Critical Race Theory

[Immanuel Can]

Recently there are a lot of hoo hahs of very aggressive promotion and strong resistance re Critical Race Theory

What I noted is this CRT is not the typical "racist" thing but a more complicated ideology.

What are your views [for or against] on Critical Race Theory?

"Critical Race Theory" is a broad category. But it's a real one. I think there's a review in Philosophy Now last issue of a major book on the subject that documents all the original sources with academic rigour.

CRT not just racist, but also sexist, heterosexual-despising, man-hating, anti-health (as in 'fat rights"), anti-national, anti-capitalist, anti-West, self-loathing, domineering, aggressive, hateful, collectivist, pseudo-intellectual and ideologically possessed.

Essentially, it's a desperate attempt to rescue some kind of Neo-Marxism from the ash heap of history, after Marxism's deplorable failures of the last century. It substitutes various "oppressed" categories for "the proletariat," and then tries to do the same moves as Marxism tried. It's really just divisive collectivism in polished up jackboots.

It really has no business being in academia, and certainly none in public education. It's political ambitions are broad and disastrous. It's heavily indoctrinatory, scientifically unsound and mostly absurdly ideological rather than scientific or intellectual. But it's around, and people are bowing at its shrine.

[mickthinks]

It's heavily indoctrinatory,...
... in other words, it's educational. Go figure!

... scientifically unsound ...
It's not particle physics or biochemistry—I'll give you that!

... and mostly absurdly ideological rather than scientific or intellectual.
No it isn't. You just disagree with some of its more controversial implications. So, it's you who is absurdly ideological rather than scientific or intellectual.

Just saying.

[RCSaunders]

This is my take:

CRT is a name for the combined attempts of sincere people to understand and address the problem.

The only people who have a problem are racists. If there were a problem it would be, "the combined attempts of sincere people," who are promoting racism. They are the ones who see human beings in terms of classes and categories and not as individuals.

If your are concerned about, "race," you are a racist.

[uwot]

CRT not just racist, but also sexist, heterosexual-despising, man-hating, anti-health (as in 'fat rights"), anti-national, anti-capitalist, anti-West, self-loathing, domineering, aggressive, hateful, collectivist, pseudo-intellectual and ideologically possessed.

It's just like watching Fox News on catch up two weeks after it originally aired. You really will buy whatever snake oil they're peddling this week, won't you Mr Can?

[RCSaunders]

The only people who EVER mention a person's 'colour' (or lack thereof) are rabid racists.

EXACTLY. Nothing is more racist than CRT.

It has NEVER come up in a conversation with ANYONE in my ENTIRE LIFE. Woke wankers are the rudest, most obnoxious people on the planet.

Absolutely. Race, or any or classifying of individuals (gender, ethnicity, physical characteristics) is simply ignorance.

[henry quirk]

73064B48-322B-48D8-9617-C0378C7C97A8.jpeg (71.88 KiB) Viewed 1500 times

[Immanuel Can]

It's heavily indoctrinatory,...
... in other words, it's educational.

If it were "educational," or if "education" meant "indoctrination," I'd have said that.

... scientifically unsound ...
It's not particle physics or biochemistry—I'll give you that!

It's not basket weaving either. It's not really up to much of anything.

... and mostly absurdly ideological rather than scientific or intellectual.
No it isn't. You just disagree with some of its more controversial implications.

No, actually. You should read some, so you'd know.

It rejects science, history and logic as "Western," "white" and "colonizing." And it eschews data. In fact, it lacks all disciplinary rigour. Its implications are insane, it's true; but one doesn't have to wait for them to appear to know that CRT is on frequently operating on the level of pure propaganda and ideological speculation. That's just how it does most of its business.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

There is something terribly wrong with you. Just saying...

Yeah, without a doubt, though that's the case for the majority of people posting on boards like this. It's a refuge for socially maladjusted people with various mental issues.

Some more obviously so than others. His use of capitals reeks of OCD.

Isn't it ironic though, that a philosophy site where there are actually quite a few intelligent people making intelligent comments, who are interested in thinking, would be somewhere that anyone would think attracted mentally ill people?
Yet on social media outlets like twitter and facebook, where imbecilic mobs and lunatics post their badly written, often single-sentence garbage, end up changing the world (and silencing the few actual thinkers on the planet).

[mickthinks]

If "education" meant "indoctrination," I'd have said that.

Of course there"s a difference. It's indoctrination when it's ideas you're politically opposed to. I get that you would prefer African Americans were educated into a sense that white people deserve better than them because whites are superior. I happen to oppose that view.

It rejects science, history and logic as "Western," "white" and "colonizing."
lol No it doesn't.

I'm not saying that no one says silly things like that. And certainly, some ideas put forward as science have been rejected by anti-racists as being unscientific myths arising out of colonialism and serving a white supremacist agenda. And rightly so.

It sounds like you've been educated about CRT by Tucker Carlson and Breitbar, Manny!

[Immanuel Can]

If "education" meant "indoctrination," I'd have said that.

Of course there"s a difference. It's indoctrination when it's ideas you're politically opposed to.

No, it's "indoctrination" when the ideas in question are not offered on the grounds of credible reasons, but are expected to win by way of things like evoking false guilt, ginning up pride, falsifying history, ignoring the data, and so on.

It rejects science, history and logic as "Western," "white" and "colonizing."
lol No it doesn't.

Yes, actually...it does. You need to read some of their writings. It's obvious you haven't.

[mickthinks]

No, it's "indoctrination" when the ideas in question are not offered on the grounds of credible reasons, but are expected to win by way of things like evoking false guilt, ginning up pride, falsifying history, ignoring the data, and so on.
lol Like I said, it's indoctrination when it's ideas you're politically opposed to.

You need to read some of their writings
Give me an example of the kind of thing that's so upset you. What "false guilt", "ginning up pride", "falsifying history", "ignoring the data"?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

If "education" meant "indoctrination," I'd have said that.

Of course there"s a difference. It's indoctrination when it's ideas you're politically opposed to. I get that you would prefer African Americans were educated into a sense that white people deserve better than them because whites are superior. I happen to oppose that view.

It rejects science, history and logic as "Western," "white" and "colonizing."
lol No it doesn't.

I'm not saying that no one says silly things like that. And certainly, some ideas put forward as science have been rejected by anti-racists as being unscientific myths arising out of colonialism and serving a white supremacist agenda. And rightly so.

It sounds like you've been educated about CRT by Tucker Carlson and Breitbar, Manny!

Where has he ever said anything that remotely resembles that? That was really a snivelly, disingenuous response, even by your standards.

[Immanuel Can]

No, it's "indoctrination" when the ideas in question are not offered on the grounds of credible reasons, but are expected to win by way of things like evoking false guilt, ginning up pride, falsifying history, ignoring the data, and so on.
lol Like I said, it's indoctrination when it's ideas you're politically opposed to.

You're not paying attention, and you're not thinking. You also clearly have no knowledge of this issue.

So I'm not going to bother.

[Veritas Aequitas]

This is my take:

• Throughout the Developed (Western,First-World, etc.) world, racial injustice is a big problem.
• There are those who want to address the problem. Broadly speaking, these are on "the Left".
• There are those who want to sweep the problem under the carpet and keep things the way they are. Broadly, these are on "the Right".
• Many people are in the middle and have little idea of what the f*ck is going on here. These are mostly well meaning white people.

• CRT is a name for the combined attempts of sincere people to understand and address the problem.
• The Left see CRT as good and necessary.
• The Right insist that CRT is unnecessary and devisive.
• The people in the middle don't know who to believe, but are naturally attracted to the "Why can't we just all get along?" pablum in which the anti-CRT message is inevitably packaged.

The video of George Floyd's encounter with Derek Chauvin was the moment when one of the main reasons why we can't all "just get along" became clear to anyone who has eyes to see and ears to hear.

Recently I've been bombarded with loads of videos on CRT from Youtube and I wondered what the fuss and f... CRT is about.

So I did some research, read a few books and listened to videos from both sides.

CRT is a broader perspective of 'racism' than the typical color, supremacy, etc. issues. However I believe CRT whilst broader in one sense is still very narrow within the overall problem of evil of humanity.
The problem with merely concentrating on one aspect of 'evil' evidently had always created more greater evil than its intended good, especially when the issue is not dealt in totality, as a whole and holistically.

1. The very root of the issue emanated from the need to survive.
2. One of the first critical instinctive response [amongst others] is to assume anything that is different from oneself, first as a threat and then review it for any good before accepting it positively.
3. This give rise to tribalism, i.e. the primal us versus them instinct in differentiation of groups and the all sorts of evil acts associated with tribalism.
4. It is from tribalism that arose the us versus them in terms of skin color and race, and therefrom all the associated evil acts with racism.
5. Tribalism is 'programmed' in ALL humans but not ALL humans are tribalistic in terms of racism, albeit the majority are potentially racists while some a very active racists.

As such, to deal with any problem of racism, it would be more effective to focus, more on the fundamental root of racism and its evil, i.e. the tribalistic instinct and less on racism on its own.

To deal with the roots of tribalism and all its associated problem, our focus should be on morality and ethics on a universal basis. We should not focus on the problem of racism i.e. CRT alone but more on morality and ethics.

Btw, CRT is a theory but if we do not focus on its fundamental root, it is very normal for some evil laden people to exploit and abuse the theory in practice which is often the case.

As I see it, CRT is not holistically aligned with the overall well being of humanity.
[Unfortunately I understand such a statement intended to be good is regarded as racists by the CRT-ists].

The video of George Floyd's encounter with Derek Chauvin was the moment when one of the main reasons why we can't all "just get along" became clear to anyone who has eyes to see and ears to hear.

Since tribalism thus racism is generic and universal to all humans, there will always be extremist racists within a group.
Thus some extremists from the majority whether they are white, brown, yellow, whatever shades, will, at this present phase of human evolution, oppress and abuse the minority color in some ways.

So it is not merely the case of George Floyd but there could be the other way around where blacks are majority somewhere in Africa and elsewhere who would do the same to whites, brown and Asians.
So for CRT-ists to focus on 'whiteness' as a problem is very short-sighted as is a twisted ideology.

To be 'critical' is definitely philosophical and progressive, but I believe the way CRT is being played out at present in the US will promote more harm than good when at our present state of evolution, we cannot deal with it holistically yet.

I believe the focus at present for humanity should be on morality and ethics on a universal basis to the extent we need to rewire, inhibit and modulate the tribalistic [us vs them] and racialistic instinct brainwise optimally in promoting greater competency in compassion, wisdom, EQ, etc.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Recently there are a lot of hoo hahs of very aggressive promotion and strong resistance re Critical Race Theory

What I noted is this CRT is not the typical "racist" thing but a more complicated ideology.

What are your views [for or against] on Critical Race Theory?

"Critical Race Theory" is a broad category. But it's a real one. I think there's a review in Philosophy Now last issue of a major book on the subject that documents all the original sources with academic rigour.

CRT not just racist, but also sexist, heterosexual-despising, man-hating, anti-health (as in 'fat rights"), anti-national, anti-capitalist, anti-West, self-loathing, domineering, aggressive, hateful, collectivist, pseudo-intellectual and ideologically possessed.

Essentially, it's a desperate attempt to rescue some kind of Neo-Marxism from the ash heap of history, after Marxism's deplorable failures of the last century. It substitutes various "oppressed" categories for "the proletariat," and then tries to do the same moves as Marxism tried. It's really just divisive collectivism in polished up jackboots.

It really has no business being in academia, and certainly none in public education. It's political ambitions are broad and disastrous. It's heavily indoctrinatory, scientifically unsound and mostly absurdly ideological rather than scientific or intellectual. But it's around, and people are bowing at its shrine.

Racialism is still a big issue and very problematic within humanity at the present phase of human evolution.
I believe to be analytical and critical [thus critical philosophy] in addressing human problems is essential. But such a strategy has to be carried out holistically, i.e. taking the whole into account. In the first place we should increase the capacity of the average human to be 'critical' before we impose any 'critical theory of ..'

While it is a good step that there are people who are taking a critical look at the issue of racialism seriously but there are no strategy to increase the rational and critical capacity of the masses.
I noted from the books and videos I am aware, the current CRT is not addressed holistically and thus triggering more race related evils.

Btw, re sexism, heterosexual-despising, man-hating, etc. they have their own critical theory, i.e. feminist critical theory, LBGT critical theory, Trans critical theory and so on.

From what I gathered, the final solution with CRT is Activism [thus ideological] using the media as its vehicle to get rid of racial oppression.
However, I believe if it is not addressed holistically, while CRT will highlight and resolve some superficial racial issues it will instead generate more evil racial issues leveraging on the us vs them instincts.

To teach CRT in school to children [who are more emotional and don't have the rational capacity and maturity to be critical] at present is one of the worst kind of strategy and will only invoke greater tribalism and us vs them instinct that would generate other sorts of the evil acts and other associated problems.