Air Force Academy professor pushes for military academies to teach critical race theory

[Jredbaron96]

The rage against critical race theory

On a recent episode of Marc Lamont Hill's show Black News Tonight, a Georgia politician revealed a singular problem with his party’s mania against critical race theory (CRT) — he doesn’t know what it is.

cpusa.org

You folks fight it out among yourselves.

Still not an answer. Do you understand why a postmodern philosophy/theory by definition can't be Marxist? And vice versa, Marxism cannot be considered post modernist?

 

[Parrish]

It's time to mandate that teachers and professors wear body cams so that they can be prosecuted for teaching history that goes against the Big Lie and white "culture." Lock 'em up.

 

[jmotivator]

Still not an answer. Do you understand why a postmodern philosophy/theory by definition can't be Marxist? And vice versa, Marxism cannot be considered post modernist?

You are attempting to pigeonhole the discussion. Postmodernism and Marxism are not mutually exclusive, and the movement today is in supporting the commonalities on Marxism and CRT. It helps because, buy design, Postmodernism is always redefining and morphing to fit whatever stupid

So here is Glenn Bracey, associate Professor of Sociology at Villanova telling you that you are full of beans.



"The core question of critical race theory is one of releasing people—especially people of color—especially black people—from the oppressive systems that deny us access to our species being, including racism. It's Marxism, my point being, critical race theory is Marxism, is fundamentally a spiritual concern, and it's the same spiritual concern that evangelical Christians have, in that they believe that all people are made in the imago Dei, the image of God,"

And my previous post showing that American Communists are racing to lay claim to CRT as well... face it, you are full of shit.

The CRT arguments are indistinguishable from Marxist and Communist arguments, and push for the same remedies. Everyone knows this but you.

 

[Jredbaron96]

You are attempting to pigeonhole the discussion. Postmodernism and Marxism are not mutually exclusive,

Yes, they are lol. Thank you for admitting you know nothing about what postmodernism is.

You cannon claim something which deliberately states that meta-narratives don't exist is the same thing as a an ideology who's entire framework is based on a meta-narrative.

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

If they already teach a comprehensive corpus of US law in military academies, I think CRT ought to be included.

If, on the other hand, military academy students don't already have a foundation in US legal scholarship, graduate-level theory might not be the best place to start.

Critical Race Theory should definitely be taught in police academies though. If those students don't already have a foundation in US legal scholarship, they shouldn't be entrusted with enforcing US law.

 

[bomberfox]

They're not planning to teaching them so they just know about it, they want them to believe it and live it.

Maybe we will have less insurrectionists following a wannabe fuhrer that way.

 

[American]

Yeah like there are no racists in the military

Not like BIPOCS are such a small number of higher ranks
Must not have the skills/edcation needed, right?

Irrelevant since this teaching won't change any of that.

 

[jmotivator]

Yes, they are lol. Thank you for admitting you know nothing about what postmodernism is.

You cannon claim something which deliberately states that meta-narratives don't exist is the same thing as a an ideology who's entire framework is based on a meta-narrative.

No they aren't. I've provided you with two examples of arguments for the convergent nature of CRT and Marxism. YOU simply handwave away the arguments because you don't want it to be true.

It's pretty funny too, because you are drifting into the inevitable realization that the biggest problem with Postmodernism is that Postmodernism describes absolutely nothing with any precision. It is a jumbled mass of disjointed musings masquerading as a cogent philosophy, and so therefor can't really be for or against any statement as true or false because Postmodernism abhors the establishment of truths in the first place (because truth is power and power makes truth subjective and implies hegemony).

So Postmodernism will always drift to support the leftist zeitgeist because Postmodernism is a load of equivocating nonsense that can conclude whatever you want.

 

[dixon01767]

They're not even on the same wave length

All of Critical Theories are neo marxism

 

[dixon01767]

You mean the Frankfurt school who posses and supported concepts that are fundamentally at odds with orthodox Marxism?

Thus the term NEO-marxist. To distinguish them from the marxist.

 

[American]

Still not an answer. Do you understand why a postmodern philosophy/theory by definition can't be Marxist? And vice versa, Marxism cannot be considered post modernist?

It is Marxist, end of story!

 

[jmotivator]

It is Marxist, end of story!

Jredbaron96 has retreated to the amorphous nonsense of Postmodern deconstruction. Postmodernism has no truths, so it is whatever you want it to be. What Jredbaron96 is suffering from cognitive dissonance over the fact that the leftists of the 1970s and 1980s needed Postmodernism to distance Neo-Marxism from the carnage of Soviet Communism, and Vietcong and Khmer Rouge atrocities more contemporaneously.... so Postmodernism was what they needed it to be: Anti-Marxist. We are now several decades beyond that, and the movement of the left is back to full throated Communist and Socialist advocacy, and so Postmodernism, the philosophy designed to mean whatever the **** you want it to mean, is now returning to its classic Marxist roots.

I mean, anyone who has payed attention and has reserved the right to think for themselves, can easily deduce that the core of Postmodernism is simply social contrarianism, it operates as the devil's advocate against the wisdom of the prevailing society. When Marxism was on full, rotting display across the globe, Postmodernism argued against it as readily as it argues against Capitalism... though never really able to settle on an alternative because an alternative would require commitment to truths that Postmodernism can't adopt. Now that the left has begun to return to their early20th century Marxist idealism, and originalist Marxism is out of favor, of course Postmodernism have to take up the mantle... because Postmodernists are idiots.

the final two stanzas of the Kipling poem "The Gods of the Copy Book Headings" describes precisely the current drift of Postmodern philosophy:

"As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!"

​

 

[JANFU]

Irrelevant since this teaching won't change any of that.

Some find knowledge scary

 

[Jredbaron96]

No they aren't.

Yes they are. You cannot claim something that rejects meta-narratives is the same thing as an ideology which based on a meta-narrative.

 

[Jredbaron96]

It is Marxist, end of story!

You couldn't explain what Marxism is if you're life depended on it.

 

[Jredbaron96]

All of Critical Theories are neo marxism

Interesting. So, what element of viewing the law as insufficient means to guarantee racial equality can be found in Marx's writings?

The answer is none, because Marx was far more concerned with economic matters than legal matters, and Marx viewed class, not race, as the principal element on defining social structures and society at large.

 

[Jredbaron96]

Thus the term NEO-marxist. To distinguish them from the marxist.

Saying it's Neo-Marxist rather than Marxist doesn't change the fact that a legal theory based on insufficiency of the law as a means to achieve racial equality doesn't have anything to do with historical materialism (unless you want to argue that racism today is the result of white resentment over the loss of capital owing to slavery being abolished), and that the emphasis on race and legal jurisprudence doesn't have a basis in Marxist teachings, which gloss over both.

 

[American]

You couldn't explain what Marxism is if you're life depended on it.

And you couldn't explain why we should entertain it here in the United States.

 

[Jredbaron96]

And you couldn't explain why we should entertain it here in the United States.

I would not, because I'm not a Marxist. I don't believe historical materialism is an adequate meta-narrative of human history and I have issue with the notions of class essentialism.

However I am familiar enough with both those concepts, which form the core of Marxist thinking, to know that a legal theory on the viewing of the law on the matter of racial equality is not based on either of those things, even if they draw inspiration from the methodologies and theories of Marxist academia.

 

[dixon01767]

If they already teach a comprehensive corpus of US law in military academies, I think CRT ought to be included.

If, on the other hand, military academy students don't already have a foundation in US legal scholarship, graduate-level theory might not be the best place to start.

Critical Race Theory should definitely be taught in police academies though. If those students don't already have a foundation in US legal scholarship, they shouldn't be entrusted with enforcing US law.

CRT has nothing to do with US law other than a critique of it as racism.

 

[jmotivator]

Yes they are. You cannot claim something that rejects meta-narratives is the same thing as an ideology which based on a meta-narrative.

Postmodernism doesn't "reject the meta-narratives", that is the lie that Postmodernists tell themselves to pretend that they are above culture. What Postmodernism actually does is it adopts the competing narratives every time. It rejected the Marxist narrative in the 70s and 80s while the horrors of Marxism were fresh, it now embraces the Marxist narrative because society no longer embraces the Marxist narrative. It is nothing more than Social Contrarianism with the only constant being that Postmodernism opposes Capitalism, mainly because Capitalism is such a rousing success that it never falls out of fashion, except to the soul sucking destruction of Marxism which Postmodern nitwits invariably ushered in.

Or, put another way Postmodernism is simply a way for leftists to sail around their own failures, time and again, by pretending they didn't cause them and the destruction is somehow the fault of Capitalists. It is unconditionally Anti-Capitalist and fashionably Marxist as far as they can get away with.

Currently, as my provided evidence shows, your fellow travellers are ready to come out of the closet as proud Marxists yet again because they have a healthy cadre of idiots who can't see Postmodernism for what it actually is.

 

[dixon01767]

Yes, they are lol. Thank you for admitting you know nothing about what postmodernism is.

You cannon claim something which deliberately states that meta-narratives don't exist is the same thing as a an ideology who's entire framework is based on a meta-narrative.

CRT rejects the traditional narratives of the US and capitalism and seeks to replace it with one of their own creation.

A metanarrative (also meta-narrative and grand narrative; French: métarécit) in critical theory and particularly in postmodernism is a narrative about narratives of historical meaning, experience, or knowledge, which offers a society legitimation through the anticipated completion of a (as yet unrealized) master idea.[1][2][3]

 

[dixon01767]

I would not, because I'm not a Marxist. I don't believe historical materialism is an adequate meta-narrative of human history and I have issue with the notions of class essentialism.

Same as the Neo marxist.

 

[dixon01767]

Interesting. So, what element of viewing the law as insufficient means to guarantee racial equality can be found in Marx's writings?

NEO marxist to distinguish them from the writings of Marx.

"Marcuse strongly criticizes consumerism and modern "industrial society", which he claims is a form of social control. Marcuse argues that while the system we live in may claim to be democratic, it is actually totalitarian. A form of technological rationality has imposed itself on every aspect of culture and public life, and has become hegemonic. Our identification with this hegemonic ideology of modern industrial society, this ideology does not represent a form of "false-conscious", but rather has succeeded in becoming reality.

Modern industrial societies have furthermore created an "affluent society", which in increasing comfort have disguised the exploitative nature of the system, and have therefore strengthened means of domination and control. Modern "affluent society" therefore limits opportunities for political revolution against capitalism."

All Critical theory seeks to create "opportunities for political revolution against capitalism"

 

[Jredbaron96]

Postmodernism doesn't "reject the meta-narratives", that is the lie that Postmodernists tell themselves to pretend that they are above culture.

Yes, it does lol.

Although first used earlier in the 20th century, the term was brought into prominence by Jean-François Lyotard in 1979, with his claim that the postmodern was characterised precisely by a mistrust of the "grand narratives" (Progress, Enlightenment, Emancipation, Marxism) that had formed an essential part of modernity.[5]

That's verbatim what the ideology is about, not whatever bullshit you try to make up to support your ham fisted argument.