durko retuiteado
The calls to "reimagine" Western history and then overhaul education to "center" "Black," "immigrant," and "non-Western perspectives" actually began in earnest in the 1980s.
We are in the last stages of the "reimagining" of everything Whites created to the point that the entire curriculum from first grade to university graduation is now super "inclusive of Black, immigrant, and global perspectives".
Even courses about European history, art, or philosophy have been "reimagined" as "Eurocentric" and fully integrated with "global perspectives".
The "reimagining" of White accomplishments (97% of human accomplishments) was a direct product of postmodernism, postcolonial studies, critical theory, civil rights and immigration-driven interests.
The turning point may have been Stanford's 1980s "Hey hey, ho ho, Western Culture’s got to go." The Faculty Senate voted (39-4) to replace Western Civilization courses with a multicultural "Cultures, Ideas & Values" emphasizing race, gender, and non-Western perspectives.
By the early 2000s, everything about Western history was "reimagined" as imperialist, colonialist and racist --------------- at the same time as nonwhite cultures were "reimagined" as inherently more inclusive and "global in perspective".
Today, when you walk through the halls of universities, the Arts/Social Science departments, you barely see anything, and perhaps nothing, that is not automatically "reimagined" as inclusive of everyone else.
Inclusive means that nonwhites can glorify themselves on their own -- "reimagining the future of black art" -- while whites can only reimagine their past to talk about their colonialism, and reimagine their future to talk about "decolonization" of their culture.
English
