Sure but you see how quickly the zealots are confirmed in their beliefs when the “system” is used to remove a black guy, as principal, for simply saying they are against racism.
Why did they react that way? No evidence other than the principal saying he would fight against systemic racism (why is that controversial) and is anti racist (again, why is that controversial)
No curriculums, policy, directives, nothing showing he was pushing CRT on his teachers or students. Yet a few white parents complain and he is gone.
I would ask him this. What part of the system is still racist?
That right there usually destroys any chance at a positive dialogue.
If it was rephrased to “I want to root out the racist individuals in the system” then that would be a much more accurate and achievable objective. Because there are racist individuals in the system.
But that doesn’t mean the system is inherently racist.
This is the accusation that was made. This is what the disagreement was about. This was a temporary suspension, not a trial and conviction. If he thought it was unfair he could have likely followed some process to seek due process…eventually to a federal court. In fact, the article states the letter sent to him excludes details, considering it a private matter. We don’t know what all of this is about in detail. As I said, if he thinks it is horrible systematic racism let him elevate the issue and make it a cause celebre.
The term is used to define a mindset. You can be anti racist and not see racism “everywhere”. Which ironically is what you are attempting to do now. Seeing the term anti-racism as anti-white.
There are some activist who are anti racist and there are some stay at home moms/Dads that are anti racist
It has not been litigated. If he thinks it was an injustice he could carry this further. When all the facts were presented then I could reach a final conclusion.
Why do you automatically believe the suspension was invalid?
The community said nothing. And there have been people who denied things that later turned out to be incorrect.
I said this was what the issue is about, not reached some finding of fact. Certainly not based on one persons self serving statement.
