Soapbox

Critical race theory, a once-obscure academic concept developed more than 40 years ago, has recently emerged as a source of contentious debate nationally and has become a lightning rod topic in school board elections locally.

What is clear about most discussions about CRT, whether at the local or national level, is that the term is generally misused, mischaracterized and profoundly misunderstood. As a result, the rebranding of the term has misled the public, weaponizing the concept against the American people and creating toxicity where none should exist.

CRT is an academic and legal framework used as “a way of looking at law’s role platforming, facilitating, producing and even insulating racial inequality in our country,” as defined by Kimberlé Crenshaw, the law professor who helped coin the term.

It is essentially an intellectual tool used to examine systemic racism. The recent redefining of the term by right-wing conservatives has academics in the field scratching their heads, especially those who originally developed the theory.

At its core, CRT maintains that racial inequality is embedded in the U.S. legal system and culture, negatively affecting people of color in their schools, jobs, doctor’s offices, the criminal justice system and many other aspects of their lives. Essentially, CRT simply calls for the acknowledgment of the realities and horrors of slavery and its lingering impacts on our nation.

Like many other Trump-inspired conservative notions, the outcry over CRT is based on misplaced fear. Co-opted by Republicans and right-wing media, the term “critical race theory” has been amplified on cable news shows such as Fox with false proclamations that CRT is racist, anti-white and divisive. The theory is currently being falsely equated with any examination of systemic racism and used as an umbrella term to cover any conversation associated with anti-racism, especially those related to education.

In fact, CRT is not part of K-12 school curriculum or taught in most states with the loudest protests. A survey conducted by the Association of American Educators found that 96% of responding teachers indicated that their schools do not require them to teach critical race »

Veteran’s discount all day, every day.

The Alternative Resource

Variety of Strains • Hash/Concentrates • Edibles • Tinctures • ATM

Bodo Park (Durango) REC: 9am-8pm MED: 9am- 6:45pm 72 Suttle Street, Units F/G 970.259.3674

Grandview (Durango) REC ONLY: 9am-8pm 37 CR 232 970.426.4381

Cortez MED & REC: 9am-8pm 1104 E. Main St., Cortez 970.565-6500

Last 4 days to order your Dietz Market SIGNATURE BASKET and save $5 off shipping

(Offer ends Nov. 14) Order now for holiday delivery!

Come in, call or order online at: dietzmarket.com ! !

Fall into Jimmy’s

theory. CRT is not part of K-12 Colorado Academic Standards and is not used in Durango School District 9-R.

However, these facts are inconsequential to those so fiercely claim offense. Could it be that the real fear is around teaching history truthfully, acknowledging America’s checkered past?

It almost seems the goal of CRT critics is to prevent discussion about racism in our country’s history, which may paint the U.S. as anything less than perfect.

Some of the claims made by critics of CRT is that it is anti-white, racist, divisive, Marxist and fundamentally at odds with the Christian faith. These critics allege that CRT teaches white people that they’re racist just for being white and that white people should admit their individual guilt for historical wrongs. In truth, the theory is about institutions, not individuals. CRT does not attribute racism to white people as individuals but to systems that maintain embedded racism.

It seems clear that any discussions of racial injustice are a personal affront to many of those who are raging against CRT. These are typically those whose race is the one maintaining power in most of our country’s institutions. Their priority is likely to preserve the mythology of America as a country of equal opportunity and unlimited freedom for all. Taking a critical view of our country’s racial history threatens this mythology and the power structures perpetuating racial injustices. The uninformed objections to CRT are not intellectual or thoughtful – they are emotional, based on a fear of disruption of the status quo.

It is one thing to mischaracterize CRT; however, it is exceedingly dangerous to propose and pass legislation based on utterly false notions. Twenty-two states have proposed legislation to limit the teaching of concepts of racial equity and white privilege under the umbrella of CRT. Most legal scholars say that these bills impinge on the right to free speech and will likely be dismissed in court. Let’s hope they are right.

To those who may claim that I am antiAmerican, as James Baldwin once said, “I love America more than any other country in the world and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.”

– Claire Ninde, Durango

My body, my rules

Bravo to Daniel Wilson’s letter “Plants over vaccines” in the Telegraph on Oct. 28. Your assessment of the insanity currently running rampant in our society was spoton. Thank you for speaking out.

My husband and I also enjoy choices when it comes to our health care. As someone said recently, “If the vaccine is so great, why do they have to push it?” You presented your position clearly, without contributing to the already-divisive condition of society.

It is so heartening to know others feel as we do. Excellent, thoughtful letter, Mr. Wilson.

– Heidi F. Nichols, Durango

Don’t be the last one to know!

The Telegraph has early deadlines for its Thanksgiving issue, which comes out Wed., Nov. 24

• Display ad reservation deadline is noon, Fri., Nov. 19 • Classified ad deadline is noon, Mon., Nov. 22

It’s time for Medicare open enrollment. For those new to Medicare, if you can afford it, you’ll want to find a separate supplemental insurance policy (i.e. Medigap) to complement Medicare. These policies are offered by private insurance companies in alignment with state regulations and federal laws. Supplements cover Medicare’s significant deductibles and copayments and fill in coverage gaps.

When seniors first enroll in Medicare they can purchase any supplemental Medigap policy regardless of their health history. This occurs only during your initial (one-time only), six-month open enrollment period.

Unlike the protections in the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which don’t allow insurers to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions, Medigap supplemental policies may do just that after the initial sixmonth enrollment period. After the enrollment period expires, if you choose to change policies due to an increase in premiums, deductibles or an unforeseen limitation, a pre-existing medical condition may make you unable to purchase a Medigap policy or change your supplemental coverage. If you have a pre-existing medical condition or a disease you can be denied a Medigap policy.

States do have the flexibility to institute consumer protections for Medigap policies that go beyond the minimum federal standards. For example, 28 states require Medigap insurers to issue policies to eligible Medicare beneficiaries whose employer has changed their retiree health coverage benefits.

Only four states, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine and New York, require either continuous or annual guaranteed protections for Medigap policies for all beneficiaries on traditional Medicare, regardless of medical history. Guaranteed protections prohibit insurers from denying a Medigap policy to eligible applicants in these four states. This includes people with pre-existing conditions, such as diabetes and heart disease.

As a result of these issues, when you transition to Medicare, you’ll want to consider which type of plan would be the best choice for you over your lifetime, not just at the time when you transition to Medicare.

The normal business model for health care uses “underwriting” (risk analysis), which undermines the whole purpose of health insurance. Health insurers don’t necessarily make more money when they have more customers. They make more money when they have more customers whose health care they don’t have to pay for. Making a profit is antithetical to good health care.

I’m calling on all seniors to push your state legislators to join ME, CT, MA and NY and provide seniors with stronger and continuous guaranteed protections “annually” regardless of medical history. We’ve earned and paid for Medicare through a lifetime of work and deserve continuous guaranteed protections for life. – Jan Phillips, Durango