From the website that brought you “Whiteness” as a “disease”, come an “explainer” about Critical Race Theory for “White people” that is a combination of snarky dishonesty and Kaftatrapping. Their shtick ought to be a familiar one by now: Declare that all of society was built to oppress non-Whites and you are racist for not blindly accepting their assertion blindly and uncritically. This, of course, means one thing: A Fisking!
“On Monday, Mississippi state Rep. Chris Brown (not that one) introduced two bills in the state legislature affirming the ‘resolute opposition to the promotion of race or sex stereotyping or scapegoating.’ While the concurrent resolutions seem like no-brainers, the measures are part of the Republican Party’s nationwide effort to eliminate the anti-racist terror threat that has triggered white people around the country.
“Everybody—from preachers to teachers—is talking about it. Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton introduced legislation to ban it from the military. School boards across the country are up in arms about it. White people briefly considered boycotting Coke over it.
“It’s the dreaded Critical Race Theory (CRT).”
Funny how they don’t link to any of the proposed laws or regulations, which are manifestly clear about being against judging someone “by the color of their skin”.
“Not since Rev. Jeremiah Wright insisted that God doesn’t like racism has one phrase caused so much consternation. CRT has become the conservative equivalent of Black Santa Claus delivering a Little Negro Mermaid while telling little white kids that Jesus was born with melanin. It’s not what Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. would have wanted.
“So, to separate truth from white lies, we decided to offer this simple explainer to why white people are so upset by Critical Race Theory.”
That same Jeremiah Wright who said “God damn America”?
If you haven’t guessed yet, the people at “The Root” don’t hate “white lies” because they are purportedly “lies”, but because it is considered “white” and thus a “lie”.
“Is there a backlash against Critical Race Theory?
“If you mean one that is sanctioned by federal, state and local authorities, then, yes.
“Under the Trump administration, the Office of Management and Budget issued a memo instructing government agencies to ‘identify all contracts or other agency spending related to any training on “critical race theory,” “white privilege,” or any other training or propaganda effort that teaches or suggests either (1) that the United States is an inherently racist or evil country or (2) that any race or ethnicity is inherently racist or evil.’
“‘Critical Race Theory is basically teaching people to hate our country, hate each other. It’s divisive and it’s basically an identity politics version of Marxism,’ said Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis during an interview with the racial scholars at Fox News. ‘Florida’s civics curriculum will incorporate foundational concepts with the best materials and it will expressly exclude unsanctioned narratives like critical race theory and other unsubstantiated theories.’”
This is a roundabout admission that yes Critical Race Theory teaches that America is inherently evil that exists to benefit White people who should feel guilty, and that Critical Race Theory is teaching this as an axiomatic truth that the races are inherently unequal.
“Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center says the term became the subject of a GOP disinformation campaign after the Trump administration turned against it. Using Critical Race Theory, the Georgia legislature would have considered the historical and structural factors of voter suppression before passing their draconian electoral reforms. And now, regular white people are lashing out against the term.”
An objective and neutral look at “historical and structural factors of voter suppression” would have demonstrated that the new Georgia voting law did nothing of the sort. What they are really saying is if you presume Whites are all racist supporting racism, then you’d have to oppose them just to be “anti-racist”. It is a presumption of racism that can’t be disproven.
“What is Critical Race Theory?
“Basically, Critical Race Theory is a way of using race as a lens through which one can critically examine social structures. While initially used to study law, like most critical theory, it emerged as a lens through which one could understand and change politics, economics and society as a whole. Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic’s book, Critical Race Theory: An Introduction, describes the movement as: “a collection of activists and scholars engaged in studying and transforming the relationship among race, racism, and power.”
“Kimberlé Crenshaw, one of the founding members of the movement, says Critical Race Theory is more than just a collective group. She calls it: “a practice—a way of seeing how the fiction of race has been transformed into concrete racial inequities.”
“It’s much more complex than that, which is why there’s an entire book about it.”
A more honest description of Critical Race Theory: “Critical race theory is an academic discipline that holds that the United States is a nation founded on white supremacy and oppression, and that these forces are still at the root of our society. Critical race theorists believe that American institutions, such as the Constitution and legal system, preach freedom and equality, but are mere “camouflages” for naked racial domination. They believe that racism is a constant, universal condition: it simply becomes more subtle, sophisticated, and insidious over the course of history. In simple terms, critical race theory reformulates the old Marxist dichotomy of oppressor and oppressed, replacing the class categories of bourgeoisie and proletariat with the identity categories of White and Black. But the basic conclusion is the same: in order to liberate man, society must be fundamentally transformed through moral, economic, and political revolution.”
It is a form of projection that presumes that others were so monomaniacally obsessed with race over all else. By focusing exclusively through the lens of race, they ignore all other factors, or at least deprecate them to irrelevancy. This “racial lens” is like a filter that eliminates all wavelengths of light except the one that you are looking at. Perhaps it could best be understod from the “Stories of Hidden Wisdom”: “There was a man who sat each say looking out through a narrow vertical opening where a single board had been removed from a tall wooden fence. Each day a wild ass of the desert passed outside the fence and across the narrow opening–first the nose, then the head, the forelegs, the long brown back, the hindlegs, and lastly the tail. One day, the man leaped to his feet with the light of discovery in his eyes and he shouted for all who could hear him: ‘It is obvious! The nose causes the tail!’”
“Can you put it in layman’s terms?
“Former economics professor (he prefers the term “wypipologist”) Michael Harriot, who used Critical Race Theory to teach “Race as an Economic Construct,” explained it this way:
“Race is just some shit white people made up.”
Yet it to say one “doesn’t see race” is considered racist and racial essentialism is a core tenet of Critical Race Theory.
“Nearly all biologists, geneticists and social scientists agree that there is no biological, genetic or scientific foundation for race. But, just because we recognize the lack of a scientific basis for race doesn’t mean that it is not real. Most societies are organized around agreed-upon principles and values that smart people call ‘social constructs.’ It’s why Queen Elizabeth gets to live in a castle and why gold is more valuable than iron pyrite. Constitutions, laws, political parties, and even the value of currency are all real and they’re shit people made up.”
Notice how they conflate “race” with “culture”, and also ignore how ethnicity and tribalism is a universal human thing and not just “shit white people made up”. Many if not most of these “shit that people made up” were not just “made up” but developed and evolved organically. Gold is more valuable than iron because it is rarer and for millennia a was the best material to serve as a standard for exchange due to objective chemical properties. Laws, folkways, mores, political parties, &c. all evolved over time and will continue to evolve. They were not just created ex nihilo for purposes of oppressing people, as Critical Race Theory posits.
“To effectively understand anything we have to understand its history and what necessitated its existence. Becoming a lawyer requires learning about legal theory and “‘Constitutional Law.’ A complete understanding of economics include the laws of supply and demand, why certain metals are considered ‘precious,’ or why paper money has value. But we can’t do that without critically interrogating who made these constructs and who benefitted from them.”
There are not “constructs” that were put together with the purpose of benefitting through them via systems of oppression. Supply and demand is not some creation to serve as a tool of oppression. This is far from a “complete understanding”, but rather its opposite. To “critically interrogat[e]” those who allegedly “made these construct” is nonsensical at best.
“One can’t understand the political, economic and social structure of America without understanding the Constitution. And it is impossible to understand the Constitution without acknowledging that it was devised by 39 white men, 25 of whom were slave owners. Therefore, any reasonable understanding of America begins with the critical examination of the impact of race and slavery on the political, economic and social structure of this country.”
It is not reasonable to assume that racial oppression was the core motivation for the Constitution. Critical Race Theory holds axiomatically that everything is society is constructed to serve oppressive system structures, which means it assumes the Constitution was racist with racist intent and proves it by literally ignoring or disregarding as irrelevant minutiae, anything and every other potential consideration.
Was slavery a topic at the Constitutional Convention? Yes, which is why we have the ⅗ compromise. But was the Constitution all about that? Of course not, as Madison’s records of the Constitutional Convention clearly attest.
“That’s what Critical Race Theory does.”
IOW, it literally begs the question.
“How does CRT do that?
“It begins with the acknowledgment that the American society’s foundational structure serves the needs of the dominant society. Because this structure benefits the members of the dominant society, they are resistant to eradicating or changing it, and this resistance makes this structural inequality ordinary.”
Again, they conflate “culture” and “race” when it comes to society. It is a matter of historical record that American society has, as its roots, colonies populated by the English. It is also a matter of historical record that non-Anglo-Saxons (who were considered just as much “the other” as Blacks) assimilated into the broader American society whose culture transcended ethnic and racial bounds. The “foundational structure” of America was at its root derived from those English colonists, the Common Law, and the rights associated therewith—including slavery being an alien import that conflicted with the true foundational structure of America, and a contradiction that lost to that foundational structure. This foundational structure does not serve; it reflects.
“Critical Race Theory also insists that a neutral, ‘color-blind’ policy is not the way to eliminate America’s racial caste system. And, unlike many other social theories, CRT is an activist movement, which means it doesn’t just seek to understand racial hierarchies, it also seeks to eliminate them.”
Didn’t someone once say that “separate is inherently unequal”? There is no “caste system” in modern America, and the existence of any such social differentiation is antithetical to that “foundational structure” of America. To stop discriminating against someone because of their race you have to stop discriminating against people because of their race. What Critical Race Theory does is highlight racial differences as the be all end all of society and that a corrective “caste system” is needed to counter the past and allegedly current “caste system”. Racial hierarchies are a core part of the Critical Race Theory ideology.
“How would CRT eliminate that? By blaming white people?
“This is the crazy part. It’s not about blaming anyone.”
Yet later on they explicitly say that. Any causal investigation of the various “racial sensitivity training” materials or “diversity, inclusion, and equity” schemes will demonstrate that they divide people into non-oppressed races and an oppressor race, who are blamed for all the problems brought up.
“Instead of the idiotic concept of colorblindness, CRT says that a comprehensive understanding of any aspect of American society requires an appreciation of the complex and intricate consequences of systemic inequality. And, according to CRT, this approach should inform policy decisions, legislation and every other element in society.”
Critical Race Theory is antithetical to a “comprehensive understanding”, and assumes racialization. In contrast a “colorblind” approach doesn’t actually exclude the possibility of race being a factor, but doesn’t assume that it is the be all end all and rather looks at all objective facts without the racial bias inherent in Critical Race Theory.
“Take something as simple as college admission, for instance. People who ‘don’t see color’ insist that we should only use neutral, merit-based metrics such as SAT scores and grades. However, Critical Race Theory acknowledges that SAT scores are influenced by socioeconomic status, access to resources and school quality. It suggests that colleges can’t accurately judge a student’s ability to succeed unless they consider the effects of the racial wealth gap, redlining, and race-based school inequality. Without this kind of holistic approach, admissions assessments will always favor white people.”
Except SAT scores are indeed a neutral way of assessing individuals in a way that does not prejudice results based on the race of the test taker. Standardized tests actually combat racism by taking racial bias, either overt or otherwise, out of consideration. Are SAT scores influenced by socioeconomic status? Even accepting that they are does not make them racist; it is Critical Race Theory that assumes it does because it sees a statistical difference and presumes that racial systems of oppression are the major, if not only, factor for creating that statistical difference. SAT scores, that are discriminatory on the basis of socioeconomic status, are not racist against an upper middle class Black student and beneficial to a White kid who is raised by a dirt poor grandparent because his whore of a mother got herself shot by police after a meth rampage. This believe of race being the only significant factor ignores that all individuals, regardless of race, have agency and can indeed improve their own lot in life or at least that of their children. If society and SAT scores really were paragons of White Supremacy, then why are so many non-White ethnic groups doing better than Whites when it comes to the SAT, college admission, income levels, crime statistics, &c.?
“CRT doesn’t just say this is racist, it explains why these kinds of race-neutral assessments are bad at assessing things.”
Critical Race Theory assumes it is racist and them comes up with excuses to justify its own bigoted presumption.
“What’s wrong with that?
“Remember all that stuff I said the ‘material needs of the dominant society?’ Well, ‘dominant society’ means ‘white people.’ And when I talked about ‘racial hierarchies,’ that meant ‘racism.’ So, according to Critical Race Theory, not only is racism an ordinary social construct that benefits white people, but it is so ordinary that white people can easily pretend it doesn’t exist. Furthermore, white people who refuse to acknowledge and dismantle this unremarkable, racist status quo are complicit in racism because, again, they are the beneficiaries of racism.”
The “dominant society” is the American culture to which non-White people are part and parcel of. If “racial hierarchies” means “racism” then there are none more racist in modern America that Critical Race Theory adherents.
But we also see where their talk of “colorblindness” comes into play. It is not that one is blind to actual racial inequalities or discrimination, but that they don’t view everything through a distorted lens of race that places White people on the “evil” end of the spectrum. It preys upon the fundamentally American distaste of unfairness and tells White people that they must oppose this system of oppression even if they can’t see the system of oppression because systems of oppression have nothing to do with objective reality but only narratives of oppression and why wouldn’t any moral fellow or fellowette work against such dastardly unfairness. Of course, all this presumes that their presumptions are objectively true…
“But, because white people believe racism means screaming the n-word or burning crosses on lawns, the idea that someone can be racist by doing absolutely nothing is very triggering. Let’s use our previous example of the college admissions system.”
Maybe because the most effective tool against racism is people not being racist?
“White people’s kids are more likely to get into college using a racist admissions system. But the system has been around so long that it has become ordinary. So ordinary, in fact, that we actually think SAT scores mean shit. And white people uphold the racist college admissions system—not because they don’t want Black kids to go to college—because they don’t want to change admission policies that benefit white kids.”
There we go with those statistical differences. That didn’t stop non-White groups from being “oppressed” to being statistically better and more statistically privileged than Whites (statistically, of course) while still embracing American culture and values. It’s almost as if American culture and values aren’t very good as creating “systems of oppression” and “racial heirarchies” as Critical Race Theory is capable of doing…
“Is that why they hate Critical Race Theory?
“Nah. They don’t know what it is.”
“Whenever words ;white people’ or ‘racism’ are even whispered, Caucasian Americans lose their ability to hear anything else.”
Isn’t the entire point of Critical Race Theory to focus on that and nothing else?
“If America is indeed the greatest country in the world, then any criticism of their beloved nation is considered a personal attack—especially if the criticism comes from someone who is not white.
“They are fine with moving toward a ‘more perfect union’ or the charge to ‘make America great again.’ But an entire field of Black scholarship based on the idea that their sweet land of liberty is inherently racist is too much for them to handle.”
Maybe because those attacks are made personal and are manifestly false?
“However, if someone is complicit in upholding a racist policy—for whatever reason—then they are complicit in racism. And if an entire country’s resistance to change—for whatever reason —creates more racism, then ‘racist’ is the only way to accurately describe that society.”
The only thing creating “more racism” is Critical Race Theory and its broader pseudo-intellectual ilk.
“If they don’t know what it is, then how can they criticize it?
“Have you met white people?
“When has not knowing stuff ever stopped them from criticizing anything?”
Notice the prejudice and bigotry.
“They still think Colin Kaepernick was protesting the anthem, the military and the flag.”
Spoiler: He was.
“They believe Black Lives Matter means white lives don’t.”
Yet how many times was it said that “all lives can’t matter until Black lives do?”
“There aren’t any relevant criticisms other than they don’t like the word ‘racism’ and ‘white people’ anywhere near each other.”
Aside from Kafkatrapping, they employ childish taunting.
“People like Ron DeSantis and Tom Cotton call it ‘cultural Marxism,’ which is a historical dog whistle thrown at the civil rights movement, the Black Power movement and even the anti-lynching movement after World War I. They also criticize CRT’s basic use of personal narratives, insisting that a real academic analysis can’t be based on individually subjective stories.”
By “dog whistle” they mean accurately identifying the underlying believe system of Critical Race Theory (and Critical Theory approach in general) as the application of Marx’s “base/superstructure” to race with Whites being the bourgeoisie and the “BIPOC” the proletariat, consistent with the writings from the members of the Frankfurt School?
“Why wouldn’t that be a valid criticism?
“Well, aren’t most social constructs centered in narrative structures? In law school, they refer to these individual stories as ‘legal precedent.’ In psychology, examining a personal story is called ‘psychoanalysis.’ In history, they call it…well, history. Narratives are the basis for every religious, political or social institution.”
Legal precedents are not “narratives”, they are ruling based on the facts and determinations of the past.
Psychoanalysis does not mean elevating one’s narrative over scientific reality.
History is an objective look back as the past to best objectively determine historical facts.
Objective reality is the basis for… objective reality.
“I wish there was a better example of an institution or document built around a singular narrative. It would change the entire constitution of this argument—but sadly, I can’t do it.
“Jesus Christ, I wish I could think of one! That would be biblical!”
Spoiler: The Constitution isn’t a “narrative”, but an objective (give or take a Warren court decision) statement of overarching governing rules for the Federal government with limited limitations on the state governments.
As for the Bible, enjoy your smiting?
“Why do they say Critical Race Theory is not what Martin Luther King Jr. would have wanted?
“You mean the Martin Luther King Jr. who conservatives also called divisive, race-baiting, anti-American and Marxist? The one whose work CRT is partially built upon? The King whose words the founders of Critical Race Theory warned would be ‘co-opted by rampant, in-your-face conservatism?’ The MLK whose “content of their character” white people love to quote?
“Martin Luther King Jr. literally encapsulated CRT by saying:
“‘In their relations with Negroes, white people discovered that they had rejected the very center of their own ethical professions. They could not face the triumph of their lesser instincts and simultaneously have peace within. And so, to gain it, they rationalized—insisting that the unfortunate Negro, being less than human, deserved and even enjoyed second class status.
“‘They argued that his inferior social, economic and political position was good for him. He was incapable of advancing beyond a fixed position and would therefore be happier if encouraged not to attempt the impossible. He is subjugated by a superior people with an advanced way of life. The “master race” will be able to civilize him to a limited degree, if only he will be true to his inferior nature and stay in his place.
“‘White men soon came to forget that the Southern social culture and all its institutions had been organized to perpetuate this rationalization. They observed a caste system and quickly were conditioned to believe that its social results, which they had created, actually reflected the Negro’s innate and true nature.’
“I have no idea.”
First of all, the quote isn’t from the linked text. The speech they linked to happened to include this key quote: “I have seen many white people who sincerely oppose segregation and discimination [sic], but they never took a rea[l] stand against it because of fear of standing alone.”
That quote is consistent with those who would stand up against Critical Race Theory, not with it.
The quote is actually from a different speech. The quote was in reference to some social views in the South before the Civil Rights movement that treated the races unequally and presumed that unequal treatment was normal and just. They key quote, which stands in contrast to the misconstruction of the isolated section they quoted is a call against the core tenets of Critical Race Theory, which involves new discrimination to fix past discrimination in the name of “equity”, but rather an integrated and equal sosicety where race is irrelevant: “We do not wish to triumph over the white community. That would only result in transferring those now on the bottom to the top. But, if we can live up to nonviolence in thought and deed, there will emerge an interracial society based on freedom for all.”
“Will white people ever accept Critical Race Theory?
“Yes, one day I hope that Critical Race Theory will be totally disproven.
“Well, history cannot be erased. Truth can never become fiction. But there is a way for white people to disprove this notion.
“Derrick Bell, who is considered to be the father of Critical Race Theory, notes that the people who benefit from racism have little incentive to eradicate it. Or, as Martin Luther King Jr. said: ;We must also realize that privileged groups never give up their privileges voluntarily.’
“So, if white people stopped being racist, then the whole thing falls apart!
“From your lips to God’s ears.”
Which ignores that fact the Critical Race Theory is based on Whites being “racists”, and that Whites not being racist can not, and would not, eliminate such an axiomatic worldview which must dominate.
A worldview can not exist to be destructive of itself.
To it’s own nature, it’ll be true.