What the hysteria over critical race theory is really all about

[wbrocks67]

There is a habit nowadays on the left of claiming that all criticism of their ideas must come from a place of bigotry. There seems to be a total inability to see how people who are not 1) brainwashed, 2) racist or 3) acting in bad faith can disagree with them. As some have mentioned on the UK thread, for example, many seem to positively hate their voting base - or what they wish were their voting base ("these people should be our natural voters").

And there is a habit nowadays on the right of claiming that there is no possible way that any of their ideas or opinions could be coming from a place of bigotry... when they do.

[lfromnj]

Only a couple of minutes I happened to come across this opinion piece by a retired Army colonel and former NSC staffer with regards to "critical race theory in the military".

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/general-milley-critical-race-theory-why-gop-s-woke-military-ncna1272558

The most interesting points made in that article IMO:

- Critical race theory is defined by the author as "A relatively amorphous term often referring to the academic study of race and anti-racist movements, CRT has become a catch-all cause celebre for culture war conservatives."

- While the Chairman of Joint Chiefs denied the charge made by congressional Republicans that "critical race theory" is taught at military academies, he also stressed that the military teaches about race, racism, "white rage" and how this led to the events of January 6 and that this is an important thing to do so. The article doesn't really adress the question how this not supposed to be critical race theory, but maybe Gen. Milley was just being careful and tried to avoid using what has by now become a politically charged right-wing buzzword.

- The author of the opinion piece points out that Karl Marx, Lenin, Malcolm X, and Eldridge Cleaver were taught and read at military academies during the Cold War period. The former two to better understand the Soviet opponent, the latter two to understand what's going on in your own country. He also implies that had Republicans been behaving back then the way they are doing today this would have been decried and "investigated" as a form of "Communist indoctrination" at U.S. military academies.

The question is if the military is teaching ABOUT CRT which is fine or if they are teaching CRT especially with little to no counter points.

[MarkD]

I find it fascinating that the Vox.com article that is linked in the OP candidly made the statement that Critical Race Theory scholars acknowledge their theory "is 'interdisciplinary and eclectic,' meaning it borrowed from a number of traditions like feminism, Marxism, and critical legal theory. The thinkers argued that a combination of these ideas only strengthened their framework."

Marxism.

You can't admit something like that but try to claim that opposition to CRT is solely based on resisting any progress in racial justice.

I also note the connection between Critical Race Theory and the Critical Legal Studies movement. I first read about Critical Legal Studies about thirty years ago in Robert Bork's "The Tempting of America," and a few years later, I read about CLS as well in a book "The Federal Courts, Politics, and the Rule of Law," by John C. Hughes. Bork described CLS as "a nihilistic neo-Marxist movement that views all law as oppressive and political. It is nihilistic because its members typically demand the destruction of current doctrine and hierarchies as illegitimate, but they acknowledge that they have no notion of what is to replace this society. ... I once attended a lecture by one of its leading ... proponents, which he concluded by saying: 'The first year of law school is designed to destroy the minds of the students. It does that by asking them to reconcile the irreconcilable and to justify and obviously unjust society.' " Hughes said that CLS law professors are "iconoclastic ... with an added dose of radical egalitarian politics." Critical Legal Studies scholars commonly reject the traditional view of law as being dedicated to objectivity and they claim that said tradition is actually political.

I am suspicious about Critical Race Theory because it often overlooks and/or ignores the progress toward racial justice that has already been made. Look at this cartoon posted on Facebook by proponents of CRT:
https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=1218304488598377&set=a.119643188464518
I reposted the cartoon and pointed out that more than 20 years after the G.I. Bill was passed, Congress passed the Fair Housing Act to prohibit racially discriminatory housing practices like the one discussed in that cartoon. CRT often ignores legislation like that, and treats the phenomenon of racial discrimination as if nothing has ever been done to try to end it.

Just like Bork said that CLS scholars admit that they "have no notion of what is to replace this society," proponents of CRT offer tons of destructive criticism of our society, but they have no positive suggestions for what we can do about it. CRT offers so much destructive criticism, and no positive suggestions for what to do about it, that it can lead everyone into utterly nihilistic, defeatist, and pessimistic thoughts. CRT portrays racism is too powerful to ever be conquered.

[Calthrina950]

There is a habit nowadays on the left of claiming that all criticism of their ideas must come from a place of bigotry. There seems to be a total inability to see how people who are not 1) brainwashed, 2) racist or 3) acting in bad faith can disagree with them. As some have mentioned on the UK thread, for example, many seem to positively hate their voting base - or what they wish were their voting base ("these people should be our natural voters").

And there is a habit nowadays on the right of claiming that there is no possible way that any of their ideas or opinions could be coming from a place of bigotry... when they do.

Aren't you affirming what Geoffrey Howe is saying, though? There is a not insubstantial amount of racism and bigotry among people on the right, but to say that this applies to all people on the right, or to everything that those on the right say, is wrong. Liberal ideas and policies aren't flawless, and should be subject to worthy criticism.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Only a couple of minutes I happened to come across this opinion piece by a retired Army colonel and former NSC staffer with regards to "critical race theory in the military".

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/general-milley-critical-race-theory-why-gop-s-woke-military-ncna1272558

The most interesting points made in that article IMO:

- Critical race theory is defined by the author as "A relatively amorphous term often referring to the academic study of race and anti-racist movements, CRT has become a catch-all cause celebre for culture war conservatives."

- While the Chairman of Joint Chiefs denied the charge made by congressional Republicans that "critical race theory" is taught at military academies, he also stressed that the military teaches about race, racism, "white rage" and how this led to the events of January 6 and that this is an important thing to do so. The article doesn't really adress the question how this not supposed to be critical race theory, but maybe Gen. Milley was just being careful and tried to avoid using what has by now become a politically charged right-wing buzzword.

- The author of the opinion piece points out that Karl Marx, Lenin, Malcolm X, and Eldridge Cleaver were taught and read at military academies during the Cold War period. The former two to better understand the Soviet opponent, the latter two to understand what's going on in your own country. He also implies that had Republicans been behaving back then the way they are doing today this would have been decried and "investigated" as a form of "Communist indoctrination" at U.S. military academies.

The question is if the military is teaching ABOUT CRT which is fine or if they are teaching CRT especially with little to no counter points.

It is of course your prerogative to believe that the United States military possibly teaches full-on unrestrained critical race theory without any counter points, critical assessement or discussion of it. And it is my prerogative to regard such a believe as a little bit... "out there". But hey, some of you guys over there are getting all giddy over some UFO reports, so whatever floats your boat, I guess.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There is a habit nowadays on the left of claiming that all criticism of their ideas must come from a place of bigotry. There seems to be a total inability to see how people who are not 1) brainwashed, 2) racist or 3) acting in bad faith can disagree with them. As some have mentioned on the UK thread, for example, many seem to positively hate their voting base - or what they wish were their voting base ("these people should be our natural voters").

And there is a habit nowadays on the right of claiming that there is no possible way that any of their ideas or opinions could be coming from a place of bigotry... when they do.

Aren't you affirming what Geoffrey Howe is saying, though? There is a not insubstantial amount of racism and bigotry among people on the right, but to say that this applies to all people on the right, or to everything that those on the right say, is wrong. Liberal ideas and policies aren't flawless, and should be subject to worthy criticism.

We have reached the stage where people are right or wrong based on what side they are on.

You criticize Red China - racist
You criticize CRT - racist
You criticize Trump - You Don't Like Trump and your political coffin is waiting at the door
You criticize the Republican establishment - You a Trumpist

Do all four but neglect to do one in the past week and you obviously don't care about it.

Its basically down to a scene from the 73 Dillinger movie when Pretty Boy Floyd, on the run from the FBI, approaches an old farmer and his wife. The wife says, "You're one of them, ain't ya". At the risk of spoilers, lets just say the scene ends not with "restraint of the law enforcement types" when they arrive.

I am sick of being in time and place where all anyone cares about is "You're one of them, ain't ya", followed by a hail of machine gun fire. Its why I refused to take Green Line's crap a couple weeks back. Anyone tries to put me in a box, anytime, anywhere, I will tell them where they can shove it sideways.

That's how this will eventually end.

[pbrower2a]

To make sure anti American Propaganda isnt taught in public schools

The most blatant anti-American propaganda is racism that holds that people with different, but equally-valid, traditions, do not have an equal right to live and to maintain their traditions. When I heard neo-Nazis shout "Jews will not replace us!", all that I could think is that I wish that Jews could replace them.

We do not so much have a potential conflict between tradition and modernity as we have between various traditions that do not always mix well. Many people pick and choose between elements of different cultural traditions, as often appears in interior design, music, and cuisine.

I don't fully understand what "critical race theory is". Wikipedia has nothing on it except for a link to a book that discusses it in Canadian law.    Maybe it is a phantom that people who use it to mean whatever they dislike about efforts to promote ethnic equity.   

[Person Man]

I find it fascinating that the Vox.com article that is linked in the OP candidly made the statement that Critical Race Theory scholars acknowledge their theory "is 'interdisciplinary and eclectic,' meaning it borrowed from a number of traditions like feminism, Marxism, and critical legal theory. The thinkers argued that a combination of these ideas only strengthened their framework."

Marxism.

You can't admit something like that but try to claim that opposition to CRT is solely based on resisting any progress in racial justice.

I also note the connection between Critical Race Theory and the Critical Legal Studies movement. I first read about Critical Legal Studies about thirty years ago in Robert Bork's "The Tempting of America," and a few years later, I read about CLS as well in a book "The Federal Courts, Politics, and the Rule of Law," by John C. Hughes. Bork described CLS as "a nihilistic neo-Marxist movement that views all law as oppressive and political. It is nihilistic because its members typically demand the destruction of current doctrine and hierarchies as illegitimate, but they acknowledge that they have no notion of what is to replace this society. ... I once attended a lecture by one of its leading ... proponents, which he concluded by saying: 'The first year of law school is designed to destroy the minds of the students. It does that by asking them to reconcile the irreconcilable and to justify and obviously unjust society.' " Hughes said that CLS law professors are "iconoclastic ... with an added dose of radical egalitarian politics." Critical Legal Studies scholars commonly reject the traditional view of law as being dedicated to objectivity and they claim that said tradition is actually political.

I am suspicious about Critical Race Theory because it often overlooks and/or ignores the progress toward racial justice that has already been made. Look at this cartoon posted on Facebook by proponents of CRT:
https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=1218304488598377&set=a.119643188464518
I reposted the cartoon and pointed out that more than 20 years after the G.I. Bill was passed, Congress passed the Fair Housing Act to prohibit racially discriminatory housing practices like the one discussed in that cartoon. CRT often ignores legislation like that, and treats the phenomenon of racial discrimination as if nothing has ever been done to try to end it.

Just like Bork said that CLS scholars admit that they "have no notion of what is to replace this society," proponents of CRT offer tons of destructive criticism of our society, but they have no positive suggestions for what we can do about it. CRT offers so much destructive criticism, and no positive suggestions for what to do about it, that it can lead everyone into utterly nihilistic, defeatist, and pessimistic thoughts. CRT portrays racism is too powerful to ever be conquered.

I think the fact that it doesn't really give us a way forward is the main reason why I don't consider myself a proponent of CRT. Just because I'm not a proponent doesn't mean I think it's this conspiracy against our nation that should be illegal for teachers to expose minors to.