A Devil's Advocate response to Thomas Sowell

 h/t to @philllosoraptor for putting this in front of me

As brilliant as this argument is in taking down the notion that the lingering effects of slavery, Jim Crow, redlining, etc. necessarily remain with us today, it stands no chance against the shiftiness of CRT thinking. 

In answer to Sowell's questions 5 and 6, the Critical Race Theorist would unhesitatingly say "yes." Because getting married or having reading material at home are both forms of "whiteness." And the racist has structured society to favor whiteness over all other ways of being.

That is to say, the Critical Race Theorist thinks that society is structured around essentially arbitrary institutions. Why build a society upon family cohesion, education, and work ethic? Why not build society around something else? Why not the opposites?

The idea that one way of doing things might actually work better than another is—for the most part—outside CRT thinking. To the extent that they have it at all, they see the (historically minor) imperfections of modern life and conclude that "anything would be better than this."

Put slightly differently, CRT sees society as completely and artificially structured, and that the keys to success were in some sense decided. This is not to say that society is in no sense structured, but the idea that any of what "works" was discovered is anathema to CRT.

~~~

Phil importantly notes (in response to troll): "The excerpt says absolutely nothing about justifying redlining. It is dispelling the argument that redlining half a century ago is still *the primary factor* that determines the outcomes in the black community. My asterisked phrase is important here."

Comments

  1. ArgentGaleMarch 30, 2021 at 5:00 PM

    That's exactly how it works with these types all right and it's just one more piece of insanity I'm at my wit's end with. I keep wondering where the general public is in all of this and why they keep getting away with this and honestly I'm afraid of what the answer might be at this point. Regardless it's exhausting to follow this and even more exhausting to realize just how little it seems like people who see through this nonsense can actually do anymore.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. andToddsaidApril 2, 2021 at 6:38 AM

      Hey ArgentGale, I really need to get my notifications in order. CRT is inherently shifty and arguing with it is like trying to nail Jell-O to the wall. I get that it's exhausting. I seem to have a knack for slipping into its mode of thinking. It really is a you-get-it-or-you-don't sort of thing. People like James Lindsay are doing yeoman's work in translating a completely different manner of logic to people outside of it. In fact, even that is a sticking point. Lots of people think there is simply Logic and not different varieties of logic.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Real Reason Why Are Trucks Getting Bigger

Image
It's not "ego." It's a claim that you encounter a lot—an insult really—that people are buying bigger and bigger trucks to compensate for… something. Here's one particularly cringeworthy example, because the person making it doesn't seem to realize the go-kart he's praising doesn't meet US emissions standards.  whenever americans say that they *need* a massive pickup truck that gets 12mpg just show them the Subaru Sambar utility vs. ego pic.twitter.com/NqexDbQcok — sam (@sam_d_1995) May 11, 2022 In response, a lot of people will defend their big truck purchase by saying they need a larger vehicle for their family, their business, or just because they like it. And to an extent, market forces are partly responsible for the increase in truck sizes, particularly when it comes to features like crew cabs. But it turns out that even a lot of people who like the big trucks don't know the full story of how their trucks got so big. The rest of the story
Read more

Romney’s Pro-Life Position Not So New

Also: Say hello to the “Sev-Con” There’s a NYTimes article out over the weekend that is all the buzz today. The pull-quote du jour is by former Mitt Romney strategist Mike Murphy, who told National Review in 2005 that Romney "is a pro-life Mormon faking it as a pro-choice friendly." The preferred pick-apart is that this proves Romney will say and do anything to get elected. And, I admit, it certainly sounds damning. If nothing less, it was a poor choice of words. But this is old news. At the time Murphy issued a statement saying he had been misquoted. I’d say the facts support Murphy’s side of the story. The Times article tries to make more ado about Romney’s pro-life journey than there is. In 1994, when he ran against Ted Kennedy, he did not shy away from his personal opposition to abortion but positioned himself by saying “my personal beliefs, like the personal beliefs of other people, should not be brought into a political campaign.” He lost that race. In 2001, Romney e
Read more

The Gaffe that Almost Wasn’t

Image
The smear campaign against Cain continues   By now the internet, radio, television, and wagging tongues everywhere are all abuzz over the latest campaign blunder by Herman Cain. But is it really the gaffe everyone says it is? Or was it a selective editing job a la Ed Shultz ? Well, call me cynical, but I’ve seen enough media shenanigans to be suspicious of anything taken out of context and this definitely tripped my radar. In the clip that has gone viral (below), Cain does appear to be caught off-guard by a question on Libya, a topic he ought to have been ready for. My first reaction was to wonder how many clips like this land on editing room floors instead of online. In a world used to hyper-slick video and equally slick candidates, a moment of thought gathering can seem disastrous. Still, this isn’t about a some candidate’s “senior moment.” Rather, it is about a hatchet job gone awry. This clip was released by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel along with the entire half-hour interview
Read more