The question is whether CRT is being taught in school, and if it is, is it the kind of thing that children should learn? The official response is that it’s a legal framework for law students to analyze racial inequality in the legal system. Great, keep it there. The categories it examines are highly subjective and rely on some dangerous and presupposed biases.
A quick review includes the belief that racism is the norm, and not a rare event. Everything is seen through the lens of race. Though everyone is prejudiced, racism only comes from the oppressing class.
Skin color matters, the oppressing class is evil, and the oppressed is the only one to merit having a voice to speak to the issue.
Sounds like a lot of moral judgement there than legal critique. Let’s get back to the categories of this alleged analytical. Tool.
Standpoint epistemology.
Big words, I know. It basically means from the perspective from where you stand. It means a victim is the only authority who can express an opinion on their victimhood. If you’re not black, you have no right to discuss race. If you’re not a woman, you have no voice to discuss femineity. You just don’t know what it’s like to be me. For the proponent of CRT, these matters. It also means we might as well forget all about justice, fairness, or equality. Because CRT claims we are all different, and not equal, but equal outcome is expected and demanded.
Essentialism vs. anti-essentialism.
meaning that only blacks have a right to a voice. However, within the victim community, not all have the same needs. Who has the right to speak for the community, for the sub-group? Who are” Uncle Toms” and deserve to be ignored? If you’re black, but embrace the American dream where it doesn’t matter where you start, but where you end up, you’re racist and lose black street cred. If you’re black, but embrace traditional family values, work hard to get to a better life, maybe even get rich or famous, you’re racist. Well, unless you’re willing to tear down the system that landed you in a gated community with the wall around your house, so you can encourage others to keep looting and burning down cities.
Structural determinism.
This means something along the line that the system determines your lot in life. To quote from a song, “Those who got will get, those without will lose.” While this can certainly tip the scales. However, America is still the land of opportunity where rich kids can end up bankrupt, or a poor kid from a log cabin can end up as president.
This facet of CRT inadvertently claims that somehow the black person is not equal, he has no equal opportunity, and he can never succeed without a handout. He is doomed to never succeed in such a racist place as America. It is hopeless and will never happen. It demands equal outcomes, righting wrongs, identifying wrongs that can and will never be forgivable. It has nothing to do with equality. It’s about gaining power over the other side, and punishing them.
I suppose those who hold this thought have never read history. The history that lists black people coming out of slavery, becoming successful in business, finding themselves in a better place than the now destitute plantation owners, being well known scientists, educators, even spokespeople. Has anyone ever heard of Aunt Jemima? Oh wait, she was just recently canceled for her accomplishments of being one of the truly independently wealthy black women. Not bad for a former slave.
Empathetic fallacy.
Being empathetic is never enough. Oppressors will never be diverse enough to understand racial narrative. The black man can never trust the white man, since he is only empathizing for what it can gain him.
An example of this is in Jackie Robinson, the first man to cross the color barrier into professional baseball. He wasn’t the first one good enough to make it. He wasn’t the best one in the league at the time. He just happened to be in the right place at the right time, when a white team owner thought he could make a buck off having a black player on the team. Or so the story goes. I’m sure the story is more complex than that.
No consideration is given to the hundreds of thousands of white people in the 1880s who fought to abolish slavery, helping families to escape to freedom, and even those who died to fight for that freedom. How selfish for those white men to act in such utter self-preservation and benefit to themselves! Oh wait, I forgot… its racist because I said so. The oppressed group always gets to tell the oppressor about race.
Separatism.
Argues for segregation and reparations.
The hallmark of equity is having an equal shot at opportunity, showing you can do the job just as well as the next person, excelling to reach the limits of your potential, and knowing you did your best. The color of your skin, gender, religion, ethnic background or physical disability doesn’t matter as much as proving your skill at a job.
This facet of CRT claims the oppressed person needs an equal outcome, despite squandered opportunities. It expects that races should separate, and not try to integrate, even if it means going to where some of the best opportunities are. It expects being repaid for all the past sins of a society, either real or imagined. It doesn’t matter if your ancestors were in this country until decades after the atrocity. Skin color is all that matters, and the power struggle to be on top.
To conclude the senselessness of CRT, as an intelligent tool to logically examine laws, it fails. As a system, it has racial bias built in that mocks truly fair and equitable justice. It strives to tear down and offers no solution to build something better. Nothing will satisfy its claim of oppression, other a total flip of who is in power.
All its teachings make e emotional appeals that are better suited to social reform. An area where the law is limited, but religion might gain the deep, heart change sought to alleviate oppression. Reconciliation is a two-way street. A person can’t be lifted out of the perceived oppression if they don’t offer a hand to the one willing to lift him out. A person can’t be elevated if he doesn’t want to change.
Morality, lawbreaking, fairness, punishment, justice, grace, mercy, charity is just some of the thing’s religion addresses. These are the kind of outcomes CRT hopes to win. Civil governments can legislate the appearance of morality. It will only happen if people turn to the kind of heart change promised by religion. Too bad it isn’t taught in schools as much as the religion of the CRT framework
Learning history is important, so we don’t fail and relive the dark past. Teaching both the success and failures of the past is important. Not the CRT past, but the real past. Learning about race and interpersonal relations belongs in social studies. It can be done truthfully and fairly without the error that CRT introduces.