Tyre Nichols beating: Race Theory vs CRITICAL Race Theory

And from what little Ive read of this author, I dont think he would disagree with any of that so not sure of your point.

So why the dramatic reaction to the author noticing the small differences that exist? Dont see anything to indicate he exaggerated the differences.

 

Wow, you missed the entirety of the system that didn't allow for some groups of people to recover.
I suppose no one should be surprised by that.

 

Or you can read a post with link I posted earlier in this thread. Remember also, creationist or evolutionist, we all came from some form of singularity.
Your links are to Amazon? How does that help. I see there's some books, but?

 

It is and very false. I don't know why you promote that?
Do you even know what CRT is? It's a college level course that is advanced and an elective.

 

The system that crippled African Americans in the hood is called the welfare state.

 

Yes, I know what it is. Unfortunately.

 

Critical pedagogy is a philosophy of education and social movement that developed and applied concepts from critical theory and related traditions to the field of education and the study of culture.[1]

Critical pedagogy was founded by the Brazilian philosopher and educator Paulo Freire, who promoted it through his 1968 book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed. It subsequently spread internationally, developing a particularly strong base in the United States, where proponents sought to develop means of using teaching to combat racism, sexism, and oppression. As it grew, it incorporated elements from fields like the Human rights movement, Civil rights movement, Disability rights movement, Indigenous rights movement, postmodern theory, feminist theory, postcolonial theory, and queer theory.

It is rampant in K-12 schools

 

The other possibility is that we have a case of five bad cops who committed a horrible crime, deserve to be in jail, and race is not a meaningful factor in any of it.

 

No, IMO, "systemic racism" is more often used as a non-falsifiable rationale to justify some favored social policy.

 

The admissions program at Harvard University.

 

It's just not true. CRT principles are absolutely creeping in to public school systems. One need look no further than the lesson plans centered around The 1619 Project, a book based on the foundational CRT concept that the very purpose of America's political and legal systems is to perpetuate racism.

If you'd like more, Chris Rufo did a fine job assembling a collection of other examples:
https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1453033036518359045

How widespread this is is anyone's guess, but to say it's non existent or fabricated, as you have done, is simply wrong.

 

There is no evidence of that black people are more violent. None! However, even if it were true, anybody who claims that without bothering to ask WHY is just repeating white supremacist talking points.

"Some of my best friends are black" is the cop-out that confirms the above.

 

By "lack of training" I mean "lack of good training". Obviously there is quite a bit of bad training in police departments all over the country. And I agree that "you're unlikely to be accused of murder".... or similar, is probably the biggest part. But this is systemic.

 

WTF? I'm not saying you're a white supremacist, because I don't know you. But you are definitely repeating white supremacist nonsense!

 

Oh, the irony ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

CRT is not about "cases". It's about the fact that minorities (predominantly blacks) are treated different by cops. More violently or more readily arrested, more often falsely convicted, .... This is a fact. CRT simply explains WHY. So does Race Theory. But the latter would not explain why black cops would do this to a black individual.

The video doesn't show that, but it's irrelevant either way.

THIS specific episode may or may not be "normal" We don't know. We only know about this one because it was captured by a street camera. What IS the norm is the system treating black people different in varying degrees. Be it by just stopping them more often, to beating them.... and everything in between.

My definition is a definition. Not intended to be a College level course on CRT. However, your example indicates that you are very confused. First of all, laws are PART of the system. So obviously this falls within my definition. But you don't need a CRT course to learn not to make laws based on ethnicity. Equality is in our constitution. So your example is very simplistic. What they are taught is that some laws disproportionately affect some social groups more than others. For example, a "stop and frisk" law in New York City would be more likely to affect poor people (a disproportionate number of the black or Hispanic) walking to take the bus on foot, then it would a white guy driving his Mercedes. But it's NOT less likely that the guy in the Mercedes is carrying drugs.

However, this is a completely different topic.

Also off topic. But when an activist (or anybody, for that matter) DOESN'T learn Critical Race Theory they might tend to assume that Race Theory is correct. That white people are racist and that this is why black people are mistreated. CRT teaches that this is WRONG!

We should ALL go after whatever is to blame. But people who don't understand CRT blame the wrong things.

You have just made the case for CRT. Because CRT teaches that it IS a thing: the system. NOT a group of people.

Any activist who believes that URGENTLY needs a course on CRT, because the first thing they'll learn is that there is no such thing as race. All of this, and what follows describes somebody who doesn't understand CRT. And the remedy is easy: teach them what the OP says.

Clearly you didn't grasp the definition I gave. I encourage you to read the OP again.

And, BTW, you also completely misunderstand what "binary thinking" means. It means that you make an argument under the assumption that there are ONLY two options when there are actually more. CRT vs RT are two theories because one simply negates the other. CRT is the same as NOT-RT. In other words, it negates that the problem is that people are racist. The implications of this facts are numerous, but that's the bottom line.

What you call "somebody who learned CRT" is actually somebody who DIDN'T learn CRT. Because claiming that white people is the group to blame is the OPPOSITE of CRT.

It is true that most people who don't want the system to change are white. But it is also true that most who do are ALSO white. CRT teaches that this is NOT the problem. You have been describing Race Theory.... NOT Critical Race Theory

 

That might be what Race Theory claims. I'm focusing on CRITICAL Race Theory.

I'm responding to a statement by a specific poster that has nothing to do with the Tyre Nichols case . You need to read the OP.

 

And, I don't know if it's true, but we've always been told that Neanderthals were less intelligent than Homo Sapiens. If that were true that would make African people MORE intelligent than Europeans.

 

Or police interaction with blacks, and other parts of the legal system, because more blacks are stopped for no reason, falsely arrested, falsely convicted and falsely executed than whites.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/what-does-critical-race-theory-teach.589535/
(Note: See how somebody who has done research provides references, and those who don't do research show nor references)

Besides saying that what I said about CRT is not what is taught in academia, you just proved that it IS.

 

I don't know if you have too low an opinion of me or too high of one of yourself.

I haven't seen the video of this and I wonder if anyone has seen the entire event from trigger to ambulance but what we are seeing is a lynch mob mentality. There can be no questions because the rightous left already has all the answers. If this was a traffic stop, why and at what point did it go wrong?

 

Oh, I see now... you "can smell white supremacy and it is a linger mallodorous stench"...? Oh, dear, I guess I'd better go take a bath forthwith! . What a fall from grace I've experienced! When I was in solidarity and complete agreement with your faction's position that any and all decisions about abortion must be left entirely up to the woman, you 'liked' my posts again and again... oh, but NOW?!

In your Post #68, you said "I would love someone to point out racial differences that are measurable I mean, apart from the obvious skin pigmentation", whereupon I gave you two sources in two different science-based efforts by two different authors filling over 700 pages -- and all you've done so far is to explode in a wokish 'righteous-indignation' at the mere suggestion that anything in all of that information might be demonstrably true.

Fast-forward approximately 500 years: by about that time, if we haven't destroyed ourselves first, humankind will very likely have become ONE RACE, through interbreeding! This one race will be a hybrid consisting of all of the best parts of the different races that mankind had consisted of before! Don't you see? By embracing genetics R&D instead of cursing it as some kind of untouchable 'heresy', we will literally create an improved, evolved human being -- and, ironically, from all that we were as different races, we will develop a "master race", and it will be composed of the best that each race has to offer! Now tell me that is some kind of 'bad thing'!

. "First, you need to see what is right in front of you!"

 

Self perpetuity leftist myth...

 

Your research demonstrates my point. Any racial disparity that disfavors blacks is by definition the product of racism. Your "research" simply identifies the racial disparity.

 

I can assure you it's a good faith effort. And if you can point to any flaws with serious arguments, I'll be more than open to correcting them.

Not by that name. I'm using the name to illustrate what Critical Race Theory is critical of.

True. But that's not going to have an effect on systemic racism unless what we collectively work on is to not elect people to govern us who fight to keep things as they are. And this starts by fighting against the huge campaign of disinformation by extremists like Tucker Carlson, Alex Jones, ... and similar.

CRT does not presume any of that. It acknowledges that individual racism exists. And that it might always exist. Believing that it can be removed may be incorrect. But I have no idea why it would be racist. However that's besides the point. CRT doesn't address the problem of individual racism. It addresses the racism that has been built into the system.

Ok. You explain here what I said on the OP.

I have no idea how this relieves individuals of their own choices. And you didn't explain. I mean, cops who commit murder should ALWAYS be responsible. What the CRT approach attempts to do is PREVENT many of these cases from happening in the future. Because it explains the REAL underlying cause.

CRT holds all those responsible ESPECIALLY at the top. If you assume the opposite: ie, that cops kill black people because they are racist (Race Theory), THEN the people at the top...the people who are responsible for the system... would not be held responsible. What you say is exactly the opposite of what would happen. People at the top HAVE to change the system. And the more at the top you are, the more responsible. Way at the top are legislators, governors, the President.... And the main reason why this doesn't change is, not because they're racists (though some of them are), but because these people refuse to embrace their responsibility. And lately, since white supremacists have been brought out of the closet and into the mainstream, some even find a political advantage to not solving it.

I gave an example of my own hometown. Where this has changed to SOME extent by the chief of police. Of course, his hands are tied by federal and state legislation. And by the fact that this is a state where the governor has made culture wars his campaign platform.

To change this definitively, legislation needs to be passed. But I reject the idea that local leaders can't ameliorate the problem. Especially through education. At every level. It's not going to get better, and I think it's likely to get worse, when the state government here in Florida has decided to make it ilegal to teach children about our past with slavery and Jim Crowe.

I don't know if that's true or not. I can only hope you're wrong. I hope marches and public pressure do change the mindset of enough people. Because, as we have learned from history, when peaceful means don't work, people tend to embrace violent measures. I can assure you one thing: one way or another this will change. My deepest hope is that it changes through peaceful means.

That's incorrect. Many departments HAVE changed. The Police Chief in my area is proof of that. Of course, there are things like poverty that the police chief can't change. And it's a systemic fact that most poor people are black. But the interaction with police here, which used to be an issue, is much better now.

I don't know anybody or have ever even heard of anybody who believes that. So I can't comment.

That was a slogan that came out of anger. Nobody of consequence actually believes in defunding the police. And when anybody tried something like that it has failed. But, again, slogans are better than violence. So let them have their slogan.

Only the right takes it literally. And they do it only because they think it's to their political advantage to take it literally.

It works that way in almost ALL cities. Red or blue. Of course, the bigger the city, the harder for this to work if a NATIONAL policy is not in place. But works in MY city, which is deep deep red. BTW, the chief of police who has implemented this here is a lifelong Republican who supported Trump in 2016 (I don't know in 2020 or today). What I blame Republicans for is for spreading falsehoods as part of their "culture wars" which has made it more difficult to deal with the problem, if not made it worse.

But, bottom line, this has NOTHING to do with red or blue cities. Even though the tendency to wage a culture war on black people at a NATIONAL level, comes almost exclusively from the right.

 

I think I've got it now, Golem, but please tell me if I'm wrong....

A system may, or may not, reinforce an individual participant's own personal beliefs and prejudices against, or in favor of anyone, on a racial, religious, or political basis. Thus, to use an alternative example, a member of the Nazi SS "system" might or might not actually have hated Jews, Slavs, Roma, or other races or ethnic groups on a personal basis, but the very SYSTEM in which he was enrolled dictated or empowered his activities.

Back on topic-context: is it, then, an example of systemic-racism to put forth the concept that those five Black police officers, in a way not so far-distant from the hypothetical Nazi SS storm trooper I referenced above, conducted themselves -- NOT in a way related to personal, prejudicial 'racism', but because the system itself "dictated or empowered" their activities in a prescribed way?

If that is so, then is it not possible that the five Black police officers can mount a plausible defense -- much as those SS officers did in the Nürnberg Trials -- that they were "just following orders"...? Perhaps, citing this "critical race theory" their attorneys may be able to mount exactly that reasoning in a defense, but with much greater success than the SS officers had at Nürnberg....