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

[Jredbaron96]

Same as the Neo marxist.

....

No, the neo-marxist does not abandon class essentialism nor materialist history. At best, they expand it beyond Marx's initial view points. You are speaking nonsense.

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]

Did you really just cite Wikipedia and leave out the part that says exactly what I said?

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]

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"

Not only does that not actually answer my question, it doesn't even address it.

 

[jmotivator]

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.

I know what they SAY Postmodernism does, I'm telling you what Postmodernism ACTUALLY does. Some of us actually think critically, including testing and entertaining the very good possibility that Postmodern philosophers are actually full of crap... surprisingly, they are packed to the gills with shit.

If Postmodernism ever solved a problem rather than creating endless nonsense then I might reconsider my long held opinion that Postmodernism and it's adherence are nitwits. Until then, I've read and rejected Marxist/Critical Theory/Postmodernist nonsense from the original sources, so don't expect to sway be by pointing at what I already know and stomping your foot.

 

[Jredbaron96]

I know what they SAY Postmodernism does, I'm telling you what Postmodernism ACTUALLY does.

So to clarify, all of postmodernism is a lie because you said so because it makes your argument on the internet more logically consistent.

 

[jmotivator]

So to clarify, all of postmodernism is a lie because you said so because it makes your argument on the internet more logically consistent.

Postmodernism doesn't recognize truths, so there can be no lies. It undoes itself.

 

[Jredbaron96]

Postmodernism doesn't recognize truths, so there can be no lies. It undoes itself.

If that's what you need to tell yourself, sure. Unfortunately the entire postmodernist movement did not invent itself just so you could make claims about it on the internet.

 

[jmotivator]

If that's what you need to tell yourself, sure. Unfortunately the entire postmodernist movement did not invent itself just so you could make claims about it on the internet.

LOL. What a strange attempt at a jab. Does Postmodernism not want criticism?

 

[Bodi]

Let's say it is communism. What exactly is wrong with our military being educated about communism? Or is it better they remain uneducated and just shout communism without even understanding what it means?

Students already learn about racism in school... CRT is about blame. Besides, I want military leaders to learn about military tactics, their equipment, strategy, leadership, etc. Not about how white officers have benefitted from privilege and other irrelevant to the military crap.

 

[dixon01767]

....

No, the neo-marxist does not abandon class essentialism nor materialist history. At best, they expand it beyond Marx's initial view points. You are speaking nonsense.



Did you really just cite Wikipedia and leave out the part that says exactly what I said?

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]

Nothing there contradicts anything Ive said. And confirms they dont have a problem with meta narratives and only have a problem with the current "grand narratives". They have their own.

 

[Jredbaron96]

Nothing there contradicts anything Ive said. And confirms they dont have a problem with meta narratives and only have a problem with the current "grand narratives". They have their own.

Dude, what?

If they *reject* the Marxist metanarrative, then by logic they can't follow the Marxist metanarrative.

There's not a single metanarrative, there are multiple ones postulated by various ideologies. If they reject the current ones then you can't day the follow it.

 

[Jredbaron96]

LOL. What a strange attempt at a jab. Does Postmodernism not want criticism?

I think you need to take a step back and rethink your argument because you're not making any sense.

I don't care whether or not you agree with postmodernism. That's irrelevant to this debate, which is about what constitutes a postmodern idea and why Marxism doesn't fit it.

You can claim that you think they're one in the same but they're not, as the original philosophers of postmodernism said when they rejected the metanarrative of Marxism.

 

[jmotivator]

I think you need to take a step back and rethink your argument because you're not making any sense.

I don't care whether or not you agree with postmodernism. That's irrelevant to this debate, which is about what constitutes a postmodern idea and why Marxism doesn't fit it.

You can claim that you think they're one in the same but they're not, as the original philosophers of postmodernism said when they rejected the metanarrative of Marxism.

And MY argument is that in practice Postmodernism functions as Social Contrarianism and uses various imagined injustrices (race, class, gender, etc.) to promote whatever the majority of the given culture doesn't want. THis is why you will find, more often than not, that the people who push CRT and other CT schools are also marxists, especially in the current culture, now that the ignorant youngsters have been taught to ignore the horrors of Communism.

Look, for instance, at Nikole Hannah-Jones, creator of the 1619 Project built entirely on the premise of Critical Race Theory.... and she's also a communist. Becausre, whether you like it or not, the solution pushed by all of these CRT clergy is Communism. Communism cured Cuba of racism! Just ask Nikole Hannah-Jones.

It's a rather nice gig in any culture, really, since no society is perfect, and so you can always take the opposite side, point to something that seems wrong, and idiots will listen... and they won't even bother checking in the failing that you are using to justify your position was caused by your own previously promoted policies. And around and around.

 

[Jredbaron96]

And MY argument is that in practice Postmodernism functions as Social Contrarianism and uses various imagined injustrices (race, class, gender, etc.) to promote whatever the majority of the given culture doesn't want.

Although this is an aside, you're saying that postmodernists concerns about say, racial injustice, are unfounded?

THis is why you will find, more often than not, that the people who push CRT and other CT schools are also marxists, especially in the current culture, now that the ignorant youngsters have been taught to ignore the horrors of Communism.

What element of Critical Race theory do you believe embodies historical materialism?

Look, for instance, at Nikole Hannah-Jones, creator of the 1619 Project built entirely on the premise of Critical Race Theory

One of these is a theory of legal jurisprudence and the other is a journalistic project. The 1619 project is overwhelmingly a historical endeavor, not a legal one. Hannah-Jones is a journalist, not a lawyer.

 

[jmotivator]

What element of Critical Race theory do you believe embodies historical materialism?

Critical Race Materialism: Theorizing Justice in the Wake of Global Neoliberalism

Critical Race Theory's (CRT's) first two decades produced a rich and diverse literature deconstructing law and society using a racial lens. CRT's emergence and rise occurred at a moment in history where the U.S. was still the uncontested unipolar superpower whose privileged elites enjoyed...

repository.law.miami.edu

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

journals.sagepub.com

Marxist Materialism and Critical Race Theory: A Comparative Analysis of Media and Cultural Influence on the Formation of Stereotypes and Proliferation of Police Brutality against Black Men on JSTOR

Using Marxist and Critical Race Theory frameworks to call codified culture into question, this essay explores how diverse modes of expression are crushed by the...

www.jstor.org

Materialist and Idealist CRT

CRT, according to Richard Delgado (2001), has an ‘idealist wing’ and a ‘materialist wing’. The former, he argues, is concerned with discourse analysis, and maintains that ‘racism and discrimination are matters of thinking, attitude, categorization, and discourse’ (ibid.)

ebrary.net

https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1120&context=mjrl

https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/1993/06/1707-1791_Online.pdf

And so on...

 

[Jredbaron96]

snip

You quite literally just googled "historical materialism and critical race theory" and evidently didn't read through these before copying and pasting. I know because after reading through the first couple of sources I did the same and found some of them on the first page.

Critical Race Materialism: Theorizing Justice in the Wake of Global Neoliberalism

Critical Race Theory's (CRT's) first two decades produced a rich and diverse literature deconstructing law and society using a racial lens. CRT's emergence and rise occurred at a moment in history where the U.S. was still the uncontested unipolar superpower whose privileged elites enjoyed...

repository.law.miami.edu

The term historical materialism doesn't even appear in the text.

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

journals.sagepub.com

"Theoretical Foundations of an Anti-Racist Queer Feminist Historical Materialism" doesn't have a synopsis which includes critical race theory anywhere in the text, in fact the synopsis even states it "rethinks Marx’s materialist conception of history", suggesting it has a different view of Marxist thinking.

Marxist Materialism and Critical Race Theory: A Comparative Analysis of Media and Cultural Influence on the Formation of Stereotypes and Proliferation of Police Brutality against Black Men on JSTOR

Using Marxist and Critical Race Theory frameworks to call codified culture into question, this essay explores how diverse modes of expression are crushed by the...

www.jstor.org

This is not an explanation of the foundations of historical materialism in Critical race theory, this is an article that attempts to use both to form a "Comparative Analysis of Media and Cultural Influence on the Formation of Stereotypes and Proliferation of Police Brutality against Black Men"

Given that it's behind a paywall, did you even read this before posting it?

Materialist and Idealist CRT

CRT, according to Richard Delgado (2001), has an ‘idealist wing’ and a ‘materialist wing’. The former, he argues, is concerned with discourse analysis, and maintains that ‘racism and discrimination are matters of thinking, attitude, categorization, and discourse’ (ibid.)

ebrary.net

Literally the last paragraph of this synopsis says "In the chapter 3, I will critique, from a Marxist perspective, CRT’s two major tenets (to which a number of other tenets relate): the first is that the concept of ‘white supremacy’ better describes oppression based on ‘race’ in contemporary societies than does the concept of ‘racism’; the second is the belief in ‘race’ rather than social class as the primary contradiction in society."

He is literally using the Marxist perspective to criticize the tents of Critical race theory, not endorse it. You really didn't read this, did you?

https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1120&context=mjrl

The term "historical materialism" appears no where in this text. Even further, the only time "Marxist" appears in the text is a commentary on Marxism's contention within the conundrum of race vs class.

https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/1993/06/1707-1791_Online.pdf

Neither "historical materialism" nor "marx" appear in this text, nor does the term "materialism".

And so on...

A quick search history of your posts for the terms "historical materialism" showed no mentions prior to this thread, even when accounting for threads where Marx and the derivatives of his teaching are being discussed. My guess is you were unfamiliar with this term until I brought it up. This by itself is not damning; I myself was unfamiliar with the term (though vaguely familiar with the concept) until a few months ago when I cracked open the book I have on Marx.

But instead of admitting that you instead tried to play it off like you did and then used google to try to back up your claims, only to produce a ton of sources, none of which actually validate what you're saying (in fairness two of them I can't read because they're behind paywalls, but neither of there synopsis's back up your claims), and one of which in fact implicates a refutation of it by pointing out the Marxist issues with critical race theory.

 

[jmotivator]

You quite literally just googled "historical materialism and critical race theory" and evidently didn't read through these before copying and pasting. I know because after reading through the first couple of sources I did the same and found some of them on the first page.

I did read through them, better than yo did, evidently.

Also you realize that your attempted dig that I got some of them off the first page of a Google search doesn't make the point you think it does?

This is not an explanation of the foundations of historical materialism in Critical race theory, this is an article that attempts to use both to form a "Comparative Analysis of Media and Cultural Influence on the Formation of Stereotypes and Proliferation of Police Brutality against Black Men"

Given that it's behind a paywall, did you even read this before posting it?

Was the abstract to hard for you to read?

Neither "historical materialism" nor "marx" appear in this text, nor does the term "materialism".

You really are terrible at this. You are so superficially informed that an article that is precisely a Critical Theory on Race using Marxist materialism, literally defining "whiteness" as property, isn't CRT or "historical" materialism because you scanned for Marx and "historical materialism" and couldn't find them...

Literally the last paragraph of this synopsis says "In the chapter 3, I will critique, from a Marxist perspective, CRT’s two major tenets (to which a number of other tenets relate): the first is that the concept of ‘white supremacy’ better describes oppression based on ‘race’ in contemporary societies than does the concept of ‘racism’; the second is the belief in ‘race’ rather than social class as the primary contradiction in society."


He is literally using the Marxist perspective to criticize the tents of Critical race theory, not endorse it. You really didn't read this, did you?

My entire point from the beginning is literally that CRT is Marxism that replaces class with race which is exactly what you just quoted...

You aren't worth debating anymore. Like all Postmodernist debaters you have lost your own lead and are now redefining your requirements for proof to the point that you are shooting yourself in your own foot. You have backed yourself into such a corner now that all of your critiques of my sources rest of your inability to to find terms in the body of the text, rather than addressing the text itself which argues the very point I have been making all along.

See, you are the embodiment of the problem with Postmodernist bullshit. Nothing means anything to you, only contrarianism, and when cornered you pretend that materialism isn't materialism, and hand your argument on utter nonsense.

 

[dixon01767]

Dude, what?

If they *reject* the Marxist metanarrative, then by logic they can't follow the Marxist metanarrative.

Thus the term NEO marxist dude.

 

[dixon01767]

One of these is a theory of legal jurisprudence and the other is a journalistic project. The 1619 project is overwhelmingly a historical endeavor, not a legal one. Hannah-Jones is a journalist, not a lawyer.

You are about 25 years behind.

Spread​

In 1995, Gloria Ladson-Billings and William F. Tate began applying the critical race theory framework in the field of education, moving it beyond the field of legal scholarship.

Critical race theory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And Hannah Jones herself says it is not history. It's an origin story. Not THE origin story but an origin story to "change the narrative". To substitute the current narrative with CRT's own.

​

 

[Jredbaron96]

Thus the term NEO marxist dude.

Who told you that neo-Marxists reject the Marxist metanarrative?

I did read through them, better than yo did, evidently.

Also you realize that your attempted dig that I got some of them off the first page of a Google search doesn't make the point you think it does?



Was the abstract to hard for you to read?


You really are terrible at this. You are so superficially informed that an article that is precisely a Critical Theory on Race using Marxist materialism, literally defining "whiteness" as property, isn't CRT or "historical" materialism because you scanned for Marx and "historical materialism" and couldn't find them...

I asked you specifically to explain how CRT was rooted in historical materialism, and most of your sources didn't even mention the concept. This is because you are bad at debating, and know nothing of this subject.

My entire point from the beginning is literally that CRT is Marxism that replaces class with race which is exactly what you just quoted...

An ideology who's entire premise is the supremacy of class as a social system, and for some reason you believe you can just swap that out with no questions asked.

You aren't worth debating anymore. Like all Postmodernist debaters you have lost your own lead and are now redefining your requirements for proof to the point that you are shooting yourself in your own foot. You have backed yourself into such a corner now that all of your critiques of my sources rest of your inability to to find terms in the body of the text, rather than addressing the text itself which argues the very point I have been making all along.

See, you are the embodiment of the problem with Postmodernist bullshit. Nothing means anything to you, only contrarianism, and when cornered you pretend that materialism isn't materialism, and hand your argument on utter nonsense.

I'm not a postmodernist, lol.

 

[swing_voter]

Marxism: the workers own the means of production.

So Walmart is owned by the employees who work at Walmart. They sell stuff that is made by employees who also own their means of production, like toilet paper employees who own their own toilet paper factory.

I think OP is on to something!

 

[jmotivator]

I asked you specifically to explain how CRT was rooted in historical materialism, and most of your sources didn't even mention the concept. This is because you are bad at debating, and know nothing of this subject.

I'm aware, and clearly you don't understand either term or your wouldn't have had to resort to running a find to see if the words appear rather than the meaning.

That's like saying the statement "An economic system centered on the public ownership of the means of production" isn't Socialism because you scanned the sentence and didn't see the word "Socialism".

An ideology who's entire premise is the supremacy of class as a social system, and for some reason you believe you can just swap that out with no questions asked.

You really are a dishonest debater. I've already stated specifically that CRT couches Marxist social critique as a function of race... which it does. It's also no secret, as I have said and you run away from, that CRT's biggest proponents also happen to be communists. And they are communists because CRT is communist. The very same way Lenin used Marx as a justification for Communism, so to do CRT proponents use Marxist ideology to justify their Communist goals.

I've show it too you in numerous arguments by university professors and academic works.. I have done what I can to educate you.

I'm not a postmodernist, lol.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it's a duck, even if the duck doesn't know it's a duck.

 

[Jredbaron96]

I'm aware, and clearly you don't understand either term or your wouldn't have had to resort to running a find to see if the words appear rather than the meaning.

That's like saying the statement "An economic system centered on the public ownership of the means of production" isn't Socialism because you scanned the sentence and didn't see the word "Socialism".

I asked you for a simple explanation and your response was to copy and past the first six responses you found on Google. You didn't even read them because two of them are behind pay walls and one of them directly went against your claims.

You really are a dishonest debater. I've already stated specifically that CRT couches Marxist social critique as a function of race... which it does.

Marxist social critique is the basis by which Marxism explains the history of human conflict through historical materialism. I asked you to explain where and how CRT is inspired by historical materialism, and you couldn't. In fact one of your own sources directly countered your claims.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it's a duck, even if the duck doesn't know it's a duck.

The reality is that because you lack a real understanding of what any of these terms mean, you have to try and force everything and everyone into your own narrow perceptions because otherwise you can't comprehend because you haven't the knowledge to do so.

I never at any point claimed to be a postmodernist, all I did was point out the philosophical differences and you ended up whining about postmodernism in return.

 

[dixon01767]

Who told you that neo-Marxists reject the Marxist metanarrative?

Marcuse. And

Jean-François Lyotard - New World Encyclopedia

www.newworldencyclopedia.org

 

[jmotivator]

I asked you for a simple explanation and your response was to copy and past the first six responses you found on Google. You didn't even read them because two of them are behind pay walls and one of them directly went against your claims.

No, you have made a request to answer to your terms which you failed to define. All of my articles use marxist methodology to bolster their CRT agendas, some explicitly, and others in clear ideology. You simply did a dumb search for terms and delcare them insufficient... because you have nothing, and are left to rely on superficialities to cover for your lack of depth.

Marxist social critique is the basis by which Marxism explains the history of human conflict through historical materialism. I asked you to explain where and how CRT is inspired by historical materialism, and you couldn't. In fact one of your own sources directly countered your claims.

And, as one of my examples spells out directly and you are too blind or stubborn to admit it, CRT adherents are arguing that RACE, specifically "whiteness", is property, and therefor subject to consideration under Marxist historical materialism. You only managed to search for materialism and Marx on that article before you ignorantly declared it irrelevant.

The reality is that because you lack a real understanding of what any of these terms mean, you have to try and force everything and everyone into your own narrow perceptions because otherwise you can't comprehend because you haven't the knowledge to do so.

Again, you are nothing but hand waving and superficial nonsense, all the way through our discussion. You want to complain that my search for materials all happened to show up on the first page of a google search (an indication that my argument is actually COMMON among CRT ideologues), when in reality you have done absolutely nothing to move your argument. It would appear to any observer that you have simply pulled a few phrases from wikipedia and then demanded that my evidence fit your narrow minded, ignorant position, going so far as to declare very pertinent articles as useless for failing a cursory word search.

I never at any point claimed to be a postmodernist, all I did was point out the philosophical differences and you ended up whining about postmodernism in return.

I never said you claimed to be a postmodernist. You are, however, a postmodernist in your debate methodology.. which is really the only place where Postmodernism can exist, lacking any real world examples of a successful application to solving real world problems. It's great at creating them, though!

 

[joko104]

48 soldiers are killed and 49 horrifically injured in the next Air Force transport to crash - for which the solution is to teach personnel in the Air Force that the United States military, like the entire United States history is pure evil in an otherwise perfect world of perfect countries and morally perfect militaries.

 

[dixon01767]

48 soldiers are killed and 49 horrifically injured in the next Air Force transport to crash - for which the solution is to teach personnel in the Air Force that the United States military, like the entire United States history is pure evil in an otherwise perfect world of perfect countries and morally perfect militaries.

Meanwhile a group of 300 black Haitians crossed the border illegally today into Texas to enter the systemically racist USA where blacks are oppressed by the white oppressors.