Answer for BRT (Brother)

My brother, who hasn’t kept up with current events, sent me this video from PragerU explaining Critical Race Theory (CRT). He asked me if the presentation was accurate. After four hours of online research & reflection, this is how I responded. Yes. It’s mostly accurate. Although the speaker allows his personal beliefs to bleed over into areas like his example of the shopkeeper or in his social commentary in comparing Critical Race Theory (CRT) with Apartheid, every major point he makes about CRT I was able to verify in at least one external source. In my research to verify the Prager definition, I discovered that CRT is a jumble of vague ideas & can be difficult to piece together. However, as a racial minority who has lived my entire life in the US, I can provide a more real world relevant definition of CRT. Critical Race Theory is a tool used by the supporters of the Democratic party to ensure that the Republic party never wins a Presidential election again. For now, that’s the goal. But wait . . . there’s more.

In Pursuit of Objectivity

Since we’re discussing a controversial topic, I want to address any claims about my methodology upfront. So I ask that you at least read this section before you begin your barrage of insults. I regularly watch all three all news networks (CNN, MSNBC, & Fox) in addition to browsing multiple web resources for headlines that interest me. My primary online resources are http://www.msn.com; http://www.yahoo.com; http://www.cnn.com, http://www.foxnews.com, http://www.google.com, & http://www.youtube.com. Coming into this undertaking, I already had an idea of CRT & how & why it’s currently used by the establishment. In an effort to make as objective an assessment as possible, I’ve read the entries for CRT on both Wikipedia & Encyclopedia Britannica online. Here are the highlights from both 3rd party resources.

Wikipedia

Wikipedia identifies two primary pillars of CRT. The first holds that American society is inherently racist. Moreover, the legal system is deliberately designed to maintain this white supremacist doctrine that allows whites to profit from the systematic exploitation of minorities, specifically blacks. The second pillar holds that the emancipation of black Americans is possible through the act of “transforming the relationship between law & racial power;”that true equality is possible, but would require an complete dismantling of the system then a rebuild from scratch.

The entry goes on to identify several other aspects of CRT too numerous to discuss here. I’ve selected two aspects of particular significance. The first is the concept of white privilege. This particular entry describes white privilege in terms of white Americans receiving the benefit of a doubt; truly benefiting from the idea of innocent until proven guilty whereas daily interactions with black Americans are governed by negative stereotypes.

The second aspect is the idea of social constructionism; an idea that, to the best of my understanding, elevates story-telling above evidence or reason; meaning, a black person’s testimony should outweigh evidence or legal reasoning in any legal case. The idea behind this is that black Americans have suffered through such an underprivileged experience that the only fair way to capture the nuances & insensitivities of their experiences is to grant their narratives more weight. After all, if our legal system is deliberately designed to subordinate them, then how can we be certain that the evidence or the logic that our system uses to judge the evidence is not inherently racist too? This is truthfully how I’ve interpreted this principle. Feel free to judge for yourself by reading the excerpt here.

Britannica

“Wait! Anybody can post an entry on Wikipedia. That’s not a real resource–that’s biased!” This is all true but when you type a question into Google search, the Wikipedia response is normally the first to populate. I’ve used the Wiki entry as a resource because the average person would probably do the same. Moreover, even when compared to the more encyclopedic definition, the Wiki explanation still appears accurate.

The Britannica entry goes into more depth & establishes, as I’ve seen elsewhere, six universally accepted tenets of CRT. I’ve listed all six below with a brief description.

(One) Race does not exist except as a social construct to allow whites to exploit blacks.

(Two) Racism in American is the normal order of things.

(Three) Interest Convergence: black are only allowed to succeed in America insofar as it somehow benefits the white agenda. (My interpretation: Owing to this theory, Barrack Obama was given the Presidency because doing so somehow allowed whites to warehouse more power behind the scenes.)

(Four) Differential Racialization: racial minorities are assigned negative stereotypes & sometimes re-assigned a different set of negative stereotypes as needed in order for whites to remain the dominant group.

(Five) Intersectionality: No one person can be completely defined by their membership into a single group. For example, a black woman is not only black but a woman too.

(Six) Voice of Color: An assertion that one person of color can accurately speak for that entire group, presumably because they share the common disadvantages of their struggle. (My interpretation: I guess this is why black men can disparage one another using racial epitaphs without causing social outrage. Also, it explains how the media can exploit the voice of a single black positive testimonial to establish the Democratic party as the party of black Americans while simultaneously writing off another black voice who votes Republic as someone “detached from their community.”

One Minority’s Take

Now that we’ve addressed the question of what Critical Race Theory is, I vote we move on to answer the bigger question: Why are we talking CRT right now? CRT isn’t a new idea. Per Britannica, we can trace it back at least to 1989 when the 1st Annual Workshop on Critical Race occurred. More recently, legal scholars Richard Delgado & Jean Stefanic published their book Critical Race Theory: An Introduction in 2001 (Britannica entry). That’s all fine & well but why is a book published twenty years ago dominating headlines right now? Well, at the risk of sounding like a CNN anchor, I’ll tell you why. Five letters . . .

T-R-U-M-P . . . Trump.

The election of Barrack Hussein Obama into the Presidency in 2008 heralded a new age of racial enlightenment, so network news proclaimed. When Obama won again in 2012, I saw articles on credible websites like http://www.msn.com entitled, “Will America ever see a White President again?” It was as if one of the tenets of CRT per Wikipedia had been fulfilled: the power structure of our country’s keystone processes had been re-written on racial lines & blacks were now the favored group. After eight years of listening to the mainstream media & even pop culture exaggerate the implications of Obama’s two terms, Donald Trump’s winning the 2016 election was the absolute doomsday scenario for the Democratic party. Not only did America elect a white man into the Presidency; but they did so at the expense of electing the nation’s first female President. And not only America choose a man over a woman; but they chose a man who was racist! Trump’s ascension to the Presidency was nuclear winter for the Democrats and they’ll do anything to ensure it never happens again.

By the time 2016 came around, America had tired of the black vs white racial dynamic. In fact, so did the Democratic party. Having already succeeded at convincing America to elect the country’s first black President, they had moved on to checking off the next box in electing the first female President. The Left & the major networks that appear to support them used terms like misogyny & toxic masculinity to discredit Trump & the Republican party. We even saw the birth of the Me Too Movement, which appears in part at least, to have been an attempt to sway female voters to the Democratic party & their female candidate. When this didn’t work, the media hurriedly tried to make an issue of immigration on the Southern border, framing the case that Trump’s stance on tougher immigration standards equaled racism against brown men. As recently as 2019, before Covid19 dominated media coverage, I remember journalists like Chris Matthews snickering at Donald Trump for calling the migrant caravan from South America an invasion simply because it contained “brown skinned men.”

Then 2020 came & the Covid shutdown in March. While we were all stuck at home, we had a front row seat to the horrific death of George Floyd while in the custody of the Minneapolis police. This single tragedy set the stage for an even bigger tragedy as major cities erupted into flames in a six month period of often violent protests in the name of Black Lives Matter, a social justice group that developed, ironically, during the Obama administration after the Ferguson, MO riots of 2014. Let’s be clear: Covid19 probably lost Trump the election; but BLM 2.0 is what will ensure no one like him will win again. At least, if the Democrats have anything to say about it.

I paint this timeline to establish context. And while I allowed some personal opinion to spill over into the discussion, my time table is easily verifiable through public record. Awareness of this time table is critical because, in at least one school system, the implementation of Critical Race Theory reached a fevered pitch after the death of George Floyd. Andrew Gutman of NYC stood up to the prestigious Brearley School where he had his daughter enrolled. Chelsea Clinton, Tina Fey, Drew Barrymore, & other noteworthy public figures graduated from this school. In an interview on Fox News, the concerned father stated that the school’s insistence on stressing CRT in the curriculum accelerated noticeably after the George Floyd riots last year. Gutman finally decided to pull his daughter from the school when they required an anti-racist pledge for parents to sign as a condition of enrollment. Once again, the need to standardize such a pledge assumes that everyone is inherently racist; then, coming into this agreement, obligates them to strive not to be. You can see for yourself by watching the videos provided below.

Videos

School Requires Anti-Racist Pledge for Parents

Tucker Carlson Excerpt

In response to this thorough & well-written parental concern, The Head of the Brearley School, Jane Fried, simply said that the letter was, “Deeply offensive & harmful.”

In an even more recent case, a group of parents from Loudoun County, VA made national news when they criticized the school board’s push for Critical Race Theory. One parent delivered a particularly moving speech, stating that CRT is “racist” . . . “abusive” . . . and “discriminates against one’s color.” She went on to criticize the curriculum for failing to promote an honest dialog, stating the following:

An honest dialog does not oppress. An honest dialog does not implement hatred or injustice.

CLICK: Fox News Online Article

Predictably, the school board responding my labeling the feedback from the concerned parents as “racist.” Ironically, the parent who delivered the moving speech is black. Conversely, the six members of the school board most supportive of the CRT are white. I’ve included the speech in the video below. It will be worth the 66 seconds it takes to watch it.

Impassioned Critique of CRT

Closing Thoughts

In 1839, Edward Bulwer-Lytton famously wrote, “The pen is mightier than the sword.” Sadly, in this Brearley School incident, the party with the better constructed argument failed to “pen” the right words to debunk the latest politically convenient truth: that our system (championed by the Republican is party)is inherently racist against blacks. In 1939, a misguided visionary stated: “He . . . who controls the youth, gains the future.” If our youth continue to hear in school, on CNN, on the internet, on social media—that America is racist against blacks; that whites are privileged & exploit blacks to maintain that privilege & that we have an obligation to change–then we’re teaching our kids to vote exclusively Democrat. And that’s the end goal; Democrats won the White House in 2008 & 2012 on a ticket of Black against White. In 2016, they changed their mantra & the unthinkable occurred—Donald Trump won! Republics are racists, Democrats are not—so we’re told. Today, the goal is to prevent another Republic from winning the White House. But wait, there’s more. Tomorrow, the goal is to eliminate the Republican party altogether! So much for democracy–or even, a Constitutional Republic for that matter. What is Critical Race Theory? It’s a means of establishing a single party system in the next generation. Remember: he who controls the youth gains the future. Oh yeah–do you know who the visionary was who spoke these words in 1939?

Adolf Hitler.

Related Terms: look for them in current events

If you found this discussion interesting, stay on the lookout for these key terms. If you hear them pop up in the news or in daily conversation, chances are high that the subject is Critical Race Theory or similar content. I think it’s good to stay aware: the indoctrination of Generation Next is all around us; and it seems as if the entire establishment is in on it. Trump wasn’t lying when he declared, in 2016, that he had beaten the system. If the system has their way, may have have witnessed the last Republic President vacate the White House in January.

1619 Project

woke studies/woke curriculum

institutionalized racism

white privilege

white apologist

cancel culture

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s