UPDATED: Briefly Noted: CRT Under Legal Challenge

Even though CRT is one of the biggest stories in current America, time is limited and I'm not about to spend time on an obviously deranged view of reality. So, briefly ... I'll cite the views of two pundits who are by no means conservative in the sense that I am. I do so as a hopeful sign that the unease at the direction American society is taking has risen to the attention of the Center.

Paul Mirengoff references an article that documents legal challenges to the imposition of CRT as the default--indeed, the only allowed--public ideology in our schools and workplaces. Mirengoff's views, as reproduced, track mine pretty closely. He's not optimistic:

... A nation that teaches children to hate its history and to demonize a plurality of its population is probably doomed.

Fortunately, as John Murawski at RealClearInvestigations documents in detail, CRT is under challenge in courts. Here are some of the legal actions he describes, along with my tentative, off-the-cuff thoughts about the cases:

...

Murawski also quotes Douglas Seaton of the Upper Midwest Law Center, which is planning to file lawsuits challenging the imposition of CRT, on the stakes of the legal battle ahead. Seaton says:

You can’t have a country as diverse as ours without equality before the law. It’s a recipe for communal violence, tribalism. You can’t simply proceed that way. You’d be doomed to internecine battles between groups.

Steve Sailer cites an article by Ueber Neocon NeverTrump Bret Stephens--quoting Stephens at length. Stephens thinks that 

... anti-racism narrative will profoundly alienate liberal-minded America, even as it entrenches itself in schools, universities, corporations and other institutions of American life.

I'm not as sanguine, but consider it a good thing that Stephens' misgivings are appearing in the NYT. Stephens considers that 

... in this era of with-us-or-against-us politics, to have misgivings about the left’s new “anti-racist” narrative is to run the risk of being denounced as a racist. Much better to nod along at your office’s diversity, equity and inclusion sessions than suggest that enforced political indoctrination should not become a staple of American workplace culture.

And yet those doubts and misgivings go to the heart of what used to be thought of as liberalism. The result will be a liberal crackup similar to the one in the late 1960s that broke liberalism as America’s dominant political force for a generation.

Of course, as we all know by now, to be "denounced as a racist" in America has real life consequences--consequences that work in only one direction. That much of the nation has been cowed into silence--except for anonymous commenters on the internet and Tucker Carlson--is graphically illustrated by this recent post at Wire Points:

Illinoisans overwhelmingly oppose racial indoctrination now rampant in schools, yet they cower in silence

I highly recommend the entire post, but here are some telling excerpts:

Illinois’ political establishment is far out of touch with the general public on the racial dogma now forced on students from kindergarten through college. Yet a stunning two-thirds of Illinoisans say they don’t speak up, thereby ceding control to an intolerant, extremist minority.

...

Among the survey’s specific findings:

• Sixty-two percent of Illinoisans say it’s more important to expose students to a variety of perspectives, compared to just 23% who want teachers to embrace progressive viewpoints and perspectives; 15% were not sure where they stood. The view was shared by a plurality of Democrats (49.6%) as well as majorities of Republicans (78%) and Independents (69%).
• Illinoisans reject a core piece of woke teaching, 1619 Project published by The New York Times, which aims to “reframe the country’s history” by putting slavery and its enduring consequences “at the very center of our national narrative.” Forty-eight percent of respondents favored a focus on “American founding principles and . . . documents,” compared to 38% who favored “new curriculums that teach children to understand that America is founded on slavery and remains systemically racist today.”
• 57% of respondents said training programs should focus on making teachers better equipped to help students develop core skills and competencies, not on social justice or progressive politics. Just 34% said the priority should go toward teaching progressive viewpoints and social justice advocacy to help teachers overcome their own biases and build more inclusive classrooms
• “A resounding 84% of respondents,” according to the poll’s sponsor, said that “all people should be treated equally on merit” when the question was posed in general terms. When asked to think about the college admissions process specifically, 63% answered that “all people should be treated equally based on merit, even if that results in less racial diversity at selective colleges and universities,” including 89% of Republicans, 62% of Independents and a plurality (47%) of Democrats.

...

Most significant of all, however, is that over two-thirds of Illinoisans say they are afraid to speak up on these issues.

Why?

Because they fear the mob.

Sixty-four percent of respondents reported that they stop themselves from expressing their opinion on controversial political and social issues “often” (30%) or “sometimes” (34%), with an additional 18% doing so “rarely,” according to the survey sponsor. No surprise there. National surveys, as the sponsor wrote, “have repeatedly shown that political correctness has silenced important discussions—among students on college campuses and in the broader marketplace of ideas.”

Of those who reported self-censoring, 22.4% said the main reason they do so is because they are worried about unfair criticism, while 22.0% answered that they are “worried about professional or academic consequences” for saying the wrong thing.

OK, why did I put that part in red? Think about it. If 34% of Illinoisans actually believe that "teaching progressive viewpoints and social justice advocacy" should be "the priority," then if you combine that 34% with the people who "aren't sure" or who don't believe this stuff is happening in their school, or that the Progs are basically good people, really--all of a sudden you get Dem domination and radical policy initiatives. How radical? Try these:

‘What a foundation!’: Two Illinois Profs On Hot Mic Giddy About Social Justice Everywhere In Schools

TEACHERS' UNION LEADS EFFORT FOR STATE TO CONTROL NON-PUBLIC, HOME SCHOOLS DURING HEALTH EMERGENCIES

This is why it may be a good sign that centrists are starting to come off the fence. There's an election coming next year.

UPDATE: Don Surber has found an interview with James Carville at Vox, and the Ragin' Cajun is nervous, ya'll:

Democrats worry that their steal won't hold

And, as Surber explains, all that nervousness is because Carville knows they didn't win:

The big headline to the story was "Wokeness is a problem and we all know it."

Buried in the interview was the real problem.

It was a steal, not a win.

Carville said, "We won the White House against a world-historical buffoon. And we came within 42,000 votes of losing. We lost congressional seats. We didn’t pick up state legislatures. So let’s not have an argument about whether or not we’re off-key in our messaging. We are. And we’re off because there’s too much jargon and there’s too much esoterica and it turns people off."

Jargon that turns people off is not the problem and he knows it. The problem is the ideas are awful. And if you won big and truly are amidst ruling for 40 years, a little backlash should not stop you.

He is as nervous as that infamous long-tailed cat in that room filled with rocking chairs.

Surber closes with some dynamite:

[Carville] ended the interview with the truth. He said, "First of all, the Democratic Party can’t be more liberal than Sen. Joe Manchin. That’s the fact. We don’t have the votes."

They don't have the votes because Biden did not win the last election. He lost. Bigly.

Which is why Democrats are going all in on socialism and fascism. They have nothing else to lose because they already lost. Republicans were just too cowardly to call them on it because Republican feared Donald Trump would get a second term and totally end the RINO game.