Critical Race Theory: definitions and concerns

[Nakosis]

That only works when your racial identity never impacts your life at any point, a position which both CRT proponents and otherwise non-CRT affiliated people of color would likely take umbrage at.

Sure, it 's just my theory that holding onto racial identities has no practical benefit.

It presupposes that racism is bad, and that a society without racism is preferable - two points that socialists, liberals and conservatives all ostensibly agree with. Do you disagree?

I disagree of the need to presuppose that racism is bad. We can agree it is bad without CRT.

 

[icehorse]

CRT is an academic movement first and foremost, it doesn't really need a "brand manager" because it's not entering any market and isn't trying to sell you anything.

It essentially consists of a bunch of university professors and grad students in social science and humanities fields discussing how to approach the phenomenon of American race relations in their academic work, and what proposals one could sensibly draw from that work.

So... you disagree with the OP?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

CRT is an academic movement first and foremost, it doesn't really need a "brand manager" because it's not entering any market and isn't trying to sell you anything.

It essentially consists of a bunch of university professors and grad students in social science and humanities fields discussing how to approach the phenomenon of American race relations in their academic work, and what proposals one could sensibly draw from that work.

And law school. And, look...in a university setting, exploring these type of things is appropriate. But I disagree with you around the brand management aspects of this. Whether it wants to or not, CRT has entered politics.

This article is a fair representation of what I mean, at a simple level.

The Conversation About Critical Race Theory In Schools Is Over.

My background is education. I say that not to suggest I have any expertise on CRT...I don't. But I've seen academic theories taught in university to teaching students (who can be a little less...err...intellectually robust than they think in my experience) then get mangled and parties out in ridiculous fashion.

And you have a whole cottage industry built up around exaggerating and highlighting when this happens.

Fairly or unfairly...and I tend to think unfairly...this theory now has people trying to profit off it.

 

[Kooky]

Sure, it 's just my theory that holding onto racial identities has no practical benefit.

Sure, subsuming oneself under one of the dominant mainstream identities and erasing concurrent identities may occasionally bring practical benefits if one holds traits considered valuable and desirable inside that mainstream.

I disagree of the need to presuppose that racism is bad. We can agree it is bad without CRT.

Sure we can. But what does that mean in practice?

 

[Kooky]

And law school. And, look...in a university setting, exploring these type of things is appropriate. But I disagree with you around the brand management aspects of this. Whether it wants to or not, CRT has entered politics.

This article is a fair representation of what I mean, at a simple level.

The Conversation About Critical Race Theory In Schools Is Over.

My background is education. I say that not to suggest I have any expertise on CRT...I don't. But I've seen academic theories taught in university to teaching students (who can be a little less...err...intellectually robust than they think in my experience) then get mangled and parties out in ridiculous fashion.

And you have a whole cottage industry built up around exaggerating and highlighting when this happens.

Fairly or unfairly...and I tend to think unfairly...this theory now has people trying to profit off it.

If you've already seen how this works, then you should know full well that no amount of "brand management" is going to salvage the image of a right-wing bogeyman. And that's the entire point of this kind of panic discourse to begin with.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Sure, it 's just my theory that holding onto racial identities has no practical benefit.

Maybe someday. But the problem is that the racial identities forced upon marginalized groups still impacts them. Consider the idea that color-blindness ignores something that is very physically evident; it's one thing if it's treated like hair color and one's presuppositions about it are mostly innocuous. But when there are still obvious impacts of skin color and your status as a citizen, color blindness leads to the blindness of discrimination against those of different skin tones (as stupid as that type of discrimination is).

 

[Lain]

Hmmmm...slight tangent, but bear with me.

In my formative years, I would have self-identified as egalitarian in matters of gender. Now I'd be more likely to describe myself as feminist (if of the milder variety, and possibly not accepted as such by some feminists).

The goal, to my mind, remains an egalitarian society. But I think some more direct action is required to promote that. So...my ideal end state remains. My method to get there has developed.

What I have struggled with a little around CRT is understanding what the ideal end state is. Much like I can't subscribe to all theories of feminism, despite being feminist, I can't subscribe to all theories around race. My ideal end state remains egalitarian.

Is ignoring disparity in racial issues the best way to get there? No...not in my opinion. Is seeing racial consciousness as the single most pressing need of our society the best way to get there? No...not in my opinion. The truth lies between. If you think CRT is that sensible path, then I'm open to convincing, but it needs a new brand manager if nothing else.

Did defund the police make sense? Sure...on some levels. But I'm a pragmatist. The actual impact of something is important, beyond the theoretical or academic impact.

Honestly I have no idea how one would get to such a society with CRT, and this for two reasons.

1) My ideal is a just society, where all receive what they are owed at least. This is to me (as I understand the terms) not egalitarian and not equal, for different groups would be given things other groups are not given, based on what people are owed, so differences in treatment would be baked in to all levels of the society.

2) My learning about CRT and use of ideas from it comes within the unique context of my life. I will have perhaps a generation and a half (60 years) to be politically active in my life, I accept this. I will never see a just society on this Earth, I accept that. The USA is fundamentally racist and always will be as long as I live, I accept that. The majority of it's citizens are racist towards my group and there are no friends, I accept that also, and such will remain even at my death. So my use of it all is in the context of only this: with my fragment of existence how can I better my group even slightly?

I do not even begin to reach as far as some of the theorists mentioned in the OP video, who discuss ending all oppression through these means and others. Neither do I think that in the limited context in which I do use and learn about CRT it is the most important thing (race-consciousness or anything), and naturally I would not as a Christian. But that is my limit and use of it.

For that I think it can be useful, insofar as it encourages racial consciousness among those of my group with which I speak and changes their behavior to be more positive in even limited and myopic ways towards one another (such as hiring one another for jobs, monetary support, restructuring family life to be more connected, and so on). Because it achieves at least that much I consider it worthwhile and frankly I think: "I won." I think so because that was my goal in the first place.

So I do not know how it could achieve that kind of society for you, not only because that kind of society isn't my ideal, but also because my use of CRT is limited to my own specific life and a very minor goal of bettering my race slightly before I die.

 

[Nakosis]

Sure we can. But what does that mean in practice?

It means CRT is an unproven theory. So adopting it is no guarantee of a society without racism.

One can adopt it, not adopt it, or adopt something else without prejudice.

 

[Kooky]

It means CRT is an unproven theory. So adopting it is no guarantee of a society without racism.

You are not "adopting" a child here. There is no reason your institutions can't abandon a theory when it doesn't prove useful in achieving its purpoted goals.

One can adopt it, not adopt it, or adopt something else without prejudice.

What other academic theory would you suggest employing in order to combat racism?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

If you've already seen how this works, then you should know full well that no amount of "brand management" is going to salvage the image of a right-wing bogeyman. And that's the entire point of this kind of panic discourse to begin with.

I think the left has to find a way to look like the calm, rational ones in these arguments. They haven't done a great job of that at times. The right can build their bogeymen, but they're encouraged to do so by the relative success this tactic has afforded them.

I'd be distancing myself strongly from 'CRT' and calling it out clearly as a discussion point for intellectuals. I'd be positioning myself as an advocate for American History, and for seeking to promote a better and more complete understanding of the shared past.

The right basically just takes little sound bytes, and attaches the crazy to it. They're not even hiding this tactic any more. I think there is a gap for a strong centre, centre-left voice and message, but whether factionalism within the left allows for it...I don't know.

 

[F1fan]

I see holding onto a racial identity as unnecessary. Generally better if you don't
CRT is a political ideology which unfortunately for liberals fits into the current conservative narrative which conservatives have taken advantage of.

It's a theory which means there is no need to accept any of it precepts. Just a theory of how one might make the world a better place. No guarantee that it would actually do this.

I've see people claim that it is a non-issue. Then ok, fine. Liberals ought to come out saying they have no interest in CRT. Anything else feeds into the narrative of the right.

The interest by liberals is pushing back on the right wing disinformation and propaganda. This whole issue is an example of what CRT teaches. It is how racism is so inherent in US society that many do not realize they are supporting racism and anti-equality.

By those on the right opposing CRT they can claim a sort of plausible deniability that it isn't really black people they oppose. But the criticisms are improper and inaccurate, and this has been pointed out. Yet the right doesn't;t care. They want to express a sort of superiority over the aims of CRT, and over the people who advocate against racism, most in this case are black people, and highly educated.

 

[Kooky]

I think the left has to find a way to look like the calm, rational ones in these arguments. They haven't done a great job of that at times.

First of all, I think we should abandon the notion that there is such a thing as a unified, monolithic, centrally controlled "left" that could even employ the kind of centralized, unified media messaging that terms such as "brand management" suggest.

Second of all, I would argue that the relative success of these arguments in America specifically (because these issues largely seem to be considered a major debate in the US, and almost nowhere else) hinges on the very real and long standing tendency of suburban middle class parents falling for moral panics and calculated hysteria campaigns like clockwork. (Or do we no longer remember the Satanic Panic created over literally nothing and a huge amount of fiction, or the drug scare which took an existing, though arguably minor, issue and blew it completely out of proportion?)

It also hinges on the continued resentment large portions of the American population harbor against colleges and their students and graduates, especially when these students and graduates display dangerously unconservative ideas. (Or do we no longer remember the hysteric media coverage over "political correctness" and the "death of free speech" on American campuses, over issues such as uninviting known hate speech peddlers or insisting that trans people be treated as people and deserving equal respect as the rest of us?)

I doubt either of these significant factors could be gosplaned away even if America had this centralized leftist politbureau a lot of talking points concerning the role of "the left" seem to assume. They are featurs of the US media landscape since at least the invention of national television on the continent, and in some ways even predate the existence of modern mass media.

 

[F1fan]

You are not "adopting" a child here. There is no reason your institutions can't abandon a theory when it doesn't prove useful in achieving its purpoted goals.


What other academic theory would you suggest employing in order to combat racism?

And it's not really a theory like you'd find in the social science. It is a set of arguments that are based on well formulated examples of racism, and ongoing effects of that racism even in present times.

 

[Nakosis]

Maybe someday. But the problem is that the racial identities forced upon marginalized groups still impacts them. Consider the idea that color-blindness ignores something that is very physically evident; it's one thing if it's treated like hair color and one's presuppositions about it are mostly innocuous. But when there are still obvious impacts of skin color and your status as a citizen, color blindness leads to the blindness of discrimination against those of different skin tones (as stupid as that type of discrimination is).

Generally the law provides protection against the kind of discrimination which impacts a person's life.. So if it does get to the point of impacting your life there exists legal remedies.

The interest by liberals is pushing back on the right wing disinformation and propaganda. This whole issue is an example of what CRT teaches. It is how racism is so inherent in US society that many do not realize they are supporting racism and anti-equality.

By those on the right opposing CRT they can claim a sort of plausible deniability that it isn't really black people they oppose. But the criticisms are improper and inaccurate, and this has been pointed out. Yet the right doesn't;t care. They want to express a sort of superiority over the aims of CRT, and over the people who advocate against racism, most in this case are black people, and highly educated.

I understand but I suspect this pushback is exactly what conservatives what. Keeps it in the news.

 

[Nakosis]

You are not "adopting" a child here. There is no reason your institutions can't abandon a theory when it doesn't prove useful in achieving its purpoted goals.

It's something for academics to discuss, not for the world to implement unproven.

What other academic theory would you suggest employing in order to combat racism?

No academic theories, just practical experience. Many non-White members of my family have been very successful assimilating into the American culture. Those that choose not to always have a harder time of it.

 

[F1fan]

I understand but I suspect this pushback is exactly what conservatives what. Keeps it in the news.

I think you are correct. It is a sort of political murder/suicide. The Republicans seem determined to sabotage democracy and any sort of honesty in discourse. They have no ideas to propose that appeals to the average citizens and can only be creative in causing damage.

 

[Aštra’el]

If we assume the playing field is not level (and we have to, I think we'd agree) what should be done about it?

The way I see it... there is no “should”. The problem here is not about society, but about the individual, and about that individual’s choices in life.

People have the option to self improve. People have the option find a mate, create families and to build a life for their children that was better than the life they were raised into. The path I respect most is not the one which involves screaming in the street and demanding “equity”, expecting equal outcome for all and the benefits of hard work without having done anything to earn it... but the path that involves making smart and healthy choices, embracing strong values, utilizing opportunities that are available to you, having discipline over your emotions and your behavior, having enough respect for the law that you do not end up in prison, working hard to earn a living to build a legacy for your family so that their lives become less of a struggle, and accepting that even if you don’t achieve the life you wish you had then you can at least give your kids a better chance to achieve their dreams than you had.

We are the product of many things... but most of all among them, our own choices.

 

[Leahpolitan_icecream]

At the bottom of this post is a link to a 21 minute video I'd encourage you to watch. I'll attempt to summarize some of the important ideas in the video here. First off, the video cites 6 books as being the essential foundation of CRT (titles and author lists summarized):

1 - CRT: The Key Writings, Crenshaw +
2 - How to be an Antiracist, Kendi
3 - CRT: an intro, Delgado and Stefancic
4 - Words that Wound, Matsuda +
5 - White Fragility, DiAngelo

6 - Traditional and Critical Theory, Horkheimer (older, foundational)

Throughout the video, important claims about CRT are cited with screenshots of pages from these books. This seems like a very sound approach to defining CRT.

== Key Ideas in CRT

1 - CRT began as a deep dissatisfaction with the civil rights discourse of the 60s and 70s. Two important values that came out of this period were:
- color-blindness, the idea that laws should apply equally to everyone
- racial integration, the idea that society should be a melting pot and that cultural exchange and power should be shared

CRT, believes these values are flawed. Instead, CRTists promote race consciousness, forming collectives without integrating into society. (A la Malcolm X)

2 - CRT's main analysis approach is to "deconstruct" and then "reconstruct" aspects of society. Once society has been deconstructed, CRT will attempt to construct a new social reality, and direct its operation.

As part of this process, CRT has determined that equality theory, legal reasoning, rationalism, and neutral constitutional law are to be undermined. As an example, CRT considers the academic values of:
- objectivity
- neutrality
- and balance,

to be "white values", and not universally held. And anyone - regardless of skin color - who values objectivity, neutrality, and balance is "white" in practice. Instead of these academic values, CRT promotes "authenticity", which means resisting integration into the "white world". In order to achieve this, CRT promotes subjectivity and political bias. Instead of evidence, CRT promotes personal story-telling, a.k.a. "lived experience".

3 - Racism is THE defining issue of our time. You can either be a racist or an antiracist. An antiracist makes fighting racism the most important societal issue. You CANNOT be non-racist. If you don't act like a racist, BUT you don't hold racism as the most important issue, you are a racist.

4- America is a regime of white supremacy. It's laws, educational system, politics and culture are all in support of white supremacy and must be undone. The replacement plan is not yet clear, but includes:

- making hate speech illegal
- voter redistricting to support race consciousness
- passing an antiracist constitutional amendment and creating a Department of AntiRacism that would oversee all law making.
- embedding CRT into all aspects of academia
- ending capitalism

==

Now one might argue that the video maker has cherry picked some of the most controversial ideas from these books. To that I would say, perhaps, but so what? If you think there is an alternate "CRT-lite", that might be great news, can you provide citations?

They can leave

 

[Kooky]

It's something for academics to discuss, not for the world to implement unproven.

Nope.

No academic theories, just practical experience.

Can you perhaps elaborate on what kind of "practical experience" is going to help implementing antiracist policies, exactly? So far this feels overly vague and not at all like a feasible grounding for actual policy that's going to be implemented by communities or institutions.

Many non-White members of my family have been very successful assimilating into the American culture. Those that choose not to always have a harder time of it.

It's always facile to blame people's misery on their own choices; a staggering portion of the world's population apparently "chose" to be poor and oppressed.

 

[Kooky]

The way I see it... there is no “should”. The problem here is not about society, but about the individual, and about that individual’s choices in life.

I'm curious, do you even believe that racism exists at all?