Critical Theory and Critical Race Theory - Distinct Theories, Yet Similar Roots

[j brown's body]

Try this link.

Critical Theory (Frankfurt School) (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

That you libs dont know that Critical Theory has its roots in Marxism, is because you dont want to know,

Give an example of Marxism in CRT.

 

[j brown's body]

The second one: Racism in the United States is normal, not aberrational.

That is patently false. It may have been true at some point in the past, however that is certainly not true today. The word aberrational means unwelcome. Racism is VERY unwelcome, and VERY aberrational.


Nope. It's 100% true. if you want to ignore it, then ignore it.

We talk of white and black neighborhoods as though they are normal. They are not.

 

[Michael Cole]

Critical Theory



Critical Race Theory is also a Marxist-inspired philosophy which aims to "overcome the social structures through which people are dominated and oppressed" but does so through the prism of racism. Six basic tenets of Critical Race Theory are:

• Race is socially constructed, not biologically natural.
• Racism in the United States is normal, not aberrational:
• Legal advances for people of color tend to serve the interests of dominant white groups. Thus, the racial hierarchy that characterizes American society may be unaffected or even reinforced by ostensible improvements in the legal status of oppressed or exploited people.
• Members of minority groups periodically undergo “differential racialization,” or the attribution to them of varying sets of negative stereotypes, again depending on the needs or interests of whites.
• No individual can be adequately identified by membership in a single group. An African American person, for example, may also identify as a woman, a lesbian, a feminist, a Christian, and so on.
• The “voice of color” thesis holds that people of color are uniquely qualified to speak on behalf of other members of their group (or groups) regarding the forms and effects of racism.

source: https://www.britannica.com/topic/critical-race-theory/Basic-tenets-of-critical-race-theory

Racism

Kamala Harris has proposed tax breaks for people of color.

Cite?

White people would be excluded from these tax breaks because of their skin color. Her plan is blatantly racist because it excludes people based solely on the color of their skin. Thankfully, the U.S. Constitution (Amendment XIV, equal protections clause) explicitly prohibits government from excluding people based on their skin color. It's ironic that CRT is fundamentally racist, and that Kamala Harris embraces racism - - as long as it's against white people!

Yes, CRT is rooted in the Frankfurt School. Critical Theory permeates women's rights issues, gay rights, handicap rights and other areas where people have been disadvantaged. Not sure what the point is.

If Harris is proposing tax cuts based on race, I would think that would be illegal. What is the relevance of this to CRT?

 

[SkyChief]

Cite?


Yes, CRT is rooted in the Frankfurt School. Critical Theory permeates women's rights issues, gay rights, handicap rights and other areas where people have been disadvantaged. Not sure what the point is.

The point is: CRT is based on Critical Theory. This is the only thread (that I know of) which makes this connection. Most people don't know that CRT is based on Critical Theory - It's important.

If Harris is proposing tax cuts based on race, I would think that would be illegal.

Kamala proposed this in 2018 during an interview. Even back then pundits pointed out that the Equal Protections clause precludes special protections (from taxes) based on skin color. Harris has since reversed her race-based tax cuts proposition.

Even though Harris dropped the tax cuts for blacks plan, she HAS vowed to sign any Reparations (special treatment of blacks) Bill that reaches the Resolute Desk. Harris is a firm believer in race-based reparations. But again, the 14th Amendment Equal protections clause precludes any special treatment based on skin color, so any race-based Reparations Bill would be immediately struck down by SCOTUS.

What is the relevance of this to CRT?

CRT is based on false premise. For this reason, the theory can be rejected.

 

[Michael Cole]

The point is: CRT is based on Critical Theory. This is the only thread (that I know of) which makes this connection. Most people don't know that CRT is based on Critical Theory - It's important.

So it's informative. Okay.

Kamala proposed this in 2018 during an interview. Even back then pundits pointed out that the Equal Protections clause precludes special protections (from taxes) based on skin color. Harris has since reversed her race-based tax cuts proposition.

Even though Harris dropped the tax cuts for blacks plan, she HAS vowed to sign any Reparations (special treatment of blacks) Bill that reaches the Resolute Desk. Harris is a firm believer in race-based reparations. But again, the 14th Amendment Equal protections clause precludes any special treatment based on skin color, so any race-based Reparations Bill would be immediately struck down by SCOTUS.

That's not a cite, but I'll assume it's true. Still not seeing the connection to CRT.

CRT is based on false premise.

CRT is based on the Frankfurt School. It's a study of oppressors and the oppressed. This dynamic exists, so it's not a false premise.

CRT studies how the law has affected people based on race. You can disagree with its conclusions, but the premise is solid.

For this reason, the theory can be rejected.

You can reject the theory, but your reasoning is faulty.

 

[SkyChief]

CRT is based on the Frankfurt School. It's a study of oppressors and the oppressed. This dynamic exists, so it's not a false premise.

CRT studies how the law has affected people based on race. You can disagree with its conclusions, but the premise is solid.

The Big Six tenets of CRT are hypotheses. At LEAST two of the hypotheses are false: i.e., the hypothesis that

Racism in the United States is normal, not aberrational:

That is FALSE. Racism in America is NOT normal and is HIGHLY aberrational. The hypthesis is FALSE, therefore the theory cannot be trusted, and must be rejected.

And another hypothesis which is false:

The “voice of color” thesis holds that people of color are uniquely qualified to speak on behalf of other members of their group (or groups) regarding the forms and effects of racism.

This flawed hypothesis is based on the false premise that only people of color can experience racism, so therefore only a person of color is "qualified to speak on behalf of other members of their group". White people experience racism too. They are EQUALLY as qualified (and justified) to speak about it as people of color are.

You can reject the theory, but your reasoning is faulty.

My reasoning for rejecting the Critical Race Theory is rock-solid. CRT is junk, and based fundamentally on nonsense and bigotry. It's purpose is to stigmatize white people, which of course is the essence of racism.

 

[Michael Cole]

The Big Six tenets of CRT are hypotheses. At LEAST two of the hypotheses are false: i.e., the hypothesis that


That is FALSE. Racism in America is NOT normal and is HIGHLY aberrational. The hypthesis is FALSE, therefore the theory cannot be trusted, and must be rejected.

And another hypothesis which is false:


This flawed hypothesis is based on the false premise that only people of color can experience racism, so therefore only a person of color is "qualified to speak on behalf of other members of their group". White people experience racism too. They are EQUALLY as qualified (and justified) to speak about it as people of color are.

My reasoning for rejecting the Critical Race Theory is rock-solid. CRT is junk, and based fundamentally on nonsense and bigotry. It's purpose is to stigmatize white people, which of course is the essence of racism.

Opinion noted.

Racism was grounded in law, so your opinion is false.

 

[j brown's body]

The Big Six tenets of CRT are hypotheses. At LEAST two of the hypotheses are false: i.e., the hypothesis that


That is FALSE. Racism in America is NOT normal and is HIGHLY aberrational. The hypthesis is FALSE, therefore the theory cannot be trusted, and must be rejected.

And another hypothesis which is false:


This flawed hypothesis is based on the false premise that only people of color can experience racism, so therefore only a person of color is "qualified to speak on behalf of other members of their group". White people experience racism too. They are EQUALLY as qualified (and justified) to speak about it as people of color are.

My reasoning for rejecting the Critical Race Theory is rock-solid. CRT is junk, and based fundamentally on nonsense and bigotry. It's purpose is to stigmatize white people, which of course is the essence of racism.

Again, racism is normal. For example, racially segregated neighborhoods (with a wide gap in property values ) is considered normal and utterly unobjectionable.

CRT tenet #3 tells us that changing housing laws does nothing to change this racism. And while white folks get the benefit of segregated communities, they believe they gave addressed the racist problem.

They obviously haven't. That's where the strategy of equity, to change attitudes and conditions of racism that law failed to change, comes in.

 

[Daisy]

Racism is a human construct, not a Godly construct...just sayin'...

 

[j brown's body]

• No individual can be adequately identified by membership in a single group. An African American person, for example, may also identify as a woman, a lesbian, a feminist, a Christian, and so on. Correct.

Does this hold true for old white men?

Blacks were long identified by law. The law is gone now, but the attitude remains.

 

[Deuce]

Kamala Harris has proposed tax breaks for people of color. White people would be excluded from these tax breaks because of their skin color

Prove this claim of yours.

 

[SoccerCoach]

Everything woke is in decline. The era of stupidity is over