Comments by "Debany Doombringer" (@debanydoombringer1385) on "Bill Maher EXPOSES Bryan Cranston's Crazy Critical Race Theory" video.

@JNYC-gb1pp Unfortunately, no. There are indeed still minority racist policies, but they're not against black people. They're against the Native population. It's called Indian Affairs. There's policies that dictate how much blood quantum we have to decide what group we can say we belong to. If a company wants to drill or something on our reservations the government takes the money and holds it for us in a trust because we're too stupid to manage our own money. That's literal policy. The government was also caught stealing that money. The difference is we don't cry to other groups to fix it for us. We follow the rules set forth to take our grievances to the government. I really wish other groups would learn to do the same instead of expecting everyone else to fix it for them. That's not helping the stereotypes and it creates things that aren't real issues because you've never properly taken them to the government to even get an explanation or response.
1
@HaikesXO "The argument is if tomorrow they removed all of those laws in place, you would still feel the consequences of 60-70 years ago." Which means it does not exist today which is the claim being made by Cranston and the person that started this thread is disputing. Reversal of some of those laws are being asked for today by the group saying the US is systemically racist. Also, what consequences would someone feel that's never lived it and didn't impact them? Don't say generational wealth because the vast majority of Americans don't even have it. Even ones that have been here hundreds of years. Generational wealth unless you're extremely rich and even then most of the time too, doesn't last more than 3 generations and it takes generations to reach that point. My grandfather's family has been here since the late 1600s and my children will be the first generation to enjoy any amount of wealth being passed on to them. My family is not unusual due to various economic downturns that have occurred often in our history. The whole "generational wealth" stuff comes from thinking that a certain race is far above the others when even looking at a wealth chart disputes that claim. I mean one is, but it's not the one that's being called racist.
1
@andrewsork4897 Are black people being forced to live there today? No? Then it's not today. Are those policies still in place? No. Then it's not now. Nobody is disputing it was around 80 years ago. Which was about 4 generations ago. Claiming it still is is the lie CRT pushes.
1
@riclacour Yes there were. There just weren't as many 1st generation immigrants. There was also Italian ones. They were in Texas. Edit: You unintentionally highlight a very real problem in teaching history. They don't teach the full history and just do a highlight reel focusing on the worst or biggest instances of something. I see this in the history taught around slavery. I've even seen them teach the US was the worst when the Middle East castrated the males and that's not getting into the lowest class of slaves in Rome that only lived 6 months if they were lucky. Nor do they teach that Natives were enslaved first or that free blacks existed and also had slaves. I'm glad I was taught when I was because it was a more comprehensive study on these things.
1
@stevebaptista480 That's 100% false and was proven false 10 years ago. It's in every college course now including engineering as a required subject. They have children line up, ask questions, and say whoever is in the back is due to systematic oppression in elementary. There are books in elementary required reading or on the reading list that calls huwite people "the devil." They've removed discipline based on race. They do grading based on race and those policies explicitly state it's to overcome the systematic racism. It's called CRT in praxis and it's taught in every college to obtain a teaching degree and how to teach it to all ages of students.
1
@KimmieSue. I'll let the black kids that held a knife to my friend's throat know that even though they didn't receive any punishment, they were discriminated against. You do know if what you're claiming was true they'd have attorneys lining up to sue for discrimination. When it comes to court cases in particular there's past offenses taken into consideration. So if it's the same crime and one is a first offense and the other is a 2nd offense, they're going to get different sentences for the same crime. As for those families, have they been before the court before? Do they have other things against them? It's not as simple as they both did this when it comes to court cases. You're past heavily influences a decision because they heavily impact the likelihood of continued issues. There's a massive amount of context missing from your little story, and it's likely for a reason. Edit: I'm always suspicious when the same crime is stated but the claim of same history is ommited.
1