Critical Race Theory

[whatishappeningtome]

Recently republicans are constantly talking about "Critical Race Theory". It's been banned from being taught in Florida schools by the Republican state government whilst the rest of fox news rail against it and demonize it.

If you do a Youtube search trying to find a video explanation of what Critical Race Theory actually is, you'll likely come across dozens of Prager U and reactionary breakdown videos of CRT without actually finding a decent video explaining what it is!

You can read about it more here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory

In layman's terms- Critical Race Theory is a sociological theory which puts forward the idea that because modern American society was founded by white europeans as the dominant race, there is going to be an inherent biases in how society functions to favour white people. 

This is a deep issue as it ends up affecting how law is done (racial disparities in jail sentencing e.g.), how business is done (minorities statistically finding it harder to get bank loans e.g.) and in general minority groups being pressured into conforming to what "white" society deems as "good" and "right" (Native people discouraged from living how they choose to live and instead being forced to conform to society for example). 

So there's nothing new here. CRT is just an umbrella term for what a lot of people who advocate for social justice have been talking about for decades. It's also NOT about making white people feel guilty for existing, it's merely a perspectival analysis which helps us understand modern social issues better. 

Ahh the republican party, the good ol' party of free speech everyone!

[Epikur]

Here is a discussion about it with Destiny, Ajw and Riley
 

This is what google could offer critical to crt:

https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1238&context=cjlpp

Maybe crt may go in this direction:
 

 

Edited June 17, 2021 by Epikur

[whatishappeningtome]

Just found an additional interesting quote - 

Quote

Derrick A. Bell, Jr., considered the “Father of Critical Race Theory” (LadsonBillings, 2013), first presented the theory of interest convergence. Interest convergence is grounded on the premise that People of Color’s interest in achieving racial equality advances only when those interests “converge” with the interests of those in power (typically White, heterosexual, Christian, ablebodied males; Bell, 1980; Brown & Jackson, 2013; Taylor, 2009). Thus, People of Color in the United States make significant social, political, and economic progress when their interests align with those in power and those interests serve to benefit both groups.

 

[DocWatts]

I really don't see the Wisdom of getting drawn in to Culture Wars debates with Bad Faith actors on the Right over this issue, since all that CRT really is is a more accurate and honest account of American History than the propaganda that many Americans grew up with. This is because it takes seriously perspectives other than just that of the dominant group.

The way that the Right uses this issue to provide an emotionally charged distraction in lieu of an actual Policy Platform, is similar to how they pound thier chests about Cultural Marxism and Transgender kids participating in Sports. Useful for distracting thier Constituents from the fact that the Republican Party has openly embraced Authoritarian Plutocracy.

 

 

 

Edited June 17, 2021 by DocWatts

[Epikur]

1 minute ago, DocWatts said:

I really don't see the Wisdom of getting drawn in to Culture Wars debates with Bad Faith actors in the Right over this issue, since all that CRT really is is a more accurate and honest account of American History than the propaganda that many Americans grew up with, because it takes seriously perspectives other than just that of the dominant group, 

The way that the Right uses this issue to provide an emotionally charged distraction in lieu of an actual Policy Platform, is similar to how they pound thier chests about Cultural Marxism and Transgender kids participating in Sports.

 

 

 

Though also some liberals are critical about CRT
 

 

 

[DocWatts]

15 minutes ago, Epikur said:

Though also some liberals are critical about CRT
 

 

 

As long as the person you're engaging with isn't in denial over the reality of ongoing systemic racism in America, then at that point it just becomes a discussion over the particulars. Plenty of space to have Good Faith disagreements if that's the case, just like there's plenty of space to discuss the best approach for combating Climate Change.

The idea that racial injustice isn't an ongoing problem in America, like the view that Climate Change isn't real, isn't a view worth taking seriously or engaging with, no matter who it's coming from. Doing so only serves to gives a platform to Bad Faith actors and harm Public Discourse over these issues.

 

Edited June 17, 2021 by DocWatts

[Epikur]

7 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

As long as the person you're engaging with isn't in denial over the reality of ongoing systemic racism in America, then at that point it just becomes a discussion over the particulars. Plenty of space to have Good Faith disagreements if that's the case, just like there's plenty of space to discuss the best approach for combating Climate Change.

The idea that racial injustice isn't an ongoing problem in America, like the view that Climate Change isn't real, isn't a view worth taking seriously or engaging with, no matter who it's coming from. Doing so only serves to gives a platform to Bad Faith actors that harm Public Discourse over these issues.

 

Though who can decide what is bad faith? There is a lot of grey area. In collecting information sometimes you can use the strategy of steelmanning. That could look like agreeing with bad faith actors but could actually mean you work with their toughest arguments.

Otherwise you operate in an echo chamber where you use the ability to convince anyone outside. A discussion has to be sometimes uncomfortable to get something going.

The more one side is accusing the other groups of bad faith the other sides will do the same.



 

Edited June 17, 2021 by Epikur

[DocWatts]

33 minutes ago, Epikur said:

Though who can decide what is bad faith? There is a lot of grey area. In collecting information sometimes you can use the strategy of steelmanning. That could look like agreeing with bad faith actors but could actually mean you work with their toughest arguments.

Otherwise you operate in an echo chamber where you use the ability to convince anyone outside. A discussion has to be sometimes uncomfortable to get something going.

The more one side is accusing the other groups into bad faith. The other sides will do the same.

The thing is though that not every Issue has room for Good Faith disagreements as to whether its basic premise is credible or not.

Just like there's not an Honest way to argue that the Holocaust didn't happen, there's not really an Honest way to argue that Systemic Racism within the US doesn't exist. Of course that doesn't mean that every problem in the US is due to Racism, but to deny the bigger picture that Systemic Racism is still very much alive in the US is just factually incorrect.

In both cases there's such an overwhelming spectrum of evidence to support the basic premise that both the Holocaust and Systemic Racism within the US are Real, that it takes an act of Willful Ignorance to ignore or discredit the reality of either one.

Now within the basic premise, there's a ton of room for different perspectives as to why racial injustice continues to exist, and how to best address it. Marxists may have one answer. Liberals will have another. Libertarians will have a perspective different from both.

But the person sticking thier head in the sand and denying that there's even a problem to discuss is someone to be sidelined and ignored, because they're obstructing productive engagement with discourse around the topic.

Edited June 17, 2021 by DocWatts

[whatishappeningtome]

1 hour ago, DocWatts said:

I really don't see the Wisdom of getting drawn in to Culture Wars debates with Bad Faith actors on the Right over this issue, since all that CRT really is is a more accurate and honest account of American History than the propaganda that many Americans grew up with. This is because it takes seriously perspectives other than just that of the dominant group.

You're right. I don't want to start a stupid culture war debate. I'm studying to become a teacher in College at the moment and funnily enough am studying CRT as it relates to how we treat students. Just thought it was crazy that right as I was studying it, it gets banned in Florida. 

[DocWatts]

6 minutes ago, whatishappeningtome said:

You're right. I don't want to start a stupid culture war debate. I'm studying to become a teacher in College at the moment and funnily enough am studying CRT as it relates to how we treat students. Just thought it was crazy that right as I was studying it, it gets banned in Florida. 

That's great to hear that you're studying to become a Teacher.

In my own opinion, probably the best thing that people who want to educate people on the subject is to disassociate the History of Race Relations in America from the Critical Race Theory label, as all that it does is give ammunition to Bad Faith actors.

By dragging this subject in the muck of the Culture Wars, what the Right is hoping for is to portray a more historically accurate picture of Race Relations in America as just another instance of wacky and far fetched Left Wing Theory run amok.

[bejapuskas]

I mean I disagree with CRT that racism is systemic and not psychological, I think it is both. Sure, the system is racist and biased, but different people react differently to it. Sure, CRT can have the effect of telling people of colour that they are inherently lesser, because the system is so, and that is not at all nice. But I see a problem in white people getting offended by others speaking up for their rights, saying it's excessive, that it's narcissistic or greedy. That's just insane.

[whatishappeningtome]

7 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

By dragging this subject in the muck of the Culture Wars, what the Right is hoping for is to portray a more historically accurate picture of Race Relations in America as just another instance of wacky and far fetched Left Wing Theory run amok.

I get you, they are trying to take what is actually "historically accurate" and muddy the waters.

[bejapuskas]

But like what is currently being taught in school and how it is interpreted is not historically accurate, or do you think it is? 

[DocWatts]

@bejapuskas

Emphasis on the more part of 'more Historically accurate'.

It's less a matter of any one theory of Race Relations being 'correct', and more a matter of making sure that the systemic nature of Racial Injustice is taught at all. 

Hard to have a useful perspective on many of the social problems we face today if you're completely ignorant about how practices like Red Lining prevented Black Americans from being able to accumulate wealth, or the explicitly racist motivations behind the War On Drugs.

Consider something like Black Lives Matter, and how incomprehensible that movement will be to someone who mistakenly believes that all forms discrimination went away after the passage of the Civil Rights Act in the sixties.

Edited June 17, 2021 by DocWatts

[bejapuskas]

@DocWatts  Yeh, I understand, I don't know how things are in the US, but I agree with you.

[Arcangelo]

Cheryl I. Harris and Gloria Ladson-Billings describe a notion of whiteness as property, whereby whiteness is the ultimate property that whites alone can possess; valuable just like property. In this sense, from the critical race theory perspective, the white skin that some Americans possess is akin to owning a piece of property, in that it grants privileges to the owner that a renter (in this case, a person of color) would not be afforded.

Hehe! They are taking it too far.

 

A long, long time ago in my country I asked for a loan at the bank and they didn't ask my race.

In America if you ask for a loan, they ask your race. If that's not systemic racism I don't know what it is.