Read on Twitter
critical race theory is, quite literally, weaponized stupidity
it is the mistaking of arbitrary dogma for objective fact
it presumes that one aspect of culture (racism) is so powerful that it creates massive inequality and then denies that any other aspect of culture has effect https://twitter.com/BriannaWu/status/1332376305325789185
it is the mistaking of arbitrary dogma for objective fact
it presumes that one aspect of culture (racism) is so powerful that it creates massive inequality and then denies that any other aspect of culture has effect https://twitter.com/BriannaWu/status/1332376305325789185
stop and think about that. it's argues that culture drives all inequality while at the same time denying that culture has any effect on outcomes. only racism matters. not attitudes towards education, hard work, family, saving, investment, entrepreneurial achievement. nothing.
this is so fundamentally illogical and implausible that it renders the whole movement farce.
if culture matters, how can only one aspect drive everything? why do other races vary? why do we see variations within races?
this doctrine cannot answer the simplest of questions.
if culture matters, how can only one aspect drive everything? why do other races vary? why do we see variations within races?
this doctrine cannot answer the simplest of questions.
why can a whole country fail when rights are taken away (venezeula) or thrive when they are returned (colombia)?
there is clearly no logic to this argument nor is there intended to be
"giving people liberty & leaving them alone is inherently racist!"
it's intended to be stupid
there is clearly no logic to this argument nor is there intended to be
"giving people liberty & leaving them alone is inherently racist!"
it's intended to be stupid
the goal of CRT is to finesse one glaring point: the only thing in the history of humans to ever lift a meaningful portion of humanity out of desperate, crushing poverty is rights, particularly property rights.
nothing else works.
certainly not "government intervention."
nothing else works.
certainly not "government intervention."
and yet we are to believe that this is some failed construct "cuz, racism"?
no. it's complete nonsense in denial of 2000 years of objective fact.
these logical flaws like "freedom from interference is oppression!" are so glaring that they do not even try to ague them.
no. it's complete nonsense in denial of 2000 years of objective fact.
these logical flaws like "freedom from interference is oppression!" are so glaring that they do not even try to ague them.
instead, they use the twist of calling logic the tool of the oppressor, a subjective aspect of toxic whiteness.
remember these charming posters from the smithsonian exhibit on "whiteness"?
"cause and effect relationships" is my favorite.
i mean, what is even the other option?
remember these charming posters from the smithsonian exhibit on "whiteness"?
"cause and effect relationships" is my favorite.
i mean, what is even the other option?
how can any culture not believe in cause and effect?
what, things just happen for no reason and do what you like? eating 12,000 calories a day does not affect weight, fixing the hole in the roofs does not stop the rain from getting in?
how would that even work?
what, things just happen for no reason and do what you like? eating 12,000 calories a day does not affect weight, fixing the hole in the roofs does not stop the rain from getting in?
how would that even work?
it's clownish, dogmatic denial of the possibility of any functioning structure of reason.
this is, of course, just what CRT wants.
it's the offshoot of deconstructionism and post modernism from folks like derrida and leotard.
but at least they were honest about it.
CRT is not
this is, of course, just what CRT wants.
it's the offshoot of deconstructionism and post modernism from folks like derrida and leotard.
but at least they were honest about it.
CRT is not
the precepts of post modernism were that you cannot separate thought from culture & language. dominant discourses set us into modes of thinking that limit us & set arbitrary parameters. if we sufficiently expand this semantic game, we can deny anything by robbing it of context
thus, "scientific method" despite being the thing that makes airplanes fly and computers compute, becomes a subjective aspect of the dominant discourse and can be deconstructed into irrelevance and replaced with whatever we choose.
then that becomes the dominant discourse.
then that becomes the dominant discourse.
this, of course, sets up an endless loop of systems deconstructing the dominant discourse thereby becoming the dominant discourse and thus, needing to be deconstructed themselves.
this is why the whole movement devolved into cynicism/nihilism (nothing can be known) or into dada.
this is why the whole movement devolved into cynicism/nihilism (nothing can be known) or into dada.
the leading lights of this philosophy were smart/honest enough to know that they were playing a parlor game, suitable for "la academie" or the salon, but with no real implications for things like the hard sciences.
it was a recursively self-refuting philosophical ouroboros.
it was a recursively self-refuting philosophical ouroboros.
this is why these new offshoots are so different: they are neither smart nor honest. they are weaponized dogma.
if you take this post modern structure and add a sacrosanct ideological payload that, by definition, one is not allowed to deconstruct, it becomes a religion.
if you take this post modern structure and add a sacrosanct ideological payload that, by definition, one is not allowed to deconstruct, it becomes a religion.
faith is demanded in a set of arbitrary doctrines that can be neither proven nor interrogated.
it's just a way of saying "god is god and thou shall worship no other god nor question his precepts" without making reference to deism.
but it's the same as militant evangelism.
it's just a way of saying "god is god and thou shall worship no other god nor question his precepts" without making reference to deism.
but it's the same as militant evangelism.
well, almost the same. militant evangelists are aware that they are religious. militant CRT adherents are not.
they are self deluded into thinking that because they have placed their faith in something other than a deity they must be adherents of science or reason or morals.
they are self deluded into thinking that because they have placed their faith in something other than a deity they must be adherents of science or reason or morals.
yet their own doctrine explicitly rejects both science and reason. these are just aspects of a discarded discourse and what we "feel" and "know" are what matter and there are ways of knowing other than reason or logic or research or facts.
my meaning means what it means to me.
my meaning means what it means to me.
to any outside observer, this is clearly dogmatic subjectivist drivel masquerading as morality. it's non rational subjective assumption and preference taking on the role of "truth standard."
amusingly, that's pretty much the precise definition of "prejudice."
amusingly, that's pretty much the precise definition of "prejudice."
and this is why the adherents of this deeply twisted philosophy must be so militant and explosively touchy and violent:
because they explicitly are what they proclaim to hate: bigoted, prejudiced, emotional idiots judging others by skin tone and group affinity.
because they explicitly are what they proclaim to hate: bigoted, prejudiced, emotional idiots judging others by skin tone and group affinity.
they have mistaken bullying for moral high ground and unquestioned (and unquestionable) dogmatic belief for objective truth.
they seek to wield the whip hand of deconstructionism and interrogation upon all else, yet be immune to such scrutiny themselves.
they seek to wield the whip hand of deconstructionism and interrogation upon all else, yet be immune to such scrutiny themselves.
it's a fundamentally bankrupt philosophy created to seduce the half-smart and grant them the zeal and righteousness of a dominacan friar seeking out heresy when, in reality, they have just mistaken "punch no punchbacks" as the basis for an ethical system.
it's stunningly stupid.
it's stunningly stupid.
anyone not blinded by such dogma can readily see that any payload could be dropped into such a system (and it has. post colonial theory is another great one) but from the inside, you're a religious crusader who has no idea they were even converted.
it's a cultivated blind spot.
it's a cultivated blind spot.
it's perilously close to brainwashing.
this is why i think we can describe is as weaponized stupidity.
it takes and makes militant those who wish to feel righteous but are not smart enough to realize they've been inducted into a cult.
this is why i think we can describe is as weaponized stupidity.
it takes and makes militant those who wish to feel righteous but are not smart enough to realize they've been inducted into a cult.
it takes this blindness and fashions it into activism by obscuring the fundamentally subjective, prejudicial nature of the whole doctrine and framing it as "real objectivism" despite being the precise opposite.
it's how you get armed fascists calling themselves "antifa."
it's how you get armed fascists calling themselves "antifa."
it's a predatory movement taking advantage of the poorly calibrated and half-smart who seek meaning and physical and moral authority but cannot see the contradictions.
half these people would be scientologists if they had picked up "dianetics" before they read crenshaw...
half these people would be scientologists if they had picked up "dianetics" before they read crenshaw...
