Comments by "Jim Werther" (@jimwerther) on "What Is Critical Race Theory? | 5 Minute Video" video.
-
5
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
@Builder the bob
What Lindsay supplied here was an example, not a definition. CRT is not easily definable in a short video. Lindsay is a major academic, and wrote a book on CRT. You think he can't define it??
CRT starts out with the assumption that all racial inequality is inequity, and all statistical differences in results by race are necessarily due to racial differences. It ignores numerous obvious difficulties:
A. Single variable statistics are near-useless
B. Predetermined single-variable statistics are, if this is possible, even worse
C. The overwhelming evidence of other data being the cause of differentials is extremely strong:
* The timing pre- and post- the civil rights
era
* Other factors, such as median age and,
more importantly, family dynamics
When one is preconditioned to see the world based upon a pre-chosen narrative, the result will obviously be heavily skewed. CRT is not only a prime example of such a pre-decided lens, it was explicitly designed by its radical authors as a political polemic.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@bradmason1588
I am going to guess that "Derrick Bell" is not your name irl, but that you dubbed your account after the 1960s/1970s radical who helped pioneer CRT. Not surprising, then. that you don't know - or don't want to know - the truth about the discipline.
First, James Lindsay: The man is a very accomplished academic (not a conservative, btw), who wrote a scholarly book about CRT and its dangers. He rather obviously understands it fully. In this video he provides an illustration of its effects, not a definition.
CRT is a shallow, hate- and falsehood- based argument, masquerading as an academic discipline. It starts out with the false assumption that all unequal statistical results by race are necessarily born of racism. It then seeks to uproot all of society based upon that myth.
Single-variable statistics are near-useless, and pre-decided single-based statistics based upon political beliefs are, if possible, even worse. The timing pre- and post- the Civil Rights era demonstrates the obvious problems with CRT. And the other data which CRT conveniently ignores simply shows that hateful doctrine to he utter rubbish.
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@moatengator6047
You have established two points clearly:
1. You have multiple accounts from which to spam the comment section, suggestion a significant lack of self confidence, and
2. You suffer from severe tunnel vision.
As to the latter...Anyone with knowledge and common sense would understand shortly after being introduced to CRT that it is a study not worth pursuing. Your immersion in that foolishness does not show you to be educated, but rather a shallow dullard.
Let me provide an example: If a member of the Church of Scientology were to provide you a detailed questionnaire on the beliefs of L. Ron Hubbard, you would (hopefully) be unable to answer most of the questions. Why? Because any reasonable person should understand within five minutes that Scientology is quackery, and would not feel compelled to waste time delving into the specifics.
In the briefest of fashions, I explained above why CRT is utter nonsense, used by racial Marxists to attempt to overturn this country, leaning upon the use of a string of falsehoods. Any reasonably intelligent and clear-minded individual should be able to discern this fact long before he went down the rabbit hole of hatred and nonsense.
The fact that you choose to act superior due to your immersion in the cult does you no favors.
If you want to learn something, delve into the writings of Thomas Sowell. With an open mind and knowledge of the brilliant Dr. Sowell's thinking, CRT would become as transparent to you as it is to all wise folk.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@generalerica4123
There are a couple of major problems with what you wrote.
1. Your description of CRT does not match that of its creators, such as Derek Bell and Richard Delgado.
2. Even your modified version of CRT is highly unscientific, as is any univariate observation.
Try the following:
* When most people's calendars are turned to "July", it tends to be really hot outside.
* When most people's calendars are open to October, the weather tends to be moderate.
* Solution: To solve climate change, everyone should change their calendars to October, and keep it there. It would only be a small inconvenience on the calendar front, but would keep the glaciers from melting.
Sounds like a plan?
In real life, CRT is a radical "solution" in search of an intellectual fig leaf. It steadfastly ignores all contravailing evidence, as well as other significant factors, of which there are plenty. Why did blacks have a higher rate of marriage than did whites in 1900? Why did blacks have a higher level of employment than did whites in 1930? Why do first generation Nigerian-Americans who grow up in abject poverty do so well? Why do desperately poor immigrants with semi-literate parents, irrelevant of country of origin, do better than American blacks on average? Why do blacks who grow up with married parents outdo whites? Why are minority children in charter schools vastly outperforming their counterparts in public schools? Why are many of those same charter school students in many cases outperforming students in the richest school districts? Those and many other questions are conveniently ignored by CRT adherents, such as the grifter Ibram X. Kendi, as it would eviscerate their every claim which underpins CRT and its supposed "solutions", which in turn would only make things worse.
1
-
1