The Political Hat

     One of the ways that Critical Race Theory is presented as a “legitimate” alternative is to say that it is just an alternative “that challenges the ability of conventional legal strategies to deliver social and economic justice and specifically calls for legal approaches that take into consideration race as a nexus of American life” and that it is just an innocent movement that “champions many of the same concerns as the civil rights movement but places those concerns within a broader economic and historical context” that “often elevates the equality principles of the Fourteenth Amendment above the liberty principles of the First Amendment.”

     Even with the rather dry tone it is clear that elevates race as the prime mover of all of society that can only be combated by diminishing civil liberties and thus by inequality under the law achieve equality in principle.

     It’s a strange “legal approach” that rejects the entire legal framework within which it seeks to work, much like a deadly virus within the human body.

     Even those who pretend Critical Race Theory was created by a handful of so-called “legal scholars” (e.g. Derrick Bell, Alan Freemen, and Richard Delgado) end up admitting to it having certain core tenets that are hard to disguise as anything but Marxist in framework. Tenets include:

“Some of the basic tenets of CRT rest on the belief that racism is a fundamental part of American society, not simply an aberration that can be easily corrected by law; that any given culture constructs its own social reality in its own self-interest, and in the United States this means that minorities’ interests are subservient to the system’s self-interest; and that the current system, built by and for white elites, will tolerate and encourage racial progress for minorities only if this promotes the majority’s self-interest.”

     Herein lies the core problem of Critical Race Theory: I presumes the primacy of aspect that the Critical Theory is applied to and further presumes that this primary aspect must have a foundation an oppressor/oppressed dynamic.

     In effect, it is an admission that Critical Race Theory is nothing more than an example of begging the question. It is often said by many of its proponents, and others on the Left, that “not seeing color” is to be “color blind” to racism that is all around, and that by mono manically focusing in on race can it be proved that that focused upon racial aspect is dominant and all other ignored aspects are at most subservient. To use a color analogy, it is like putting on a filter that excludes all but one wavelength of light to prove that that frequency is the dominant one and the only one that really matters, regardless of the truth of the full spectrum. Now that is true color blindness.

Continue reading →