Critical Race Theory policy in hiring at UT

[NWBuck 8547]

6 minutes ago, Hanrahan said:

This thing has all the hallmarks of a concept that is helpful and beneficial as described by scholars but will instantly be dumbed down, misinterpreted and misapplied, furthering the dumbass screeching from both sides. Seems like we’re already past that point.

See also, "Christianity" 

[bad_teammate 13132]

White people, 1960s, "MLK IS COMMUNIST SCUM DIVIDING THIS NATION!"
White people, 2020s, "We need a universally-loved uniter like MLK was in his time to heal our divisions. None of these divisive blacks."

Edited June 14, 2021 by bad_teammate

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

Again, pardon my ignorance on this subject; but aren't we basically talking about asking ourselves the question on whether a piece of legislation may of have an unbalanced impact on certain races based on historical and modern data? Like, isn't that what we should do since all men are created equal, they haven't been historically treated that way, and now we need to address it? It feels like if you have a problem with that, then you need to look in the mirror and assess what scares you about that. And offloading your fear on what others might not like about this is a weaselly way of dealing with the subject. 

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

Side note: I wonder whose sock Mr Sardine is. He goes back all the way to Hornfans and has a very distinct writing style and manner of just asking questions. Issues of race and ethnicity appear to be the lights that entice this moth out of the darkness of lurking.

[HornOnTheBayou 8881]

On 6/12/2021 at 1:01 PM, Bruno Sardine said:

For the record, I don’t believe the creator created inferior types/categories of humans based on outward physical characteristics

[DonkeyCigars 144]

3 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

"Jesus taught us to love one another as we love ourselves; therefore, Christians can't be racists".

Love the sinner, hate the sin. 

[Pancho 44467]

This is an example of what radical Republicans are trying to stop because they think it’s CRT when it’s just history. 

 

[TwiceHorn 31269]

3 hours ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

Again, pardon my ignorance on this subject; but aren't we basically talking about asking ourselves the question on whether a piece of legislation may of have an unbalanced impact on certain races based on historical and modern data? Like, isn't that what we should do since all men are created equal, they haven't been historically treated that way, and now we need to address it? It feels like if you have a problem with that, then you need to look in the mirror and assess what scares you about that. And offloading your fear on what others might not like about this is a weaselly way of dealing with the subject. 

That's certainly a part of it.  But CRT doesn't limit its analysis to laws or legislation, but it is an outgrowth of critical legal studies, which mostly concerns itself with laws and the legal system.

CRT includes social customs and attitudes and just "things" that are considered normal and everyday in society that turn out to have disparate impact.  You run across a lot of stuff that's like "oh shit, I never thought of that, but it makes sense," and some other stuff that may be a bit of an eye-roller.

[NWBuck 8547]

3 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

White people, 1960s, "MLK IS COMMUNIST SCUM DIVIDING THIS NATION!"
White people, 2020s, "We need a universally-loved uniter like MLK was in his time to heal our divisions. None of these divisive blacks."

About that-

(whole thread...)

[WhatTheBuck 28708]

12 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

What's really funny about this is that it's clearly a veiled attempt to just say that black people are dumber than non-black people, using racial disparities between black people and non-black people in Africa as proof, when the disparities both here and there can be traced back to the same fucking thing: European colonialism.

So congrats on showing how stupid you are while trying to argue that black people are just naturally dumber than you are.

And people who think that way genuinely don’t think they’re racist. They just think it’s an accurate description of reality. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

8 hours ago, Pancho said:

This is an example of what radical Republicans are trying to stop because they think it’s CRT when it’s just history. 

 

that's cool and everything but good god white liberal tik-tokers are the most insufferable presenters in the universe I want to scream

Just. Talk. Like. A. Human. Being.

It's like watching Logan Paul do a video on the triangle trade

Edited June 14, 2021 by bad_teammate

[bad_teammate 13132]

hell yeah here we go let's do it

For those who don't know Adolph Reed, he is a black academic who talks about race but focuses largely on class/power dynamics as opposed to racism as a separate and all-encompassing driving force. (made waves in 2019 for being an open critic of the 1619 Project)

He also 360-tomahawk dunked on Obama in the mid-1990s and predicted the entire damned thing with capital-driven Dems and black representationalism.

“In Chicago, for instance, we’ve gotten a foretaste of the new breed of foundation-hatched black communitarian voices; one of them, a smooth Harvard lawyer with impeccable do-good credentials and vacuous-to-repressive neoliberal politics, has won a state senate seat on a base mainly in the liberal foundation and development worlds. His fundamentally bootstrap line was softened by a patina of the rhetoric of authentic community, talk about meeting in kitchens, small-scale solutions to social problems, and the predictable elevation of process over program – the point where identity politics converges with old-fashioned middle-class reform in favoring form over substance. I suspect that his ilk is the wave of the future in U.S. black politics, as in Haiti and wherever else the International Monetary Fund has sway.”

He absolutely rules.

[Pancho 44467]

 

[GRHorn 105]

Hey, check out this systemic racism. 

 

[elfenix 34171]

not many black people apply to harvard, film at 11. 

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

Maybe with CRT, we could understand why and then address it so those stats could become more balanced. 

[wildcat09 29237]

Of course Calipers Sullivan would complain about Harvard admitting black students while ignoring the fact that 43% of Harvard's white students are legacy, athletes, or children of faculty or major donors. They've got a big fucking affirmative action for whites operation going and he's mad that they're doing a tiny bit to try to balance it out.

[bad_teammate 13132]

Do these idiot conservatives think Harvard is a meritocratic institution?

[DonkeyCigars 144]

33 minutes ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

Maybe with CRT, we could understand why and then address it so those stats could become more balanced. 

Man your post unlocked something for me.

We agree that CRT is about understanding why. Everyone agrees with that; "it's just a framework" we say, in and of itself it is value neutral.

But you added a follow-on. It's the next step action items that is the heart of the division. You say it as "...and then address it." That implication-- an action based off of learnings from CRT-- is what makes it not value neutral, but positive for those who are fighting for change and negative for those who are negatively impacted by change. Thus: a division and issue to fight over!

I've read a lot about CRT over the last 30 days and read every post on this thread from mostly people whose politics I don't wholly agree with and my takeaway is:

It makes 100% sense why this is something that is fought over, because it's a tool for change (via disruption at best, conflict at worst) and, this might be a hot political take, but I feel like those who are boogeymanning this (e.g. white people who want to keep power/influence/privilege, GOP/GQP, etc.) are actually very prescient in making this a battle.

One of the smartest things they are doing to protect their interests is fighting this tooth and nail and not letting it gain a foothold, because they inherently know the end game here isn't just an academic investigation and whitepapers and junior college MLA formated essays about CRT, but the actual change that CRT will try to enable. It's dishonest to say "what's so wrong with learning the real history and experiences, etc. it's just knowing knowledge" because the reality is, CRT is a tool for people to gather ammo and build a case-- defensible/justifiable data to get more of the pie at the expense of those who are hoarding a lot of the pie.

I think the last insight I had, personally, and you guys might already know, but I think I underestimate those with power and privilege and fortunes and how they are always on hyper alert to anything that will erode that and are a paranoid bunch. You just aren't going to sneak up on these guys with any nonviolent, well-reasoned or polite ask based on reason.

It just reinforces my opinion that in America, you aren't going to claw any substantial gains in equality, inclusivity and diversity through any political or academic strategies. It will be through violence of the threat of violence (e.g. uprising, riots, destruction to economy, wealth, etc.). 

Edited June 14, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[DonkeyCigars 144]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Do these idiot conservatives think Harvard is a meritocratic institution?

hahaha, truly. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

I think, one day, right-wingers might learn that wealth and power aren't actually earned through hard work, value, and the guiding hand of an invisible God of Good Values or some shit

[Nice Guy Eddie 13411]

26 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

It's dishonest to say "what's so wrong with learning the real history and experiences, etc. it's just knowing knowledge" because the reality is, CRT is a tool for people to gather ammo and build a case-- defensible/justifiable data to get more of the pie at the expense of those who are hoarding a lot of the pie.

Can you provide some background on why you think this statement is a fact? 

[wildcat09 29237]

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I think, one day, right-wingers might learn that wealth and power aren't actually earned through hard work, value, and the guiding hand of an invisible God of Good Values or some shit

All of their actions tend to indicate that they're already well aware of that.

[bad_teammate 13132]

22 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

It makes 100% sense why this is something that is fought over, because it's a tool for change (via disruption at best, conflict at worst) and, this might be a hot political take, but I feel like those who are boogeymanning this (e.g. white people who want to keep power/influence/privilege, GOP/GQP, etc.) are actually very prescient in making this a battle.

One of the smartest things they are doing to protect their interests is fighting this tooth and nail and not letting it gain a foothold, because they inherently know the end game here isn't just an academic investigation and whitepapers and junior college MLA formated essays about CRT, but the actual change that CRT will try to enable. It's dishonest to say "what's so wrong with learning the real history and experiences, etc. it's just knowing knowledge" because the reality is, CRT is a tool for people to gather ammo and build a case-- defensible/justifiable data to get more of the pie at the expense of those who are hoarding a lot of the pie.

This is really where we run into problems by not looking at basically everything through the lens of economic class.

The Republican voterbase that is furious about CRT is, relatively, broke as a joke. They might have a house and a paltry amount of stock holdings. What the ACTUAL wealth class, the Top 0.1%, does a wonderful job of is make white right-wingers imagine that they share an interest with that Top 0.1%.

This is what needs to be beaten into the heads of white right-wingers: If you do not currently have well over $15M in assets, you don't actually have any of the pie. Statistically speaking, you are far closer to a bum under a bridge than you are to the 0.1%. And you are far more likely to end up a bum under the bridge than among the 0.1%.

[bad_teammate 13132]

7 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Can you provide some background on why you think this statement is a fact? 

He's correct. 100% correct.

There is no war but class war.

Line 1 of Chapter 1 of The Communist Manifesto says it perfectly:
The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

The PROBLEM is that white people en masse in America have zero clue as to their actual class and are completely mesmerized by bullshit.

[elfenix 34171]

42 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Do these idiot conservatives think Harvard is a meritocratic institution?

i love that word

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

39 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Man your post unlocked something for me.

We agree that CRT is about understanding why. Everyone agrees with that; "it's just a framework" we say, in and of itself it is value neutral.

But you added a follow-on. It's the next step action items that is the heart of the division. You say it as "...and then address it." That implication-- an action based off of learnings from CRT-- is what makes it not value neutral, but positive for those who are fighting for change and negative for those who are negatively impacted by change. Thus: a division and issue to fight over!

I've read a lot about CRT over the last 30 days and read every post on this thread from mostly people whose politics I don't wholly agree with and my takeaway is:

It makes 100% sense why this is something that is fought over, because it's a tool for change (via disruption at best, conflict at worst) and, this might be a hot political take, but I feel like those who are boogeymanning this (e.g. white people who want to keep power/influence/privilege, GOP/GQP, etc.) are actually very prescient in making this a battle.

One of the smartest things they are doing to protect their interests is fighting this tooth and nail and not letting it gain a foothold, because they inherently know the end game here isn't just an academic investigation and whitepapers and junior college MLA formated essays about CRT, but the actual change that CRT will try to enable. It's dishonest to say "what's so wrong with learning the real history and experiences, etc. it's just knowing knowledge" because the reality is, CRT is a tool for people to gather ammo and build a case-- defensible/justifiable data to get more of the pie at the expense of those who are hoarding a lot of the pie.

I think the last insight I had, personally, and you guys might already know, but I think I underestimate those with power and privilege and fortunes and how they are always on hyper alert to anything that will erode that and are a paranoid bunch. You just aren't going to sneak up on these guys with any nonviolent, well-reasoned or polite ask based on reason.

It just reinforces my opinion that in America, you aren't going to claw any substantial gains in equality, inclusivity and diversity through any political or academic strategies. It will be through violence of the threat of violence (e.g. uprising, riots, destruction to economy, wealth, etc.). 

The only reason anyone would fight against this is if they don't like the competition. Well, fuck them. They're the same ones that own a big business and do anything in their power to sue smaller businesses to limit competition, then say they believe in capitalism. Same with race relations. Keep a race down so they can't be within, as some on this site would put it, their community. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

2 minutes ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

The only reason anyone would fight against this is if they don't like the competition. Well, fuck them. 

Who likes competition for resources? No one. 

It's the crab bucket.

There is an enemy. There is a cause we can unite behind. The name of the enemy is capital.

[DonkeyCigars 144]

45 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Can you provide some background on why you think this statement is a fact? 

I believe this is a fact and I have landed at this place of belief due to a confluence of two things: 1) combining my worldly experience and well-readedness and knowledge of human history and behavior with 2) paying attention the last 30 days to social media mention of CRT (here, but more the GenZ zeitgeist of twitter, buzzfeed and tiktok), reading as much as I can (e.g. like on here), reading articles with CRT (google alerts emailed to me weekly; articles in NYT, The New Yorker, Atlantic, etc.)

Can you provide background on why you think I'm off base (if you think this, at all)?

[DonkeyCigars 144]

54 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

This is really where we run into problems by not looking at basically everything through the lens of economic class.

The Republican voterbase that is furious about CRT is, relatively, broke as a joke. They might have a house and a paltry amount of stock holdings. What the ACTUAL wealth class, the Top 0.1%, does a wonderful job of is make white right-wingers imagine that they share an interest with that Top 0.1%.

This is what needs to be beaten into the heads of white right-wingers: If you do not currently have well over $15M in assets, you don't actually have any of the pie. Statistically speaking, you are far closer to a bum under a bridge than you are to the 0.1%. And you are far more likely to end up a bum under the bridge than among the 0.1%.

I've said this before, but I will repeat it again (and be shouted down as a moron again, so be it):

The Republican voterbase understands they are not multimillionaires. They also understand that the possibility of being the next Jed Clampett or Jerry Jones or My Pillow Millionaire guy, is an easier, greased skid if white privilege remains tipped in their favor. 

I used the analogy that they want to know the great green valley will be there if/when they or their children can get there, rather than have a little bit more wealth and comfort for today at the expense of doing away with their inherent privilege by being sons and daughters of a white, patriarchal America.

Their voting agains their interests is aspirational. It's a vote for the hope and dream. It's like buying a lottery ticket. It's a psychological device, it's not because they are stupid, it's a combination of how and what they value combined with their status quo being "at least better than those other people".

Edited June 14, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[elfenix 34171]

uh oh

Quote

Rick Berman, an infamous right-wing lobbyist whose organizations have been accused of several astroturfing campaigns—and who is known as "Dr. Evil"—revealed that his firm is behind an organization that claimed to be a grass-roots movement against New York City's prep schools focus on "diversity education."

https://www.vice.com/en/article/g5g5ny/researcher-uncovers-critical-race-theory-astroturfing-campaign

[David Dennison 18655]

1 hour ago, DonkeyCigars said:

I've said this before, but I will repeat it again (and be shouted down as a moron again, so be it):

The Republican voterbase understands they are not multimillionaires. They also understand that the possibility of being the next Jed Clampett or Jerry Jones or My Pillow Millionaire guy, is an easier, greased skid if white privilege remains tipped in their favor. 

I used the analogy that they want to know the great green valley will be there if/when they or their children can get there, rather than have a little bit more wealth and comfort for today at the expense of doing away with their inherent privilege by being sons and daughters of a white, patriarchal America.

Their voting agains their interests is aspirational. It's a vote for the hope and dream. It's like buying a lottery ticket. It's a psychological device, it's not because they are stupid, it's a combination of how and what they value combined with their status quo being "at least better than those other people".

White people understand that there is a racial caste system in America and that white people are the dominant caste.

It comes as no surprise that most white people do not want this to change.

[Captainant 27447]

1 hour ago, DonkeyCigars said:

The Republican voterbase understands they are not multimillionaires. They also understand that the possibility of being the next Jed Clampett or Jerry Jones or My Pillow Millionaire guy, is an easier, greased skid if white privilege remains tipped in their favor. 

 

So is your thesis that conservative whites won't want to address racism because it'll be more difficult for them on an equal playing field? On that we agree.

On 5/19/2021 at 5:12 PM, Captainant said:

If all you've ever known is the fruits and privileged of an inherently inequal system (read: being born on 3rd and acting like you hit a triple), then equality certainly could seem like oppression. 

This thread is a flat circle.

[DonkeyCigars 144]

33 minutes ago, Captainant said:

So is your thesis that conservative whites won't want to address racism because it'll be more difficult for them on an equal playing field? On that we agree.

Yes. Then we agree.

Take it a step further and ask: if you (generally, the royal You) were at the top of the caste, would you willingly or knowingly knock yourself down a few rungs? Maybe you or a few highly evolved thinkers and stoics would. But would the sum of the parts? I would say no; likely you'd need the power wrested from you. Hence my comments on CRT being a threat and why it's actually pretty prescient to nip it in the bud...and anyone trying to reason that it's not a tool to whittle away their power, prestige, influence, money and privilege, is not being honest.

Because I'm no Marxist, but of this I agree: there is no racial or religious or philosophical war-- there is only class war. And it is a constant war in a world of scarcity-- a world that is nasty, brutish and short. There is no utopia; that's not the human experience and condition.

But I think folks are on to something that white people have done for centuries. Take the education and development back from the state and an external locus of control and roll up your sleeves and do it yourselves. It does take a degree of privilege to be able to home school, but that's a huge lever to pull in educating and empowering a future generation. Teach CRT and formulate and codify action items and strategies for your side at home-- you won't be allowed to in public.

Quote

Black families have only recently turned to homeschooling in significant numbers. The Census Bureau found that, by October, 2020, the nationwide proportion of homeschoolers—parents who had withdrawn their children from public or private schools and taken full control of their education—had risen to more than eleven per cent, from five per cent at the start of the pandemic. For Black families, the growth has been sharper. Around three per cent of Black students were homeschooled before the pandemic; by October, the number had risen to sixteen per cent.

 

Edited June 14, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[DonkeyCigars 144]

34 minutes ago, Captainant said:

This thread is a flat circle.

It's all relative.

[jimmyjazz 45554]

I'm pretty sure the vehement dismissal of CRT by the right is not because they believe it doesn't work, it's because they fear it does work.

[Captainant 27447]

31 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Yes. Then we agree.

Take it a step further and ask: if you (generally, the royal You) were at the top of the caste, would you willingly or knowingly knock yourself down a few rungs? Maybe you or a few highly evolved thinkers and stoics would. But would the sum of the parts? I would say no; likely you'd need the power wrested from you. Hence my comments on CRT being a threat and why it's actually pretty prescient to nip it in the bud...and anyone trying to reason that it's not a tool to whittle away their power, prestige, influence, money and privilege, is not being honest.

Because I'm no Marxist, but of this I agree: there is no racial or religious or philosophical war-- there is only class war. And it is a constant war in a world of scarcity-- a world that is nasty, brutish and short. There is no utopia; that's not the human experience and condition.

But I think folks are on to something that white people have done for centuries. Take the education and development back from the state and an external locus of control and roll up your sleeves and do it yourselves. It does take a degree of privilege to be able to home school, but that's a huge lever to pull in educating and empowering a future generation. Teach CRT and formulate and codify action items and strategies for your side at home-- you won't be allowed to in public.

 

I don't want to mischaracterize you, but are you actually advocating for the inequalities in our system? You prefer that redlining and racially-driven discrimination occurred because it means your property value could be a few percentage points higher?

 

...

 

You realize that's incredibly racist and fucked up, right? Literally just "fuck you, I got mine". 

Take off your mask, Johnny Sack.

Edited June 14, 2021 by Captainant

[DonkeyCigars 144]

8 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm pretty sure the vehement dismissal of CRT by the right is not because they believe it doesn't work, it's because they fear it does work.

Yes, I agree. I think this is the case and I think any reasoning that says "wha-why so scared of just learning history" is dishonest.

[DonkeyCigars 144]

9 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I don't want to mischaracterize you, but are you actually advocating for the inequalities in our system? You prefer that redlining and racially-driven discrimination occurred because it means your property value could be a few percentage points higher?

 

...

 

You realize that's incredibly racist and fucked up, right? Literally just "fuck you, I got mine". 

Take off your mask, Johnny Sack.

You have misread me. I'm not advocating for anything here today. I'm just trying to say I now I understand why this is a political football the last 30 days.

I'm not pro or anti-CRT. I am more libertarian on the topic-- I guess more "not a racist, than anti-racist", if you will. You want CRT, great for it. You don't? great go for it. Vote with your feet and wallets.

Edited June 14, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[Captainant 27447]

Just now, DonkeyCigars said:

Vote with your feet and wallets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_flight

[DonkeyCigars 144]

16 minutes ago, Captainant said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_flight

I guess-- but running from things and avoiding things you don't like or agree with is the American way. After all, America (at least America in the non-CRT perspective of white history) was founded upon a pilgrimage; the Great Grand Daddy of White Flight. 

Besides, why do you think all these billionaires are trying out their rockets to Mars lately? Eventually there will be another pilgrimage and "new world" (though quite literally this time). We humans can't stand each other outside of our own tribes, at the heart of it. And even among our own tribes we hate each other.

Edited June 14, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

9 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

You have misread me. I'm not advocating for anything here today. I'm just trying to say I now I understand why this is a political football the last 30 days.

I'm not pro or anti-CRT. I am more libertarian on the topic-- I guess more "not a racist, than anti-racist", if you will. You want CRT, great for it. You don't? great go for it. Vote with your feet and wallets.

So you believe that there have been unjust historical events that have led to certain power structures? 

That those power structures disproportionately negatively impact some races and favor others?

That by perpetuating these power structures, these disproportionate impacts on certain races will only strengthen? 

But you're so "libertarian" that you would rather live - let - live? Because by not advocating for the opposition of those structures, you advocate for them. 

You said you had kids; what do you think the long term ramifications of these systems if they keep going in perpetuity? Increased wealth disparity, increased poverty (thus increased crime), further limiting of votes of the people in favor of votes of the big businesses (and their 0.1% owners), etc. Does that sound like a libertarian utopia to you? 

 

[Captainant 27447]

5 minutes ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

further limiting of votes of the people in favor of votes of the big businesses (and their 0.1% owners), etc. Does that sound like a libertarian utopia to you? 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

I don't know if that sounds like a libertarian utopia or not, I'm not a political libertarian. I apologize for using the term as it's one that is obviously very loaded--what I was meaning to convey is that I'm neither pro nor anti-CRT at this point in my understanding of it. I will float on whichever way the current decides to go once the storm is over.

Your post though helped me to understand why it's such a big deal in June of 2021-- there are things at stake. It's not an academic/framework conversation-- that's a ruse. It's a class war. B_T is right.

Anyways, I'll float on now.

 

Edited June 14, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

12 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

I don't know if that sounds like a libertarian utopia or not, I'm not a political libertarian. I apologize for using the term as it's one that is obviously very loaded--what I was meaning to convey is that I'm neither pro nor anti-CRT at this point in my understanding of it. I will float on whichever way the current decides to go once the storm is over.

Your post though helped me to understand why it's such a big deal in June of 2021-- there are things at stake. It's not an academic/framework conversation-- that's a ruse. It's a class war. B_T is right.

Anyways, I'll float on now.

 

There is always a war against the powerful, because the powerful are not always looking out for the collective. And often times counter what is good for the collective in furtherance of more power. That's what a democracy should mitigate. America was built so that each individual had their inalienable rights but we currently do not live in a time where that is true for all because the few who are in power. Apathy towards the power, grows the power. 

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

8 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

hell yeah here we go let's do it

For those who don't know Adolph Reed, he is a black academic who talks about race but focuses largely on class/power dynamics as opposed to racism as a separate and all-encompassing driving force. (made waves in 2019 for being an open critic of the 1619 Project)

He also 360-tomahawk dunked on Obama in the mid-1990s and predicted the entire damned thing with capital-driven Dems and black representationalism.

“In Chicago, for instance, we’ve gotten a foretaste of the new breed of foundation-hatched black communitarian voices; one of them, a smooth Harvard lawyer with impeccable do-good credentials and vacuous-to-repressive neoliberal politics, has won a state senate seat on a base mainly in the liberal foundation and development worlds. His fundamentally bootstrap line was softened by a patina of the rhetoric of authentic community, talk about meeting in kitchens, small-scale solutions to social problems, and the predictable elevation of process over program – the point where identity politics converges with old-fashioned middle-class reform in favoring form over substance. I suspect that his ilk is the wave of the future in U.S. black politics, as in Haiti and wherever else the International Monetary Fund has sway.”

He absolutely rules.

The problem with the 1619 Project is it falls into the trap set by the Brits way back when -- they intentionally camouflaged class behind race. And that's my fundamental beef with CRT; it operates on the ground rules the Crown set to keep us perpetually separated. Classism is thousands of years older than racism; racism was a relatively new ingredient only introduced after the age of exploration. Classism as practiced in the UK is exquisitely fine-tuned but even so it started to break down in the New World, so they overhauled it by spicing it up with racism. Which did very little to help poor whites for hundreds of years other than keep them in their place as the second-to-last rung on the ladder, with each new white immigrant group pushing the older one up a notch by default. Now that's not really an option; nor is mass migration westward; meanwhile, the poor of every color are threatened by mass immigration of a new slave class from the south -- for what is the undocumented worker but a true wage-slave? If you can't vote or sue or have any say in your life, you are really a slave.

Until all of these people come together in class solidarity, none of this theory means much. Educating white people about their historical wrongs and their unconscious ingrained racism is a component of this but hardly all of it. 

 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

18 minutes ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

There is always a war against the powerful, because the powerful are not always looking out for the collective. And often times counter what is good for the collective in furtherance of more power. That's what a democracy should mitigate. America was built so that each individual had their inalienable rights but we currently do not live in a time where that is true for all because the few who are in power. Apathy towards the power, grows the power. 

IDK man. I feel like America was not built so that each individual had those rights. It was built so the white, land owning men could have those rights. Same now as it was before, it was just easier to obfuscate or hide because there was no technology to share ideas at lightspeed. 

Bam! CRT in action!

I'm doing it!

[TwiceHorn 31269]

18 hours ago, NWBuck said:

About that-

(whole thread...)

I feel attacked.  That's a millenial joke.  I feel convicted because it is the stone cold truth.

2 hours ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

The problem with the 1619 Project is it falls into the trap set by the Brits way back when -- they intentionally camouflaged class behind race. And that's my fundamental beef with CRT; it operates on the ground rules the Crown set to keep us perpetually separated. Classism is thousands of years older than racism; racism was a relatively new ingredient only introduced after the age of exploration. Classism as practiced in the UK is exquisitely fine-tuned but even so it started to break down in the New World, so they overhauled it by spicing it up with racism. Which did very little to help poor whites for hundreds of years other than keep them in their place as the second-to-last rung on the ladder, with each new white immigrant group pushing the older one up a notch by default. Now that's not really an option; nor is mass migration westward; meanwhile, the poor of every color are threatened by mass immigration of a new slave class from the south -- for what is the undocumented worker but a true wage-slave? If you can't vote or sue or have any say in your life, you are really a slave.

Until all of these people come together in class solidarity, none of this theory means much. Educating white people about their historical wrongs and their unconscious ingrained racism is a component of this but hardly all of it. 

 

Well, a big part of that is that races weren't proximate to each other except in certain "explored" parts of the world, really until the last couple of centuries. Racism was only observable later as countries expanded into colonies and "other lands."  And people became sufficiently mobile to immigrate to countries where they are a racial minority.

Racism at least has a "natural" or instinctive origin, but it doesn't happen except when two races are placed in pretty close proximity. Classism is even more of a construct that racism.   But you're right that they have  lot of similarities in effect and operation, and even if you could magically make the race issue disappear somehow, there would still be the issue of economic segregation (which I think of as about the same as classism).

It's my personal theory, which I am sure is not original to me, that the origin of the race problem in America was that we imported millions of blacks right spang into the US, among the white people.  So all the American whiteys observed their "ignorant, abhorrent" customs and lifestyles up close. As opposed to just about everyone else, who held their slaves in remote colonies and it was another century or more between the end of slavery and the immigration of blacks into European and other non-American countries.

I suspect that Dutch, Portuguese, etc. explorers had their own history of racism that mostly didn't make it back home, because few of the natives made it back home.  Europe has experienced racism on  much smaller scale if just as virulent, because they have a smaller and more recent quantity of immigrants of different races.  Slavery, of course, is fundamentally racist, but our outcome was worse because we had to assimilate a fairly huge quantity of blacks, subjugated blacks, into our population, many of whom were already disposed to view them as subhuman.

So, yes, the problem of massive and in-built racism is uniquely bad in America.  But it's not necessarily because Americans are uniquely bad.  As stated above, it would happen anywhere with 10-plus% of the population brought in as a racial minority within the space of decades or a century. And, of course brought in as slaves.  That's just too much different, too fast, for most human populations to absorb without some friction.  I posted a poorly thought out thought experiment here or at TOS wondering what might have happened if freed slaves could somehow have been extracted from the deep south so that they didn't have to try to assimilate into a population that not only thought them "different" and "other" but had already concluded them to be subhuman.  I got roasted pretty good for that.

Put a sizable racial minority, say 10% of the population or more into a majority population of a different single race, you're going to get a massive race problem, even today.  

Even American Indians were mostly shuffled off to the res so they weren't spang in the middle of America in sizable numbers, and that problem is pretty bad, but far more regional than black racism.  Which is not to say that I advocate shuffling minorities "out of the way," but I think it's just a fact.

I think this is why Asian Americans have an easier time, for the most part, "assimilating" into American society:  they came over in relatively small quantities.  And the fact that they weren't slaves for a century plus.  Same with say, Italian-Americans, with the added benefit that they're mostly indistinguishable from "Anglo Saxons," once they learn the language and drop the accent.

Edited June 14, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

13 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I feel attacked.  That's a millenial joke.  I feel convicted because it is the stone cold truth.

Well, a big part of that is that races weren't proximate to each other except in certain "explored" parts of the world, really until the last couple of centuries. Racism was only observable later as countries expanded into colonies and "other lands."  And people became sufficiently mobile to immigrate to countries where they are a racial minority.

Racism at least has a "natural" or instinctive origin, but it doesn't happen except when two races are placed in pretty close proximity. Classism is even more of a construct that racism.   But you're right that they have  lot of similarities in effect and operation, and even if you could magically make the race issue disappear somehow, there would still be the issue of economic segregation (which I think of as about the same as classism).

It's my personal theory, which I am sure is not original to me, that the origin of the race problem in America was that we imported millions of blacks right spang into the US, among the white people.  So all the American whiteys observed their "ignorant, abhorrent" customs and lifestyles up close. As opposed to just about everyone else, who held their slaves in remote colonies and it was another century or more between the end of slavery and the immigration of blacks into European and other non-American countries.

I suspect that Dutch, Portuguese, etc. explorers had their own history of racism that mostly didn't make it back home, because few of the natives made it back home.  Europe has experienced racism on  much smaller scale if just as virulent, because they have a smaller and more recent quantity of immigrants of different races.  Slavery, of course, is fundamentally racist, but our outcome was worse because we had to assimilate a fairly huge quantity of blacks, subjugated blacks, into our population, many of whom were already disposed to view them as subhuman.

So, yes, the problem of massive and in-built racism is uniquely bad in America.  But it's not necessarily because Americans are uniquely bad.  As stated above, it would happen anywhere wi6th 10-plus% of the population brought in as a racial minority within the space of decades or a century. And, of course brought in as slaves.  That's just too much different, too fast, for most human populations to absorb without some friction.

Put a sizable racial minority, say 10% of the population or more into a majority population of a different single race, you're going to get a massive race problem, even today.  

Even American Indians were mostly shuffled off to the res so they weren't spang in the middle of America in sizable numbers, and that problem is pretty bad, but far more regional than black racism.  Which is not to say that I advocate shuffling minorities "out of the way," but I think it's just a fact.

I think this is why Asian Americans have an easier time, for the most part, "assimilating" into American society:  they came over in relatively small quantities.  And the fact that they weren't slaves for a century plus.  Same with say, Italian-Americans, with the added benefit that they're mostly indistinguishable from "Anglo Saxons," once they learn the language and drop the accent.

The conditions under which the Brits developed their Black Codes here preceded the mass importation of slaves by a century or two. This goes back to the pre-cotton days.

Initially, the upper crust believe the white rabble and the Africans were equal in that they were both simply trash. There was no taboo against them intermarrying -- even Black men could take White common-law wives, and so long as they kept their hands off the few "ladies" in old Virginia, nobody cared. It was only when this mixed-race class became very numerous and were set free from their servitude and starting pressing west that they became extremely troublesome, so much so that they pretty much pressed the Crown into inventing racism as we know it North America today. For them it was a matter of survival.

If the world of Black and White harmony I describe sounds a little too Kumbayah to be believed, it was. One of the main beefs the ex-servants -- Black, White, and mixed -- had with Jamestown was that the Crown was not giving them enough support in their efforts to exterminate the Virginia Indians as they moved west. The Crown was not ready for that fight, especially not if it was on the behalf of this rabble. 

[HenryJames 65889]

CrItIcAl RaCe ThEoRy