Dealing with Critical Race Theory and Critical Race Training
We’ve been discussing what people can do if they ever find themselves in the position of having to undergo a Critical Race Training course.
It’s hard to find a good course of action, and it depends on how much is at risk. But silence – which might seem a good approach – is often defined as not being able to think of any way to respond or to counter an argument, or even acquiescence. And, as some have pointed out, silence often is not allowed:
They anticipated [the silence] approach. That’s why the trainings have breakouts into small groups of 2,3 or 4 people, each with assigned roles one must perform. And then reforming as a larger group and direct questioning about what your group learned, etc… And there are individual writing assignments.
And, of course, there is always, “I notice you have been quiet so far this morning…Can you share with the group a time when you have felt marginalized…”
Silence is not permitted.
Technically speaking, of course, it is permitted, but at the same time it’s invalidated or reinterpreted, and there are built-in methods to the training to encourage people to abandon silence as a tactic of defiance. The trainers have been doing this for a long time and are prepared, so anyone who would defy them must also be prepared, and one of the things that person must be prepared for is ostracism. Perhaps even job loss, if a job is involved.
That threat is what the left counts on to gain compliance from even the most recalcitrant.
In my opinion, for what it’s worth, the best way to counter CRT is to argue process in particular. I’ve described the process/content dichotomy several times, at greatest length here.
In other words, instead of being silent, or arguing whether this is a racist country or not or whether you are racist or not, describe the game that’s being played – the double-bind or the Kafka trap or however you want to label it. Explain also that it’s a way to avoid debate on the merits. If they say that debating on the merits is a white supremacist notion, say that describing the methods by which their arguments might be found wanting as racist is another way they have of evading challenges and defining their own argument as correct and unassailable before the discussion even begins. The game is rigged and not worth playing – it’s of the “heads I win tails you lose” variety.
I think that is what needs to be called out.
However, that approach can lead to a problem like this
The “process” approach you outline is only effective in more traditional Western discourse – attacking premises, or form vs. substance, logic, reason, or the entire range of tools we’re all used to using in discussion and argument. CT, and thus CRT explicitly rejects this entire structure through postmodern deconstructionist gobbledeegook. Ironically, and childishly, this philosophy* uses the very structure it rejects to establish itself, then it immures itself from its own style of deconstruction.
This is a cult technique.
In practice, their tactic is an emotional one. Accuse people of the most vile thought crimes possible. Lay the blame of the New Original Sin at their feet. Induce feelings of panic, fear, helplessness, guilt, shame, and smuggle in the ideology. Apply the kafkatrap in cases of anger or denial to get confusion. Go ahead and officially respond about process, or facts and reason. See how far you’ll get in the faces of people who reject that utterly.
I know that the trainers themselves reject logic and all the rest. But this approach is not designed to appeal to the trainers. They are the True Believers. It is for those other people in the room (the trainees) who still value logic.
Calling out a kafkatrap such as that presented by CRT doesn’t rely just on logic, either. The training is partly an appeal to the emotions of those caught in it. They are often confused and don’t know what’s happening, being unfamiliar with kafkatraps or double binds. Therefore, naming and describing the reason they’re feeling that way and how it’s a rigged game can help them emotionally to reject it by offering an explanation and a way out in the emotional sense. The idea is that the process argument is the equivalent of Alice saying, at the end of the trial in the book, “you’re nothing but a pack of cards!”
Here’s the passage – and note that Alice’s ordeal is in the form of a surrealistic and somewhat Kafkaesque trial:
‘Let the jury consider their verdict,’ the King said, for about the twentieth time that day.
‘No, no!’ said the Queen. ‘Sentence first—verdict afterwards.’
‘Stuff and nonsense!’ said Alice loudly. ‘The idea of having the sentence first!’
‘Hold your tongue!’ said the Queen, turning purple.
‘I won’t!’ said Alice.
Off with her head!’ the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.
‘Who cares for you?’ said Alice, (she had grown to her full size by this time.) ‘You’re nothing but a pack of cards!’
At this the whole pack rose up into the air, and came flying down upon her: she gave a little scream, half of fright and half of anger, and tried to beat them off, and found herself lying on the bank, with her head in the lap of her sister, who was gently brushing away some dead leaves that had fluttered down from the trees upon her face.
‘Wake up, Alice dear!’ said her sister…
So far I’ve spoken about individual reactions when faced with mandatory attendance at a training. But this is only part of the fight against CRT, and it’s probably the smallest part of all. Relevant to this is this article from Christopher Rufo, who’s done excellent work for quite a while on exposing and fighting CRT:
Second, critical race theorists have constructed their argument like a mousetrap. Disagreement with their program becomes irrefutable evidence of a dissenter’s “white fragility,” “unconscious bias,” or “internalized white supremacy.” I’ve seen this projection of false consciousness on their opponents play out dozens of times in my reporting. Diversity trainers will make an outrageous claim—such as “all whites are intrinsically oppressors” or “white teachers are guilty of spirit murdering black children”—and then, when confronted with disagreement, adopt a patronizing tone and explain that participants who feel “defensiveness” or “anger” are reacting out of guilt and shame. Dissenters are instructed to remain silent, “lean into the discomfort,” and accept their “complicity in white supremacy.”
Note that trainers instruct dissenters to become silent, and label silence as a path to acceptance of the trainers’ premises.
Here are some of Rufo’s suggestions for group action and more effective responses, at least when the CRT-type approach is being used in the classroom:
This year, several state legislatures have introduced bills to achieve the same goal: preventing public institutions from conducting programs that stereotype, scapegoat, or demean people on the basis of race. And I have organized a coalition of attorneys to file lawsuits against schools and government agencies that impose critical race theory–based programs on grounds of the First Amendment (which protects citizens from compelled speech), the Fourteenth Amendment (which provides equal protection under the law), and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (which prohibits public institutions from discriminating on the basis of race).
On the grassroots level, a multiracial and bipartisan coalition is emerging to fight critical race theory. Parents are mobilizing against racially divisive curricula in public schools and employees are increasingly speaking out against Orwellian reeducation in the workplace…
In terms of principles, we need to employ our own moral language rather than allow ourselves to be confined by the categories of critical race theory…
Similarly, in addition to pointing out the dishonesty of the historical narrative on which critical race theory is predicated, we must promote the true story of America…
But it’s this last paragraph that is most important of all:
Above all, we must have courage, the fundamental virtue required in our time: courage to stand and speak the truth, courage to withstand epithets, courage to face the mob, and courage to shrug off the scorn of elites. When enough of us overcome the fear that currently prevents so many from speaking out, the hold of critical race theory will begin to slip. And courage begets courage. It’s easy to stop a lone dissenter; it’s much harder to stop 10, 20, 100, 1,000, 1 million, or more who stand up together for the principles of America. Truth and justice are on our side. If we can muster the courage, we will win.
In my own smaller and less consequential fights against what used to be called PC thought, which have occurred in academia and occurred mostly in the 90s and earlier when I was in school, I have stood alone while risking much less than people risk now. Many of my fellow students would come to me in private and say they agreed with what I had said, but would not stand with me publicly for fear of getting bad grades or bad recommendations. That was a sobering experience for me, and caused me to believe that people willing to take courageous stands were more rare than I’d previously thought.
Now the stakes are higher, and the courage required is greater. But this involves the fate of our children and our country.
[NOTE: By the way, here’s a sample of what is proposed for a fifth-grade curriculum in Washoe County, Nevada, which includes Reno:
Washoe County School District Board of Trustees is asking the public to view and comment on new social justice resources that may be added to English Language Arts curriculum for Kindergarten through 5th grade students.
WCSD says Benchmark Education has created three new Social Justice resources for three of its ten units.
“Benchmark designed this layer of questions and additional reading suggestions to encourage students to discuss and share experiences using students’ personal stories and cultural histories as lenses for analyzing texts. This will help deepen cultural understandings and expand students’ world views,” the website read.
Examples pulled from the curriculum of questions fifth graders would discuss include:
How does white male privilege allow people to have a false sense of self?
Why are stories about heroes most often about males who are not members of diverse communities?
Why is it important that, when faced with challenges created by systemic racism, people from BIPOC and other diverse communities maintain their cultures to survive?…Washoe County officials say it is not critical race theory curriculum.
Not a critical race theory curriculum? Call it whatever you like, it’s the same sort of message. Apparently there are many different varieties of this poisonous ideology that go by different names and have slightly different emphases and approaches.]
Hell, if I had known I’d be quoted, I would have dressed (it) up a little bit.
Thanks for the discussion and the provoking thoughts.
Race to the bottom.
Introducing Ed Gonzalez, THE PERFECT “Biden” nominee:
https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/ice-nominee-worked-with-blm-to-push-false-claim-that-white-man-murdered-7-year-old-black-girl/
Many sensible white intellectuals (such as the admirable C Rufo and James Lindsay) have criticized the toxic and pernicious ubiquity (from K-12 to corporate HR departments) of this vile nonsense at the risk of being castigated for their “racism”, but it requires a particular kind of courage for black intellectuals to expose the poisonous lies behind BLM/CRT/1619 propaganda, especially if they are not famous (Candace Owens, Leo Terrell 2.0, Glenn Loury, and Carol Swain are all very brave, but have the advantage of an unassailable position in society). A shining example of a courageous and very bright man of no great fame willing to speak “truth to progressive power” on the topic of race and systemic lies is Leonydus Johnson, who is a paragon of good sense and wisdom beyond his years.
The first question about that Washoe school “social justice resource” is what it has to do with English Language Arts.
Here’s a courageous black mother in Loudon County, VA, who spoke at the school board meeting to say that critical race theory is racist:
https://freebeacon.com/campus/black-parent-compares-critical-race-theory-to-kkk-intimidation-tactics/
Incentives matter. These people need to feel enough pain to make them stop with this swill. I suggest that they be identified so that the public may scorn them and apply pressure to their “home base” of friends, clients, employers, peers. Withholding business from X for supporting Y for supporting Z who promotes this hateful rubbish? It might have an effect, especially if the causal chain is explained to X and Y.
The Attorney General just said that “ White supremacy” is the greatest threat to democracy. The article I am linking to describes The Oath Keepers and The Proud Boys as “ white supremacist”. Years ago I looked at the Oath Keepers. They were military and law enforcement swearing to defend the Constitution by not overstepping their Constitutional boundaries. How “ supremest is that ! ? And the Proud Boys are led by a Latino. It is Orwellian what is going on! https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-supremacy-is-top-security-threat-ag-garland-says-165923811.html
We are in a life/death struggle.
The CRT crowd is everywhere.
I believe it arose at Harvard in the 1980s, so like a fire in a coal mine, it has followed all the seams (Kindergarten, Grade 1, Grade 2, etc., to grad school), academia, corporations, the press and the other media. It has had a long running start and it is everywhere. Every place has a Diversity office and officers, all POC, of course, and well-paid. For doing nothing except “fighting white supremacy”. Firing them is of course raacist.
Fires in coal mines are notoriously hard to quench entirely. There is one in NE Pennsylvania, north of Scranton IIRC, that was burning in the 1960s and a small fire would burst out of a hill here or there every now and then, perhaps even to this day. Needs very little oxygen underground! Almost anoxic.
So even if 90% of the CRT crowd were to immediately disappear, the remaining 10% in their righteous nooks and crannies, bleating away, will propagate and repopulate.
It’s most important to remember that this is a plot to pit races against one another. Instead of class warfare, they want race warfare. Destroy the culture and society with race conflict so it can be replaced with communism. It’s a great game that leads to revolution. And that needs to be pointed out at every turn. Ask the trainers/advocates why they are spreading communist propaganda.? Tell them you are onto the plot. Ask why they are promoting racial animosity instead of class animosity? After all, Marx promoted class animosity. Ask why they are promoting a false history of the United States? Tell them that their assumed moral superiority is a false stance that you can see through like a pane of glass. Call them communists or communist sympathizers. Tell them that they are anti-American and they are pushing anti-American propaganda. Put them on the defensive. When they tell you your stance proves your racism, tell them you would rather be a called a racist by them than be a communist or go along with a communist plot. Time to call a spade a spade.
Reading this I can only think of Bari Weiss article of who really is responsible. It needs to be read in full.
https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/americas-true-believers-and-their
The real wrongdoers are the Enablers. The so-called adults. The tech founders and college presidents and newspaper editors and museum directors and bank CEOs who pretend that the fight for “justice” is just. Who pretend that the “equity” crusade is about fairness and not about defending the grotesque inequality between those who have been trained to think correctly and those who have not.
We forget this sometimes. We forget that there are people with the power to turn off this nonsense. Those who made room for the new radicals in the first place, who fired the miscreants, who issued apologies, who pleaded for understanding, who stayed silent, who adopted the new lingo, who made promises, who laughed nervously, who promised to do better, to “do the work,” to unlearn.
Some of this has been going on for years. For example, there are unspoken rules for discussion:
You don’t change definitions in the middle of a discussion.
You don’t call something by another, loaded name. Tweaking welfare eligibility is not “genocide”.
You don’t infer–and publicly accuse–someone of a nefarious motivation when he states an irrefutable fact.
You don’t accuse a person of wishing for a bad result when he points out a bad result may happen, even when it’s in the form of a warning.
Many years ago, possibly decades, I thought this kind of thing was a bunch of flaky, thoughtless misapprehensions on the part of the Seriously Motivated.
In fact, it is part of a suite of techniques to win an argument by, among other things, discrediting the opponent without having to actually touch on the subject.
So, if one is in such a discussion, instead of trying to hold to the rules of civilized, honest people, acknowledge there’s no percentage in continuing and leave. Or, do it yourself.
To use and expand on an earlier example. “I felt marginalized in jump school when I couldn’t find an extra-large harness and I was walking around hunched over. And suspended agony was a real bitch.”
Implied: I’m a paratrooper and…you’re not. I did some things which would make you piss your pants and all I’m concerned about is my buddies laughing at me for my posture. Because MY friends thought jumping out of airplanes was just another way to get to work? Work? Oh, yeah. Infantry stuff. The jumping is just kind of cool. Scary? No. What’s really bad is when the colonel wants to know if you have a set of dress blues…..hahaha.
Trainer: “That’s not marginalization…..”
Aubrey, if he’s really lucky, in a no-longer fun tone: “What do you know about jump school, you freaking [you know what I mean] leg?”
Whatever the subject, you do the definition-changing, the nefarious inferences, the discrediting, the diverging,
Trainer, “You are a part of the colonizing, oppressing militaristic fascist state”
Aubrey: Ostentatiously…. “Yawn”
As I say, playing by their rules is silly. And arguing about playing by their rules is a waste of time. In fact, to get you to do that is the point.
I have heard that the way wypipo walk down the sidewalk is a function of having been on top in a slaveowning society. That’s new. But, for grins, seeing black people cross a busy street against the light looks as if they’re weighed down by centuries of enslavement. “What? You’re saying blacks are not weighed down by centuries of enslavement!!?!?!”
Have fun or bail. Playing by their rules while thinking you’re playing by the rules of civilized discourse is their game.
“Courage is rightly esteemed the first of human qualities because it has been said, it is the quality which guarantees all others.” — Winston Churchill
They are race fascists – using race as an excuse to get Big Business in bed with Big Government and tell other people what to do.
I’m lucky to be retired, so I don’t need to fear losing my job anymore. With a family, being responsible, I’d probably mouth words to avoid becoming a “woke target”.
Some strategies I’d hope to be courageous enough to try one of are:
“I believe in the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights – including the Fifth Amendment, the Right to Remain Silent” – — Do you believe in the right to remain silent? —
All humans should be judged based on their character, their actions, not on their race. — Do you believe in judging humans based on their actions or on their skin color? —
This seminar is racist. You're a racist. You want to judge people on their skin color. You're a racist, teaching racism. I object.
The problem is Systemic Promiscuity, not racism. It's promiscuity that leads 70% of Black kids to be living where their biological parents are not married. Every such Black kid has been screwed, metaphorically, by their parents. Those parents have literally screwed each other. The bad outcomes won't stop until irresponsible sex stops. Complaining about racism is an excuse to keep screwing around and getting screwed.
Step 1: Read this post by Marcus Johnson.
Make notes of any gaslighting, name calling, side-stepping, spinning, and obfuscation (or lies).
Award points for anything you think he got correct (the logical method) or that you agree with (the emotional method) or both.
https://www.newsweek.com/republican-push-ban-critical-race-theory-reveals-ugly-truth-opinion-1588684
Step 2: Read this post by Max Eden.
Make notes of any side-stepping, gaslighting, spinning, and obfuscation.
Award points for anything you think he got correct (the logical method) or that you agree with (the emotional method) or both.
https://www.newsweek.com/ban-critical-race-theory-now-opinion-1588362
Award points as above.
Step 3: Compare the totals. Contrast the arguments.
Apply what you have learned, along with whatever methods you choose from those proposed by Neo & the Salon (sounds like a pop-rock group), in discourse with proponents of CRT.
Share any further suggestions from your lived experience.
American Thinker post points up the problems faced by opponents of CRT – which are the same as those faced by conservatives in general – and you can see the degree to which the people criticizing (that’s really attacking) the very reasonable attitude of the School Board Member hew to the narrative noted on this thread.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/05/when_a_newlyelected_school_board_member_stood_up_to_oppose_teaching_critical_race_theory.html
I once.read that the best way to deal with liberal arguments is to take them seriously. In that vein, I think treating the Kafka trap like a legimate device is the best option. In that vein, I’d respond with “I felt marginalized this morning in our class on white fragility when I realized I was the only one who wasn’t a raging pedophile and animal abuser. ”
They’d probably object to being characterized as such, at which point I’d play their own game and say “That you are angry at being called a pedophile is proof that you either are one or harbor latent sexual desires for children. You should really lean into the discomfort of being a child rapist and acknowledge your disgusting proclivities.”
Trouble is, most of them probably are pedophiles and animal abusers, so it may not work as well at proving the point.
Maybe it would be better to accuse them of being QAnon supporters who are using white fragility code words to predict trumps reinstatement into the presidency. I’d pay to watch them fall all over themselves denying it. Even better, add that you saw that they were part of the Jan 6 insurrection.
I suppose another option would be the endless recitation of pee wee Hermans movie line of “I know you are, but what am I?”. It might eventually shut them up.
Category: Black people who don’t like CRT – great video.
https://notthebee.com/article/mama-bear-activated-crt-was-a-tactic-used-by-hitler-and-the-ku-klux-klan
Category: Black People Who DO Like CRT: ~3 Orders of Magnitude >> Black People Who Don’t Like CRT.
Odds of you finding Black Disliking CRT sharing your Foxhole: ~0.0XXX — being optimistic.
Conclusion: That was a nice bedtime story. And now… Ponies!!!
Related:
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/scholars-line-join-anti-woke-online-education-platform
+ fascinating bonus (depending on taste):
https://twitter.com/RepMontague/status/1392895258833432583
Related:
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/scholars-line-join-anti-woke-online-education-platform
+ fascinating bonus (depending on taste):
https://twitter.com/RepMontague/status/1392895258833432583
Zaphod – it’s a start, even if the glass is only a tenth full.
@AesopFan:
You make a valid point that it’s better than Nothing. I’m just a little concerned that the GoodWhite Right ™ has a tendency to break out in Hosannas every time a Black Person dispenses these types of Benedictions.
Some of them have worked out a very nifty grift — growing number of YouTube videos of Blacks who have zero chance of winning local community elections against the existing dysfunctional local Black power structure are out there because they know that naive Conservative GoodWhites are going to Purchase Indulgences by donating to their campaigns. And there is no money like Campaign Money — plenty of White politicians will attest.
One needs to be very skeptical about Blacks agreeing with one’s views and realistic about their impact. Not all are grifters… but there is no Lightgiving Black Saviour going to turn this thing around.
Someday someone will write a book: “From Capitalist Roader to Spirit Murdering: the halllucinatory vocabulary of the Left.”
“Male Chauvinist Pig, Kulak, Homophobe, White Oppressor,…” the vocabulary of the ideologies of the Left: feminism, communism, CRT is one long screech of hatred devoid of content.
Category: Black People Who DO Like CRT: ~3 Orders of Magnitude >> Black People Who Don’t Like CRT.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/18/%22Citation_needed%22.jpg
Now I have responses from A to Z — is that a record?
In re both: point taken. More research and pondering needed.
However, I will continue to enjoy the videos, because even if we are watching some grifters at work (and I’m not yet convinced of that), they are on the Right side instead of the Left, and their message might get through even if they are being paid to (cynically) promote it.
However, I don’t think this woman is faking her authenticity.
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/bryan-preston/2021/05/13/the-gops-nominee-for-virginia-lieutenant-governor-winsome-sears-just-blasted-critical-race-theory-n1446635?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=onsite&utm_campaign=582
Thank you for the insights and counsel. I’ve read quite a few essays at NewDiscourses.com, but I’m always grateful for a quick sum-up of resistance methods.
I am most grateful to know that truth always ultimately prevails. I just need to not be ashamed to speak it or stand for it.
Recently, Mayor Lightfoot, has done RACISM.
She decided not to do one-on-one interviews with White reporters, apparently because she thinks that all White reporters are racist.
( Mayor Lightfoot is an African-American person, and the Mayor of Chicago.)
Keeping anyone from talking to you, because of the race that they belong to, is racism.
You can’t do this to white people, or to black people, or to any people, because doing this, increases racism.