Critical Race Theory

[rturner76]

Critical Race Theory is a wedge strategy. It draws from Marxism. It is culturally divisive.

I'm glad to hear this news.

Is that because you support the racist policies of the past and think there is no need to examine how they effect people?

 

[rturner76]

I came here for all the liberal's viewpoints (it's not like there are many conservatives left) and thought that they would be knowledgeable on this subject...so I went for a quick answer as to why Trump would say what he said about it teaching to hate America and it was racist...but all I got was rhetoric and uninformed opinions.

So I thought that I would help you all out...
I went and read and understood what I read.
Apparently some of you didn't because you stated things diametrically opposed to what I had just read.

In truth upon reflection:
I'm kinda shocked at this theory...
It is completely racist. It's every bit as bad as any skinhead or white supremacists group. I can now understand why he condemned this ideology. It is hate speech. We fought WWII over this.
I don't think that the supporters of this really understand how this is lock step with Marxism and both Marxism and CRT are exactly the ideologies of Hitler. Adolf was quoted saying as much.

So you believe that slavery, Jim Crow, and the legal lynching of black people had no effect on society? Is it racist to want to change racist policies or have racist policies never existed in this country?

Example, you have mentioned Nazi Germany many times. Do you think in Germany, it would be relevant to study how Nazi policies affected society in Germany and what changes could be made to help ensure that equality is included in future policies so those of the Nazi era cannot be repeated? Or would studying the effects of Nazi policy on the German people be anti-Semitic?

Do you see how you are calling the desire to not repeat or include racist policies in the future racist?

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Why is it patently ridiculous? You neglected to provide the evidence for your assertion.

1. He didn't provide any evidence for his assertion either, so none was needed.

2. In general, arguing that something cannot exist because there are laws against it is ridiculous.

3. I did provide evidence. See post #43.

As for CRT, since the thread is about CRT, I assumed you had some point related to it. I was surprised that you did not. I expect the poster you replied to was making a point about CRT.

He was making a point peripherally related to CRT (that there is no racial element to the class divide in our country). I was challenging that assertion. Therefore, my post made no claims about CRT.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Your objection to my description is silly. The only reason you can understand how math and geometry can be used as tools is because you understand them better. If I had described math as "the study of quantity, structure, space, and change", then you would be similarly hard-pressed to come up with a concrete application.

It's a pretty good objection.

The Time article linked earlier had a decent example of how CRT can be applied. (going from memory) If, say, a particular health malady impacts POC at disproportionate rates, it would easy to assume that the problem lies in the bodies of those POC. It's possible that that explanation would be the correct one (e.g. sickle cell disease). But it's also possible that it's caused by some systemic problem that disproportionately impacts POC and manifests itself as this health malady. (e.g. negative impacts of elevated stress levels caused by being the direct victim of racist acts or by living in substandard conditions created and/or reinforced by racist policies). In the latter case, the solution is not found in some new medication or gene therapy. The solution is found in correcting the social conditions causing those elevated stress levels.

Here's the rub....there's no way to know what causes "elevated stress levels" according to an entire race. People aren't some homogeneous group defined by racial characteristics. What may stress that out one black person....may not be the cause of stress in another.

What you're essentially saying is that CRT isn't good at identifying problems or solutions...it just makes assumptions about race.

 

[JohnDB]

I've been busy with making sausages from scratch today...

But as far as proof of Marxism and Adolf Hitler's Nazis...we could ask the man himself if he weren't dead...but in the meantime a quote from the man himself will work.

Adolf Hitler’s Debt to Karl Marx – Quadrant Online

In a November 1941 speech Hitler even declared: ‘Basically, National-Socialism and Marxism are the same’.[27] On another occasion, Hitler commented:

I have learned a great deal from Marxism as I do not hesitate to admit … The difference between [Marxists] and myself is that I have really put into practice what these peddlers and pen-pushers have timidly begun. The whole of National Socialism is based on it. Look at the workers’ sports clubs, the industrial cells, the mass demonstrations, the propaganda leaflets written specially for the comprehension of the masses: all these new methods of political struggle are essentially Marxist in origin. All I had to do is take over these methods and adapt them to our purpose.[28]

 

[iluvatar5150]

It's a pretty good objection.

No, it isn't. It's a strawman argument fueled by multiple layers of ignorance. I opened my post by saying that I was only barely able to give a description of CRT. He, who apparently knows even less about the subject than I do, took my very basic description as being more substantive than it clearly was (the strawman part), and compared it to something that he has a much better understanding of.

Here's the rub....there's no way to know what causes "elevated stress levels" according to an entire race. People aren't some homogeneous group defined by racial characteristics. What may stress that out one black person....may not be the cause of stress in another.

I was giving a hypothetical.

What you're essentially saying is that CRT isn't good at identifying problems or solutions...it just makes assumptions about race.

That isn't what I said at all.

 

[Ana the Ist]

What is put forward is learning what policies, laws, education philosophies have been inherently based on a white supremacist principles and applying that knowledge to develop more egalitarian policies, laws, and education in the future.
.

What's a "white supremacist principle"?

Explain what they are and give a couple of examples.

 

[Ana the Ist]

No, it isn't. It's a strawman argument fueled by multiple layers of ignorance. I opened my post by saying that I was only barely able to give a description of CRT. He, who apparently knows even less about the subject than I do, took my very basic description as being more substantive than it clearly was (the strawman part), and compared it to something that he has a much better understanding of.

It's a valid point.

The whole "theory" is nothing but the subjective opinion of racists. There's nothing to suggest that the theory is true or relevant. All it does is take a handful of examples and generalize about motives.

CRT would explain that our entire justice system is based on white supremacy. That ignores the potential explanation (even likely explanation) that our justice system is the result of principles which were intended to protect the rights of the individual.

 

[iluvatar5150]

It's a valid point.

A strawman is never a valid point.

The whole "theory" is nothing but the subjective opinion of racists. There's nothing to suggest that the theory is true or relevant. All it does is take a handful of examples and generalize about motives.

CRT would explain that our entire justice system is based on white supremacy. That ignores the potential explanation (even likely explanation) that our justice system is the result of principles which were intended to protect the rights of the individual.

Since you seem to know so much about it, why don't you give us all a more thorough rundown of CRT, citing the pro-CRT sources that support your contentions?

 

[Pommer]

Not one iota of this is included in CRT. It is about policies and not people. Nowhere in CRT is there a call for whites to give up their possessions to blacks. That is a complete fabrication. What is put forward is learning what policies, laws, education philosophies have been inherently based on a white supremacist principles and applying that knowledge to develop more egalitarian policies, laws, and education in the future.

It has nothing to do with blaming working white people for all of life's problems. Except those who support those racist policies like our President and many of his followers who oppose any change to the idealist image they have of America and it's past policies..

From what I can see:
CRT is “a method to examine how racism affects the entirety of the system of law and of society”; and “let us have a discussion along these lines”.

Detractors seem to be saying,
“Systemic-racism is a trope, the language of the laws in question are ‘race-neutral’, therefore the entire premise can be boiled down to “evil white people” and can be safely dismissed because we think that everything is fine (enough).”

Or did I totally miss it?

 

[Aldebaran]

Time gave a good write up of CRT and how the president used....or misused it in the debate

"Critical race theory offers a way of seeing the world that helps people recognize the effects of historical racism in modern American life. The intellectual movement behind the idea was started by legal scholars as a way to examine how laws and systems uphold and perpetuate inequality for traditionally marginalized groups."
“Critical race theory ultimately is calling for a society that is egalitarian, a society that is just, and a society that is inclusive, and in order to get there, we have to name the barriers to achieving a society that is inclusive. Our government at the moment is essentially afraid of addressing our history of inequality and if we can’t address it, then we can’t change it.”

IOW, white people are supposed to be assumed to be racist and discriminated against as a form of social justice.

 

[JohnDB]

Then for CRT...
Bell himself is quoted as saying:

Racism lies at the center, not the periphery; in the permanent, not in the fleeting

Progress in American race relations is largely a mirage, obscuring the fact that whites continue, consciously or unconsciously to do all in their power to ensure their dominion and maintain control."

In other writings Bell argued that the framers of the Constitution chose the rewards of property over justice. With regard to the interest convergence, he maintains that "whites will promote racial advances for blacks only when they also promote white self-interest."

 

[Ana the Ist]

A strawman is never a valid point.

It's not a strawman.

Since you seem to know so much about it, why don't you give us all a more thorough rundown of CRT, citing the pro-CRT sources that support your contentions?

Yeah....let's start here, with one of the originators of CRT....

Derrick Bell - Wikipedia

Bell and other legal scholars began using the phrase "critical race theory" (CRT) in the 1970s as a takeoff on "critical legal theory", a branch of legal scholarship that challenges the validity of concepts such as rationality, objective truth, and judicial neutrality. Critical legal theory was itself a takeoff on critical theory, a philosophical framework with roots in Marxist thought.

Now, if you want, we can quote Bell...or others writing about Bell..to show that CRT is just subjective opinion.

If however, you agree that it's just subjective opinion ...we can move on to show its racist.

 

[Speedwell]

So CRT is bad because it singles out white people as the sole and irredeemable source of racism. OK, if that's your story you might as well stick to it. What I don't get is why it is necessary to link it to Marxism (and that notorious Marxist-Leninist state, Nazi Germany). What's the point?

 

[Ana the Ist]

What I don't get is why it is necessary to link it to Marxism (and that notorious Marxist-Leninist state, Nazi Germany). What's the point?

Regardless of any Nazi connection....it is linked to Marxism. It's philosophical foundation is postmodernism....and a bunch of Marxist philosophers.

Some people see that as important....I, for one, think it's a pretty garbage idea all on it's own merits. It's really no different from any other racist social theory like "great replacement theory" or any other psuedo intellectual trash propping up racist hate.

 

[Pathfinder627]

I was happier as a mixed race kid growing up in the 80s, who barely even talked about race. I had friends of all stripes. MLK Jr.'s Dream was realized within 20 years, at least in my neck of the woods. A place where we were all simply individuals and measured by our own merits. I pity any child who learns otherwise. It's going to be rough, both for the victims and perpetrators. This has injected new momentum in the cycle of violence. Not less.

 

[iluvatar5150]

It's not a strawman.




Yeah....let's start here, with one of the originators of CRT....

Derrick Bell - Wikipedia

Bell and other legal scholars began using the phrase "critical race theory" (CRT) in the 1970s as a takeoff on "critical legal theory", a branch of legal scholarship that challenges the validity of concepts such as rationality, objective truth, and judicial neutrality. Critical legal theory was itself a takeoff on critical theory, a philosophical framework with roots in Marxist thought.

Now, if you want, we can quote Bell...or others writing about Bell..to show that CRT is just subjective opinion.

If however, you agree that it's just subjective opinion ...we can move on to show its racist.

Don’t bother. It’s quite clear you’re not familiar enough with it to do anything beyond quote wikipedia back at me, which is the problem I have with most right-wing complaints about it - lots of people have opinions on it, but IME, few have any idea what they’re talking about.

 

[Pathfinder627]

Don’t bother. It’s quite clear you’re not familiar enough with it to do anything beyond quote wikipedia back at me, which is the problem I have with most right-wing complaints about it - lots of people have opinions on it, but IME, few have any idea what they’re talking about.

If that's the case, that would be your own fault then for adopting a philosophy so stupid that nobody understands it.

But it's not really complicated and they do understand. And it's not a stupid philosophy: It's evil.

 

[JohnDB]

Don’t bother. It’s quite clear you’re not familiar enough with it to do anything beyond quote wikipedia back at me, which is the problem I have with most right-wing complaints about it - lots of people have opinions on it, but IME, few have any idea what they’re talking about.

He is quoting the people who created CRT...the organization you claim to support...and that these framers of this ideology had goals that are as we have claimed.

But somehow we don't understand it?

IOW even though we find the definitive proof of the charges we have made by those who created the ideology it's not relevant?

Sorry, I'm not going to go with "whatever you say CRT is".

 

[iluvatar5150]

If that's the case, that would be your own fault then for adopting a philosophy so stupid that nobody understands it.

But it's no complicated and they do not understand. And it's not a stupid philosophy: It's evil.

1.) I haven’t adopted it.

2.) If anything is stupid, it’s your standard here. Your (or another poster’s) ignorance of a subject doesn’t mean the subject itself is stupid or that nobody understands it. Oncology and quantum physics are also difficult and complicated and understood by few people. Are those subjects also stupid? Or have you just not studied them enough to argue about them?

If you want to understand a subject, go do some homework.