The authors of that legislation are engaging in a very cagey sleight-of-hand with that laundry list of eight statements.

Some of the specific statements, I outright AGREE with: #1, #2, #4, #5, #6, #7.

If the legislation had been limited to only those six statements, I wouldn't have a problem with the legislation.

Statement #3, however, is intentionally written in such an open-ended way that any discussion over social privilege is discouraged (due to fear of incurring employment termination or criminalized penalties).

That's coercion.

Similarly, Statement #8 is intentionally written in an open-ended way that discourages any discussion of meritocracy and the potential links to systemic injustices. Again, this is being done by the bill's authors to create a chilling effect on critical thought within the classroom.

I much prefer *my* counterproposal on general guidelines regarding how CRT (or CRT-adjacent topics) should be handled in public schools:

https://medium.com/perceive-more/ab414-the-crt-battle-comes-to-wisconsin-2d9054f97e32

Republicans in my state are similarly trying to leverage such tactics for political gain at the expense of free speech and open discussion in K-12 schools.