3 ms·

Does critical race theory make any falsifiable predictions?

ajross 4y ago
Hard to tell if it's banned. I guess now we'll never know. (Serious answer: "CriticalRaceTheory!" as imagined by partisan right wingers isn't a subject being taught at the curriculum level anywhere. But yeah, obviously sociology and all its branches is a science and there's a ton of research being done on racial demography and explanations for signals in that data. Why should that be surprising? And... yeah, if you explain the wrong things now, in the wrong way, you tend to get banned in places like Florida. It kinda sucks.)
- nerdponx 4y ago
  Banning books because you think the authors of the banned books advocate for banning books. That's a good one. I'm also going to borrow "CriticalRaceTheory!" for later use, thank you. That said, actual academic literature from left-leaning critical-such-and-such fields can be truly weird and can sometimes seem extreme. Of course, that's part of the exercise: take a weird idea and run with it as far as possible as an interesting and hopefully enlightening way of looking at the world. And sometimes the literature seems jarring because it forces you to contend with things that you would rather not contend with. That's good and useful, but it also makes the literature very easy to misinterpret. For example, consider "Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth" by Tara Yosso from 2005: https://www.iirp.edu/images/pdf/AvNtDE_EDUC_701_-_Yossos_Community_Cultural_Wealth_Model.pdf https://www.iirp.edu/images/pdf/AvNtDE_EDUC_701_-_Yossos_Com... The premise of the article is that Communities of Color are not deficient in cultural wealth, and are in fact rich in it. Great! I can't imagine anyone seriously disagreeing with their point, but they cite a lot of literature from the 90s that does disagree with it. So I guess articles like this is necessary, in order to counteract something that (to me) seems like an unfair and bleak assertion about a very large and heterogeneous group of people. > CRT challenges White privilege and refutes the claims that educational institutions make toward objectivity, meritocracy, color-blindness, race neutrality and equal opportunity. CRT challenges notions of ‘neutral’ research or ‘objective’ researchers and exposes deficit-informed research that silences, ignores and distorts epistemologies of People of Color (Delgado Bernal, 1998; Ladson-Billings, 2000). CRT argues that these traditional claims act as a camouflage for the self-interest, power, and privilege of dominant groups in US society (Bell, 1987; Calmore, 1992; Solórzano, 1997). This is a pretty heavy claim to make! I'm not even going to argue against it, because it's probably been true historically. However it's very very easy to interpret this as an assertion that objectivity is inherently racist, rather than a claim that objectivity has historically been used as cover for institutionalized racism. The latter is a sobering good point, while the former is an extreme view of the world that I think most people would disagree with. Having not read the material the author cites, I am not sure which version the author is claiming and I am not interested in guessing. Or consider the claim directly above that one: > The intercentricity of race and racism with other forms of subordination. CRT starts from the premise that race and racism are central, endemic, permanent and a fundamental part of defining and explaining how US society functions (Bell, 1992; Russell, 1992). CRT acknowledges the inextricable layers of racialized subordination based on gender, class, immigration status, surname, phenotype, accent and sexuality (Crenshaw, 1989, 1993; Valdes et al., 2002). Wow, permanent? That's also a heavy claim to make, and one that people are sure to bristle at. As far as I can tell from the small amount of CRT source literature that I've read, if we take the permanent and funtamental attributes seriously, then through a CRT lens my whole post is probably just racist and oppressive.
- gotoeleven 4y ago
  I think this line of argument, which is typical, that 'critical race theory' isn't being taught in schools is disingenuous. This is like saying they don't teach about gravity in grade school because they don't teach general relativity. The grade school-level materials that are derived from this stuff teach bumper sticker versions of the 'america is systemically racist blah blah' line of lefty claptrap. It's not just discussion of racial issues, it is using race as a line of critique of the founding ideas of the USA and western liberalism in general. So when people make this kind of argument, I know the extent of their knowledge on the topic is perhaps several rachel maddow segments.
  - ajross 4y ago
    Yeah, this turned into the digression I'd have expected. But since you're being nice, I'll engage. > [Grade schools] teach bumper sticker versions of the 'america is systemically racist blah blah' lefty claptrap They do not. They simply do not. I know you won't believe it, but they don't (source: have sent two kids through grade school in exactly the kind of deep blue public school district you no doubt fear the most). They do spend a lot of time telling the kids in various frames to be nice to everyone, and that everyone has different backgrounds and that we should respect that stuff. I don't know what your sourcing is, but... maybe get out there and speak to some teachers and talk to some kids? The world isn't remotely as messed up as you've been led to believe. Schools are nice places. Much nicer than the ones I attended, frankly.
    - anonymouskimmer 4y ago
      Writing against the absolute statements made by you and the person you're responding to: There are on the order of 40,000 grade schools in the US, IIRC. There are going to be grade school teachers who indoctrinate or browbeat their students with the worst of the entire political spectrum.
      - ajross 4y ago
        Sure, but not at the curriculum level. You can't regulate away the presence of bad teachers. The question was effectively "Are they teaching grade schoolers CRT lefty claptrap [as a matter of policy such that it is appropriate to legislate about]?". And the answer is simply no.
pxmpxm 4y ago
I thought the entirety of postmodernism revolves around making infallible constructs to build argumwnts on top of.
frozenport 4y ago
Specific critics may have their criticisms or claims disproven.

Hard to tell if it's banned. I guess now we'll never know. (Serious answer: "CriticalRaceTheory!" as imagined by partisan right wingers isn't a subject being taught at the curriculum level anywhere. But yeah, obviously sociology and all its branches is a science and there's a ton of research being done on racial demography and explanations for signals in that data. Why should that be surprising? And... yeah, if you explain the wrong things now, in the wrong way, you tend to get banned in places like Florida. It kinda sucks.)

nerdponx 4y ago
Banning books because you think the authors of the banned books advocate for banning books. That's a good one. I'm also going to borrow "CriticalRaceTheory!" for later use, thank you. That said, actual academic literature from left-leaning critical-such-and-such fields can be truly weird and can sometimes seem extreme. Of course, that's part of the exercise: take a weird idea and run with it as far as possible as an interesting and hopefully enlightening way of looking at the world. And sometimes the literature seems jarring because it forces you to contend with things that you would rather not contend with. That's good and useful, but it also makes the literature very easy to misinterpret. For example, consider "Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth" by Tara Yosso from 2005: https://www.iirp.edu/images/pdf/AvNtDE_EDUC_701_-_Yossos_Community_Cultural_Wealth_Model.pdf https://www.iirp.edu/images/pdf/AvNtDE_EDUC_701_-_Yossos_Com... The premise of the article is that Communities of Color are not deficient in cultural wealth, and are in fact rich in it. Great! I can't imagine anyone seriously disagreeing with their point, but they cite a lot of literature from the 90s that does disagree with it. So I guess articles like this is necessary, in order to counteract something that (to me) seems like an unfair and bleak assertion about a very large and heterogeneous group of people. > CRT challenges White privilege and refutes the claims that educational institutions make toward objectivity, meritocracy, color-blindness, race neutrality and equal opportunity. CRT challenges notions of ‘neutral’ research or ‘objective’ researchers and exposes deficit-informed research that silences, ignores and distorts epistemologies of People of Color (Delgado Bernal, 1998; Ladson-Billings, 2000). CRT argues that these traditional claims act as a camouflage for the self-interest, power, and privilege of dominant groups in US society (Bell, 1987; Calmore, 1992; Solórzano, 1997). This is a pretty heavy claim to make! I'm not even going to argue against it, because it's probably been true historically. However it's very very easy to interpret this as an assertion that objectivity is inherently racist, rather than a claim that objectivity has historically been used as cover for institutionalized racism. The latter is a sobering good point, while the former is an extreme view of the world that I think most people would disagree with. Having not read the material the author cites, I am not sure which version the author is claiming and I am not interested in guessing. Or consider the claim directly above that one: > The intercentricity of race and racism with other forms of subordination. CRT starts from the premise that race and racism are central, endemic, permanent and a fundamental part of defining and explaining how US society functions (Bell, 1992; Russell, 1992). CRT acknowledges the inextricable layers of racialized subordination based on gender, class, immigration status, surname, phenotype, accent and sexuality (Crenshaw, 1989, 1993; Valdes et al., 2002). Wow, permanent? That's also a heavy claim to make, and one that people are sure to bristle at. As far as I can tell from the small amount of CRT source literature that I've read, if we take the permanent and funtamental attributes seriously, then through a CRT lens my whole post is probably just racist and oppressive.
gotoeleven 4y ago
I think this line of argument, which is typical, that 'critical race theory' isn't being taught in schools is disingenuous. This is like saying they don't teach about gravity in grade school because they don't teach general relativity. The grade school-level materials that are derived from this stuff teach bumper sticker versions of the 'america is systemically racist blah blah' line of lefty claptrap. It's not just discussion of racial issues, it is using race as a line of critique of the founding ideas of the USA and western liberalism in general. So when people make this kind of argument, I know the extent of their knowledge on the topic is perhaps several rachel maddow segments.
- ajross 4y ago
  Yeah, this turned into the digression I'd have expected. But since you're being nice, I'll engage. > [Grade schools] teach bumper sticker versions of the 'america is systemically racist blah blah' lefty claptrap They do not. They simply do not. I know you won't believe it, but they don't (source: have sent two kids through grade school in exactly the kind of deep blue public school district you no doubt fear the most). They do spend a lot of time telling the kids in various frames to be nice to everyone, and that everyone has different backgrounds and that we should respect that stuff. I don't know what your sourcing is, but... maybe get out there and speak to some teachers and talk to some kids? The world isn't remotely as messed up as you've been led to believe. Schools are nice places. Much nicer than the ones I attended, frankly.
  - anonymouskimmer 4y ago
    Writing against the absolute statements made by you and the person you're responding to: There are on the order of 40,000 grade schools in the US, IIRC. There are going to be grade school teachers who indoctrinate or browbeat their students with the worst of the entire political spectrum.
    - ajross 4y ago
      Sure, but not at the curriculum level. You can't regulate away the presence of bad teachers. The question was effectively "Are they teaching grade schoolers CRT lefty claptrap [as a matter of policy such that it is appropriate to legislate about]?". And the answer is simply no.

pxmpxm 4y ago

I thought the entirety of postmodernism revolves around making infallible constructs to build argumwnts on top of.

frozenport 4y ago

Specific critics may have their criticisms or claims disproven.