Critical Race Theory

[Age]

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, ALL 'human problems', which you want to LOOK AT and ADDRESS just, coincidentally and quite conveniently, are NOT the ones you, "veritas aequitas", have, correct?

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.

But NOT ALL 'racism' is evil, or are they?

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.

Of a "us vs them" attitude, 'you', "veritas aequitas", I have OBSERVED, are one who the MOST with this attitude.

To teach CRT in school to children [who are more emotional and don't have the rational capacity and maturity to be critical]

LOL "more emotional"

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.

So, to 'you', "veritas aequitas", to teach children in schools right FROM wrong will generate "other sorts of the evil acts and other associated problems", correct?

And, what are the "evil acts", EXACTLY, which you are referring to here?

[FlashDangerpants]

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.

But NOT ALL 'racism' is evil, or are they?

That's such a shame, you had a golden opportunity to ask your favourite ClaRIFyinG quESTion without looking like a total plum becasue in this context "critical" doesn't mean what it does as a standalone word int he dictionary. So.... what you should have asked was...

WHAT EXACTLY to "you" human that operates under the name "Vaginal Aquaduct" does CRITICAL mean EXACTLY to "you" and "humans" writing the word TODAY for my FUTURE AUDIENCE of "accolytes" that will totally EXIST ONE DAY because of THEeeeEEEeeEE SECRET TRUTH I could "tell" you BUT can't/won't/shan't/willn't/doesn't/wouldn't


The "critical" in CRT refers to this by the way, which isn't compatible with Vegetable Ambulance's deployment of the term.

[Sculptor]

So legislation the bans black people from sitting at the front of the bus is not racist?

As text, no, it's not racist. Text by itself has no meaning, no intent, etc. Individuals have to ascribe that via the way that they think about text.

As a text... nothing you post to the forum means anything.
You are still an idiot.

[Age]

Mick: It's indoctrination when it's ideas you're politically opposed to.

Manny: 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. You need to read some of their writings

Mick: Give me an example

Manny: I'm not going to bother.

Mick: lol

I believe the teaching of CRT to children [when done] is indoctrination because the CRTists had taken for granted what they are promoting is the solid grounding truth when it is not.
In addition, children and even most adults at out present phase of evolution do not have any reasonable competence to be critical, i.e. analytical and looking at all issues and weigh them wisely for optimality.

BUT, 'you', "veritas aequitas", DO HAVE the reasonable competence to be critical, et cetera, right?

As I had stated, ALL humans are programmed to be tribalistic [us vs them] from the primal beginning since such an instinct is necessary and net-positive [more pros than cons] for survival.

So, IF, supposedly, 'you', human beings, are programmed to be, so called, "tribalistic", and as 'you' PROCLAIM, "THIS IS NECESSARY for your survival", then 'you', "veritas aequitas", will ALWAYS BE 'tribalistic", have that "us vs them" attitude, and thus be RACIST as well, correct?

[at present this instinct which embedded is greatly inhibited and not very active in many]

You will TRY just about ANY to 'try to' "justify" your OWN wrong thinking and misbehaving.

However, not ALL humans are influenced by the tribalistic program to be racists [secondary].
Thus for CRTists to assume ALL humans are potentially racists is wrong.
To shove such falseness down the throats of inherently vulnerable children and students [if this is really done] is obviously indoctrination.[/quote]

What does the word 'indoctrination' mean or refer to, to 'you'?

Thus we should be more 'critical' [i.e. meta-critical] in general than being too critical with racial issue [i.e. CRT] which from what I note of the present writings on CRT, it is very limited and short-sighted.

As I had suggested, the more effective strategy to address the evil of racial issue is to accelerate the competence of morality and ethics [promote the good rather than evil] within the average humans via rewiring their brains for that purpose.

[Terrapin Station]

So legislation the bans black people from sitting at the front of the bus is not racist?

As text, no, it's not racist. Text by itself has no meaning, no intent, etc. Individuals have to ascribe that via the way that they think about text.

As a text... nothing you post to the forum means anything.

Correct, you have to assign meaning to it. That's how meaning works in general.

[Age]

So legislation the bans black people from sitting at the front of the bus is not racist?

As text, no, it's not racist.

If telling, with words, through text, or through mouth/s, that certain groups of, separated by "race", human beings that they can NOT sit at the front of the bus is NOT 'racist', then what is this EXACTLY?

If words that separate groups of human beings, into separate "races", based ones that are liked and disliked, is NOT 'racist', then what is it, EXACTLY?

Text by itself has no meaning, no intent, etc.

Maybe NOT, but the meaning and the intent behind the words, written in text, can be CLEARLY SEEN sometimes. Like in the text that CLEARLY STATES:

SOME (particular groups of) human beings can NOT sit at the front of the bus.

If you can NOT SEE the MEANING and the INTENT behind those words in that message, then I suggest you LOOK a BIT HARDER.

Also, IF "text by itself has NO meaning or NO intent", THEN the text under the label, "terrapin station", ALSO has NOT meaning and NO intent, Right?

Individuals have to ascribe that via the way that they think about text.

And, do 'you', the individual here, ACTUALLY think that the MESSAGE in those words ABOVE is NOT racist?

If yes, then what do you ASCRIBE via the way that 'you' think about that text?

The intent of the individuals creating and approving the text can be racist, and the intent of individuals subsequently enforcing the law can be racist (it might not be, but it can be).

So, what I, an individual, ascribe via the way I think about this text of yours here is that there is another underlying "driver" behind and below, which is what is allowing you human beings to "just keep doing" what is OBVIOUSLY TOTALLY Wrong. Like, for example, separating 'you', human beings, into SEPARATED groups and only allowing SOME to sit at the front of the bus.

Wrong IS Wrong. No matter how many different ways one 'tries to' "justify" and "rationalize" things.

Individuals do not make policy,

Sure they do, in all cases. It's just that individuals acting alone do not make policy unless it's a monarchy or dictatorship. In democracies, individuals act in concert with each other. They're still individuals, however. And something like racism can't obtain outside of particular thoughts, attitudes, etc. Only individuals have such things. They occur as brain phenomena in individuals' heads.

[Age]

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.

But NOT ALL 'racism' is evil, or are they?

That's such a shame, you had a golden opportunity to ask your favourite ClaRIFyinG quESTion without looking like a total plum becasue in this context "critical" doesn't mean what it does as a standalone word int he dictionary. So.... what you should have asked was...

WHAT EXACTLY to "you" human that operates under the name "Vaginal Aquaduct" does CRITICAL mean EXACTLY to "you" and "humans" writing the word TODAY for my FUTURE AUDIENCE of "accolytes" that will totally EXIST ONE DAY because of THEeeeEEEeeEE SECRET TRUTH I could "tell" you BUT can't/won't/shan't/willn't/doesn't/wouldn't


The "critical" in CRT refers to this by the way, which isn't compatible with Vegetable Ambulance's deployment of the term.

So, what does the 'critical' word in 'crt' refer to EXACTLY?

[Age]

As text, no, it's not racist. Text by itself has no meaning, no intent, etc. Individuals have to ascribe that via the way that they think about text.

As a text... nothing you post to the forum means anything.

Correct, you have to assign meaning to it. That's how meaning works in general.

So, essentially, I could ASSIGN whatever MEANING I want to the text of words, under the label "terrapin station", and the MEANING I ASSIGN could be FAR MORE True, Right, and Correct than the MEANING you ACTUALLY ASSIGNED to them, correct?

If no, then WHO and/or WHAT ASSIGNS the MEANING, which has the MOST truth, is the MOST right, or is the MOST correct, or is, in fact, ACTUALLY the ONLY MEANING that IS True, Right, AND Correct?

[FlashDangerpants]

But NOT ALL 'racism' is evil, or are they?

That's such a shame, you had a golden opportunity to ask your favourite ClaRIFyinG quESTion without looking like a total plum becasue in this context "critical" doesn't mean what it does as a standalone word int he dictionary. So.... what you should have asked was...

WHAT EXACTLY to "you" human that operates under the name "Vaginal Aquaduct" does CRITICAL mean EXACTLY to "you" and "humans" writing the word TODAY for my FUTURE AUDIENCE of "accolytes" that will totally EXIST ONE DAY because of THEeeeEEEeeEE SECRET TRUTH I could "tell" you BUT can't/won't/shan't/willn't/doesn't/wouldn't


The "critical" in CRT refers to this by the way, which isn't compatible with Vegetable Ambulance's deployment of the term.

So, what does the 'critical' word in 'crt' refer to EXACTLY?

Click the link and read the short and easy to understand article you lazy fucknut.

[Terrapin Station]

As a text... nothing you post to the forum means anything.

Correct, you have to assign meaning to it. That's how meaning works in general.

So, essentially, I could ASSIGN whatever MEANING I want to the text of words, under the label "terrapin station", and the MEANING I ASSIGN could be FAR MORE True, Right, and Correct than the MEANING you ACTUALLY ASSIGNED to them, correct?

If no, then WHO and/or WHAT ASSIGNS the MEANING, which has the MOST truth, is the MOST right, or is the MOST correct, or is, in fact, ACTUALLY the ONLY MEANING that IS True, Right, AND Correct?

Whether something is true is a subjective judgment.

[Terrapin Station]

If telling, with words, through text, or through mouth/s, that certain groups of, separated by "race", human beings that they can NOT sit at the front of the bus is NOT 'racist', then what is this EXACTLY?

Racism is a belief, and that belief can fuel actions obviously, which is the only reason it's a problem, but it's a belief.

The sounds you make in speaking aren't literally beliefs, don't literally have meaning, etc.

[Sculptor]

As text, no, it's not racist. Text by itself has no meaning, no intent, etc. Individuals have to ascribe that via the way that they think about text.

As a text... nothing you post to the forum means anything.

Correct, you have to assign meaning to it. That's how meaning works in general.

No I do not.

[Terrapin Station]

As a text... nothing you post to the forum means anything.

Correct, you have to assign meaning to it. That's how meaning works in general.

No I do not.

You have to assign meaning to it if you want to read it semantically.

[Immanuel Can]

Racialism is still a big issue...

No, it's not. We live in the most open, tolerant and racially-indifferent society in human history so far. What race problems remain are so small as to be laughable, actually. Nobody takes racists seriously anymore.

Well, except for the proponents of CRT, who are the only ones obsessed with race today.

In the first place we should increase the capacity of the average human to be 'critical' before we impose any 'critical theory of ..'

One does not "impose" any genuinely "critical" theory. Critical thinking is independent judgment, not dogma.

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.

They're all in the same Identity Politics Neo-Marxist club. The issue changes (from race to sex to gender to fat to age to disability etc.) but the propaganda is still all the standard stuff.

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

It's the worst kind of indoctrination.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Racialism is still a big issue...

No, it's not. We live in the most open, tolerant and racially-indifferent society in human history so far. What race problems remain are so small as to be laughable, actually. Nobody takes racists seriously anymore.

Well, except for the proponents of CRT, who are the only ones obsessed with race today.

What?? for you to hold the above views merely exposed your ignorance.
It is very true there had been lots of progress with racialism throughout the world but the problem of racialism is still serious and prevalent in many countries in the world.

Note this;
https://www.indexmundi.com/surveys/results/8
The USA is 13th of 76 on the list.

As I had stated, ALL humans are "programmed" with the tribalistic 'us vs them' program which is critical for survival but also came with its cons and one of the con is racialism. Because such a program is embedded in the DNA and deeply brain, racialism is not easy to get rid or be modulated as compared to say slavery.

In the first place we should increase the capacity of the average human to be 'critical' before we impose any 'critical theory of ..'

One does not "impose" any genuinely "critical" theory. Critical thinking is independent judgment, not dogma.

Critical Race Theory emerged from 'Critical Theory' [Frankfurt & marxist] which is supposed to be part of being critical and analytic.
The 'Critical Theory' itself is flawed with evil elements and Critical Race Theory is more evil but nevertheless the original intention is to be 'critical' and analytical.
Being a dogma does not mean it was not derived from 'critical' nor analytical basis. Being a dogma and an indoctrination is the way the doctrines therefrom are believed dogmatically. Even Science [objective, critical, rational] can also be a dogma when held by those who are into Scientism.

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.

They're all in the same Identity Politics Neo-Marxist club. The issue changes (from race to sex to gender to fat to age to disability etc.) but the propaganda is still all the standard stuff.

Yes, in a way, but not all of them indulge in neo-marxism or are with the Left.

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

It's the worst kind of indoctrination.

Agree.