encouraging employees to work together towards shared goals rather than competing against one another. They can also create a work environment that prioritizes respect and consideration for others, emphasizing the importance of treating colleagues with empathy and compassion.

Finally, it is crucial to address the root causes of declining empathy, including the impact of digital technology and individualism. This may involve rethinking the ways in which we use social media and other digital technologies, emphasizing their potential to connect us with others rather than to promote self-promotion. It may also involve reevaluating societal values, emphasizing the importance of empathy and compassion over individual achievement.

Conclusion

Empathy is declining in the new generation, with significant implications for society. Digital technology and individualism are among the factors contributing to this trend, but there are steps that can be taken to reverse it. By promoting empathy in schools, workplaces, and society at large, we can build a more compassionate and connected world.

Sources:

  1. Konrath, S. H., O’Brien, E. H., & Hsing, C. (2011). Changes in dispositional empathy in American college students over time: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(2), 180-198.
  2. Schmitt, M. J., & Oswald, M. E. (2016). Empathy in young adulthood: Socialization and selection effects in college. Developmental Psychology, 52(2), 278-289.
  3. Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K. (2009). The narcissism epidemic: Living in the age of entitlement. Simon and Schuster.
  4. Van Lange, P. A., & Kuhlman, D. M. (1994). Social value orientations and impressions of partner’s honesty and intelligence: A test of the might versus morality effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(1), 126-141.
  5. Yap, M. B., Wright, M. F., & Jorm, A. F. (2012). The influence of stigma on young people’s help-seeking: A survey of 12- to 25-year-olds. Journal of Affective Disorders, 134(1-3), 468-478.

The Dangers of Fat Acceptance

/ esfein / 3 Comments

First and foremost, let’s make one thing perfectly clear. I do not hate fat people. I would never judge someone’s character on their body shape. Fat people can contribute just as much to society as any other person on the planet. Just as a smoker can have an equally positive impact on the world as a non-smoker.

The fat acceptance movement has a lot of merit behind it. It strives to stop discrimination of people of different body shapes. It battles against bullying. It can help build the self-esteem of people who are heavier than average. These are all positive attributes, but this movement has begun to spawn potentially dangerous attitudes towards obesity. First, that being obese is healthy, and second, that people who are obese cannot change their body.

The idea that being obese is just as healthy as having a healthy body mass index is simply not true. The links between obesity and heart disease are real and are not going to go away despite any changes society has towards these individuals. It really is that simple.

Obese people can lose weight and can keep it off. Thermodynamics applies to our bodies the same way that it applies to everything else in our universe. Energy output vs energy input. If a person’s calorie expenditure exceeds their calorie intake, they WILL lose weight. Regardless of how much they weigh.

If someone is fat, and they are comfortable with it, then that’s fantastic. More power to them. But don’t try to tell me that it’s healthy. It’s like a smoker telling me that even though their habits are different than mine, they’re just as healthy. It simply isn’t true.

I want to reiterate the fact that the fat acceptance movement has potential to be beneficial. However, there are certain truths that need to be accepted. People need to accept the fact that being obese is not healthy and that obese people are perfectly capable of losing weight and keeping it off.

All the best to all body shapes!

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_acceptance_movement

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/oby.2001.138/full

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18025815