What is Critical Race Theory?

[@colingraham1585]

I hope this divides the USA because I can’t stand people that think racial problems are solvable by learning about differences instead of by love and empathy. Playing basketball with black people goes further than having a victim conversation with some black academic yuppy.

[@blankname5177]

How does playing basket solve racial profiling? How does it stop police killing black people if you play basketball ? Do you hear yourself ,

[@colingraham1585]

I agree that there are other activities to bond. I was using basketball as an example because I play basketball. It’s brief, simple, and real.

[@standowner6979]

Unfortunately playing basketball isn't going to fix economic inequalities.

[@darklelouchg8505]

​@@standowner6979 You are presuming that economic inequalities need fixing. Tell me, why are you entitled to economic equality? How about if you make poor financial decisions? Do you still get brought back up to that equal standard? The idea of trying to force economic equality (basically rebranded equity at this point), would require centralization and authoritarian policy that ultimately ends with a fascist or communist society depending how you want to implement it. This of course doesn't even touch on economic inequalities not related to race, do we attempt to address Rome sacking Carthage and whose descendants get reoperations next? If not, why not? My solution? Equality of Process (Called Equality of Opportunity). If you sink, you sink. If you float, you float. The world doesn't care about you, and neither do I.

[@JohanDanielsson8802]

@@standowner6979 Then build a society with less economic inequality. Don´t beat people over the head for being of the wrong "race".

[@cel1945]

For people interested in crt Read the following 'Critical Race Theory introduction. The attack on CRT, the Derrick Bell Reader, and Critical Race theory the key writings that formed the movement. And your answers are in them.

[@AndyWearsPants]

You forgot Cynical Theories by Pluckrose and Lindsay.

[@John_Malka-tits]

A theory is a valid tested hypothesis, that is still amenable to new data. Is ctr a theory? What hypotheses did it test, how were they validated, are those data points TESTABLE i.e. repeatable? To me it seems like crt works more like a protestant cult. It has religious worldview and dogmas that to question is heresy. Real science doesn't have heresy. Crt is the "flat earth" of social sciences They will come up with any spurious example to hold up their previously held belief. Religion is the justification of already held beliefs and the demonization and REJECTION of info that contradicts it. Science, depends on starting from a place of NOT KNOWING and using info until you find POSSITIVE EVIDENCE. No "proponent" of ctr can tell you A.) What is the theory that they are "critical" of B.) What they are testing for or against. Cause crt is about knowing and having faith. It's not about testing theories critically about race. Crt people can't agree what race is or what it means to have or not have it- what should be done or not done about it. Crt is about collecting spurious data about mostly black Americans living in cities and drawing harsh divine judgements from how we choose to look at the metaphorical chick entrails that data amounts to. Crt is what Orwell was imagining when he outlined NEWSPEAK from 1984. They aren't a critical scientific theory about race- They aren't the department of "peace" They are neither critical nor theoretical, but their are really proponents of "race" whatever that's suppose to mean to them.

[@treydee8442]

Bro you need proper grammar, I have a hard time telling the title sof the books

[@InventiveHarvest]

Equality is a bad measure as people have unique preferences. What we want to see is generational social mobility. When a group's rights are infringed, what we mean is that individuals in that group have had their rights infringed. Laws like redlining infringe upon rights of people and can keep them stuck in poverty; diminishing generational social mobility. During the pandemic, kids went to school online, but their online classes were still through their locally funded school. This restriction prevents online classes from escaping redlining type effects. Voucher school programs can target low income students and improve their choices.

[@CarneadesOfCyrene]

The challenge with programs like school vouchers is that only families who have the time and money to transport their kids to another district do so. Meaning only the weathy in a poor neighborhood do so, and often concentrate poverty even more, making the education worse for those that are left.

[@hjge1012]

How do you determine something is equitable? Because if you just look at the outcome, people will start altering their behavior (to get more), which means it doesn't show what people need, making it a poor indicator for equity. Moreover, how do you account for different choices and different culture? Or should we just give more to people that come from a culture that has worse outcomes and/or people that make worse choices? Or is making worse choices a sign that you need more? And what if someone doesn't want to change their poor choices? Which gets us to: what outcomes are we even measuring? Are money and performance in the job market the only things that matters? The more I think about it, the more my mind goes towards horrible scenarios. Because the only real solution to most of the questions are really authoritarian; think of how China is 'reeducating' the Uyghurs. Because that fits perfectly into this ideology. Alternatively you can just keep discriminating against better performing cultures, until they too start performing worse. That way you will however eternally be discriminating against groups. Because equity will never be reached. And then I haven't even started about how we define groups. Because you can create new inequities/inequalities by simply changing how you define your groups. This approach seems to have endless issues and literally no good outcome. So what exactly do proponents of this see as a good and realistic outcome to these ideas?

[@colingraham1585]

Idk he just dropped another CRT today. Probably hasn’t ever talked to a real black person in his life.

[@mattdobbs-dr2rt]

​@@colingraham1585word my nizzer

[@nienke7713]

I do feel like there is a type of equality between equality under the law and equality of outcome, namely equality of opportunity. Equality under the law simply means the law treats everybody the same, it is insufficient to guarantee equality of opportunity or equality of outcome. Equality of outcome goes further than equality of opportunity, in that equality of outcome would seek to make sure that all get the same out regardless of what they put it, whereas equality of opportunity simply ensures that all have the same opportunities to succeed but still rewards those who put in more (valuable) work/time/effort/merit for doing so. If there are reasons why certain groups are less likely to attend university, then that would fail to meet equality of opportunity, as university is not an outcome but an opportunity. Equality of opportunity is a requirement for meritocracy.

[@km1dash6]

While not a specific USA example, this demonstrates a very important point: Oprah Winfrey went to an Hermes store and asked to see a handbag. She was denied access to the bag because the store clerk thought she couldn't afford it. Clearly, the store clerk didn't know who they were talking to. They just saw a black woman and their learned biases about black women came up. Oprah Winfrey, one of the wealthiest people on the planet, still faces racism and discrimination. We know this has impacts on a person's health on a genetic level (toxic stress has been shown to cause damage to DNA). For specificly USA examples: black people are still more likely to be shot by police in the USA than white people, all things being adjusted for. Black people are more likely to be pulled over than white people, and this effect disappears when police have a harder time seeing a driver's race (like when it's rainy or dark outside). Identical resumes with only names changed (from traditionally white names to traditionally black names) are less likely to get a call for an interview. I think the above information shows you cannot have a race blind approach to racial equality because, despite our laws, people still have implicit biases. You don't need to say racial slurs, you can have a black friend, and you can truly have no hate in your heart, but stereotypes and biases still exist because we live in a society that raises us with implicit beliefs about racial groups, which is a form of racism.

[@dreyri2736]

The problem is that the solution to this is too simple: tell people not to judge based on race. The problem is that you don't actually want to do that. You want to give minorities more privileges for some vague and nebulous idea of justice. In truth, you guys don't actually care about ethics. You only care about spoils.

[@stevencere]

What I’m hearing is there is a wealth disparity in this country and your race heavily impacts whether you are in that wealth disparity or if you are not

[@CarneadesOfCyrene]

Yep. Many, though not all, of the other issues of discrimination are driven by these underlying wealth and income disparities.

[@amitb.e.5244]

A small nuance here: race *correlates* with wealth. Whether your race "impacts" your wealth (I.e. whether your race ITSELF casually affects your wealth) is exactly what's at question in a lot of these debates. CRT seems to want to bypass this question by saying that it doesn't matter; our society works in a way that leads to people of a certain race being worse off (on average) than people of another race. Even if they are not explicitly actually discriminated against by any policy per se, the overall "system" (*waves hand at all of society in general*) is "racist" and therefore unjust because it leads to these racial disparities in outcome (which are tied to historic injustice against people of that race by that society as a whole). This argument is deeply flawed in multiple ways - but I'll have to come back later to articulate them .

[@fluxo_musical]

​@@amitb.e.5244 , please, do it. Do comeback.

[@nickbagnall]

@@amitb.e.5244 I would like to hear more of your argument, but would add intelligence, general outlook and opportunity have a greater bearing than race.

[@John_Malka-tits]

That's the group think, yes.

[@Dayglodaydreams]

You should do one on the philosophy of disability rights. Maybe language in the ADA? Maybe the 3 definitions of disability?

[@CarneadesOfCyrene]

Great idea! There is a lot of philosophical work about and by people wth disabilities, both in definition as well as questions of rights, autonomy, etc.

[@michaelpcoffee]

CRT obviates the need for any thought, word or act of racism as proof of their presumed verdict. All they need is their preferred race measuring less favorably than another. Regardless of the cause: they declare their favored race to be victims of the other. Then they would use real government enforced discrimination in response to their presumed discrimination; altering laws, policies and practices to favor their preferred race. All for the stated purpose of forcibly making the measurements between races identical. The operative question is whether you support using government force to implement racial discrimination. All the rest is academic. My answer is no.

[@doodleprophet]

😂

[@darklelouchg8505]

@@doodleprophet He is 100% correct, seethe and cope.

[@doodleprophet]

@@darklelouchg8505 and yet you have brought me joy and a smile today 😂 Thank you 😊

[@doodleprophet]

@@darklelouchg8505 It's been so long since I got to type this 😂 Critical Race Theory is constitutional history You cannot teach or understand the US Constitution without Critical Race Theory The Republican Party is responsible for putting Critical Race Theory into the text of the constitution Oh how I missed this seething and coping 🤣 Do come back if you have any retorts you think are compelling

[@michaelpcoffee]

​@doodleprophet So; the framers of the Constitution didn't understand the Constitution; since CRT started in the 1970s. An extraordinary assertion. The operative question is: Do you support using government force to implement racial discrimination? All the rest is academic.

[@bruhmoment1329]

one objection i have for crt is the angle that certain advocates for crt take in advocating for racial policies, more specifically policies concerning reparations and punishment for the non marginalized races (im not sure if punishment would be the correct word as im just now learning some crt, please correct me if im wrong on this) is that what are we to do with the descendents of black slave owners in antebellum america? for instances in new orleans where there were a good amount of black slave owners. do we also apply these polices to these most likely black descendants as well? or do they get a pass?

[@7sevenL]

Heya! A lot of people think that. Credit card waste theory seeks to "strike back" In a sort of punitive way. It isn't a form of retaliative justice it's a form of reparative justice. Think of it like your grandfather stole my grandfather's house and all of his riches. In order to survive, he had to work for low wages in the house and so did his children, While that family that stole the house and money benefits from his labor And enjoys better material conditions and better access to things like education that comes with wealth. If we are both the grandchildren of the first men in the story, Neither of us are in these unequal situations do to anything that we did. Our grandfathers passed away long ago, so the initial people are no longer part of the story. It's all about addressing the way things came to be and figuring out solutions to fix the inequality. Punishment has nothing to do with it. Redistribution isn't outside of the question, but it could also be things like providing more opportunities etc. as poverty is intergenerational and cyclical.

[@ian-flanagan]

​@@7sevenL I'm always amazed when people raise the self-replicating nature of wealth/poverty as a supplementary factor, rather than the core issue. If we improved social mobility, we don't need to "calculate" (in reality: guess) the present value of past crimes.... or more importantly, we don't need to rationalise why one crime is repaired, while others aren't (i.e. why only race-correlated crimes are considered for reparations, and not your grandfather, for example).

[@benjamindover4337]

You can divide society up any way you like to find inequalities. Why is there so much focus on race disparity? Maybe homes with tall men or attractive women have disproportionately higher incomes. Perhaps homes with neurotic men or lazy women have disproportionately lower incomes. Shouldn't we also even out these disparities?

[@CarneadesOfCyrene]

The reason may be that race is so clearly out of your control. You may be able to control things like the job you have, how lazy you are, where you live, how healthy you eat, whether you get your neuroses treated etc. But you clearly cannot control your race. So when race has a big impact on outcomes, the idea of a meritocracy where you determine your own success is undermined.

[@jhawk114]

First, other factors are considered in broader critical theory. Second, race is a focus because of the prevalence to racist and racists systems in the world. They came first.

[@noahpogroelsky5406]

There is so much focus on racial disparity because there is a clear causal relationship between our society and the witnessed inequalities. If there was some fact about tall people that predisposed them to being paid more or less, and it was based on an unchangeable characteristic, then it would be good to solve that. However, there isn't much evidence of this, as you yourself suggest when you say that it is merely a possibility that these factors lead to higher incomes. On your point about whether or not we should be able to let inequalities based on personality exist because we are often born with them, I would say that this raises an important question abut whether merit and concepts like 'deserving' can even exist if we can't design our own personalities or lack free will, and would be good to limit inequality that stems from it if so, but don't detract from the fact that we also know that race is arbitrary, and so definitely falls under the category of unchosen, no matter what. Beyond that, racial discrimination is deep and wide - studies have found large, far-reaching impacts, and non-dominant racial groups are a large part of the population. Essentially, we care particularly about race because it is something we can all agree is not possible to change and most agree that it confers arbitrary costs and benefits, the impacts seem to be wide-reaching and on a large group, and the relationship between the costs/benefits and race seems to be causal, rather than correlative. Your examples are less clear on these criteria, so while your point is theoretically sound, it lacks empirical backing and would need some heavy philosophical justification on fairness if you wanted to make the point that we should focus more on them instead of race.

[@jakebrooks3415]

Probably something to do with the discrimination, the lynchings, and that civil war (bloodiest in our history)

[@fortunatomartino8549]

The blue whale in the room is black violence, collapse of the family and fatherlessness

[@donb6474]

Each election year the poor are promised something. They are only given enough to hold them over till the next election. Education is the way out of poverty. Education will always be the way to prosperity. EXAMPLE: TVA paid everyone doing the same job the same pay. This made life better for many people. Back in the 80's low income loans for new houses were offered to everyone working. It would behoove Washington to create policies that would enhance peoples lives.

[@Shaftalooooo]

Here As an Asian, I think C.R.T. In its principle is an attempt to undermine hardwork. Wealth accumulation, education, and all requires hard work something the new generation ain’t prepared for. Hardwork pays off

[@doodleprophet]

CRT is a legal theory that argues laws and legal frameworks shaped American racism Try reading something like Yick Wu v Hopkins or anything on Jim Crow. CRT is American legal history. Check out the CRT amendments in the constitution: -13th Amendment -14th Amendment -15th Amendment

[@joelanderson5285]

You would be partially correct one of the goals of any propaganda is to shift people's perception of where the locus of control is in their life. CRT is a grift that is meant to undermine the current system and thus wants to move the locus of control to outside the individual, great observation.

[@isabelrimmer406]

This is really good stuff. A request… although your speech is clear, you have a habit of dwindling your volume down at the end of your sentences to the point that the content is lost. The content is too good to lose so if you could buff that up I would be grateful.

[@DigitalGnosis]

Great stuff, I had a HORRIBLE conversation with Peter Boghossian and a presenter from GB news the other day who could not distinguish between the claims of CRT as a theory and of individual persons who happen to be CRT advocates that are not entailments of CRT.

[@Pfhorrest]

I was expecting that my contribution here would be to say that you can eat your cake and have it too if you treat everyone equally qua race going forward, and then ALSO help everyone regardless of race in proportion to their need (e.g. poverty) as well, which will automatically disproportionately benefit those from historically disadvantaged groups, to exactly the degree that and for exactly so long as they remain thus disadvantaged. But, you already covered that, so I've got nothing. Oh wait actually I've got one more original thought: even if all you care about is equality of opportunity, not outcome, the specific pattern of inequalities of outcome can indicate inequalities of opportunity. If outcome is the product of opportunity and ability, and abilities are normally distributed (as they usually tend to be), then we should expect a uniform distribution of opportunity times that normal distribution of ability to yield a normal distribution of outcome, where most people are average, where the mode, median, and mean all align. If instead we see a heavily skewed distribution of outcomes, with the mean far above the median in turn far above the mode, i.e. where most people are far below average in terms of outcome -- which we do in fact see -- that indicates that there is inequality of opportunity. Or else that, contrary to the empirical research, most people are far below average in ability, too, instead of abilities being normally distributed. Or maybe, as some right-wingers love to claim, maybe there's another factor besides opportunity and ability, like "effort" or "drive" or something, so successful people just tried harder or wanted it more -- but that's clearly post hoc bullshit, since if the unsuccessful people just didn't really want it, they wouldn't be complaining about not getting it, and if they did really want it, they would *try* to get it, unless for some reason they were unable to try, which once again falls back under ability.

[@nienke7713]

Although I do think ability and effort could play factors, I wouldn't think that they'd be different across racial lines. If there is inequality of outcome between racial groups, then either there'd be a racial tendency towards different amounts of ability, a racial tendency towards different amounts of effort, or a lack of equality of opportunity along racial lines. If we exclude the first two optional, which I think is a reasonable assertion if we don't have any concrete evidence that there is a difference in ability or effort between races, then it is the lacking equality of opportunity along racial lines which remains as the cause.

[@Pfhorrest]

@@nienke7713 Yup, that is the point I was making.

[@nienke7713]

@@Pfhorrest ah okay, it seemed like you were talking more on an individual level rather than group level. I definitely think there can be differences in ability and effort on an individual level, but not on a group level along racial lines.

[@Pfhorrest]

@@nienke7713 I was talking about the statistical distribution of abilities between individuals or across groups, and how that relates to the statistical distribution of outcomes, and of opportunities. I was saying that if the distribution of abilities is normal, meaning gaussian, the familiar bell curve, where most people are around the middle, and there are increasingly fewer people toward the ends -- across all people, regardless of race etc -- which is what we repeatedly see in all different kinds of empirical studies, then the distribution of outcomes should also be a normal, gaussian, bell curve, IF opportunity is distributed uniformly, flatly, equally. But since we see that outcomes are NOT distributed that way -- in a variety of different ways, including racial discrepancies -- that points at there being NOT being a uniform, flat, equal distribution of opportunity. So even if you only cared about opportunity, the abnormal distribution of outcomes can tell you that opportunity is not equally distributed.

[@nienke7713]

@@Pfhorrest ah like that, just double checking if I understand you now, you're sayijg that there can be differences in effort and ability that would result in differences of outcome, but if those follow a bell curve as expected and they have equal opportunity, then we should see a bell curve in the outcome as well; the lack of a bell curve in the outcome suggests a lack of equal opportunities or some other factor that's not accounted for. That's a good point, thanks for taking the time to explain what you meant some more 😊

[@OrdnanceLab]

Great video and well done on trying to present as neutral a viewpoint as possible, while also be transparent on your own beliefs.

[@indiefilmandmusic]

I enjoyed it as well. But in case you’re not aware, the principles of being neutral, objective and balanced, is regarded as racist in CRT theory, because it originates from the white world. To be replaced by subjectivity and the furthering of political goals.

[@NielMalan]

17:33 My response to the question of not paying for the exploitation of the forefathers would be to point out that it's not your money being spent. Reparations are funded by the government, which might obtain those funds by various means. Some of those funds are generated by taxation, and in general taxation is not earmarked. If the government want to spend money on a war you have no say in the matter, and if they want to spend it on reparations you have no say in the matter.

[@timothymatthews6458]

*"If the government want to spend money on a war you have no say in the matter, and if they want to spend it on reparations you have no say in the matter."* That is a problematic idea. The fact that we do not have a say in whether the government goes to war does not justify our having a lack of say in other matters.

[@NielMalan]

@@timothymatthews6458 If the government want to spend money on finding a cure for Alzheimer's disease you have no say in the matter, and if they want to spend it on reparations you have no say in the matter. Better?

[@northstarmind1049]

​​​@@timothymatthews6458 : *The govt & the country has a MORAL liability & a MORAL responsibility* to address & correct & try to balance the racist wrongs of its practices as a nation! (The U.S. govt finally paid financial settlements to Japanese-Americans wrongfully put in American concentration camps during WWII. Altho the settlement was woefully inadequate & the govt waited as long as possible for the victims to die off.)

[@timothymatthews6458]

@@northstarmind1049 No it doesn't, you delusional hack.

[@dreyri2736]

​@@northstarmind1049 or, you know, maybe not.

[@doubleemcastillano464]

How in the world doesn’t this have hundreds of thousands of views? You may need more animation or something to spark the algorithm but these are answers people are oblivious to.

[@joshuabrowncrow]

I won’t comment either way on this, other than to say that you take care to explain things carefully, and you are open to careful discussions. That is good. Thanks

[@oscarhoward6505]

Anytime Condoleezza Rice pushes back against anything that talks about race and trying to understand what is race in America I want to learn about it.

[@John_Malka-tits]

Thanks, Jon Stewart

[@jimweights8908]

You can either have group equality or individual equality. You cannot have both. Group equality would involve measuring outcomes at group level setting targets or quotas for outcomes. Individual equality involves having a single set of rules that apply to all; and not judging people based on petty trivialities such as eye skin or hair colour. Group equality people are racist - it is not an opinion- it is the meaning of the word. CRT is racist and people promoting it should be fined, jailed or do community service.

[@abstractvlog]

What if, and not out of a dismissal of all many other implications and factors, we decided to take our focus to all the educational inequalities that have resulted especially, from the laws previously put in place for prohibiting black americans from becoming literate at that time and how this disproportionately effected their future outcomes generationally, not to mention all the other deterrents and gruesome obstacles placed before them. Therefore, they could receive free higher education and rooming, maybe extra incentives if they went into specific fields or for entrepreneurs. I think if there were a variety of methods to assist them by making various achievements overall, more accessible, there could be growth and progress in various sectors. They also could potentially draw focus onto their lack of protections and compensation from the u.s. govt during Freedman Banking/Beurocracy collapse but I'm in the early stages of learning more about it.

[@thomaskrawford7363]

I agree yet CRT’s goal of equity expansion is often clouded by way too many words. We need to be more concise.

[@capnchip]

This is nothing but more of some people not being realistic about racial differences, no matter what the reason. If someone wants "respect", just ACT in a RESPECTFUL manner. Respect is not a RIGHT, it is EARNED! ....Again, IT IS EARNED! If someone cannot act in a respectful manner, they just AIN'T gonna get it, and it must also be maintained if obtained. ( Ask Fani ) ....Very simple.

[@jorje0068]

I feel like ambition across the board will take a huge hit

[@cyberneticqualanaut7207]

Good explanation. Thanks for creating this.

[@CarneadesOfCyrene]

No problem. Thanks for watching!

[@jasonbrandler66]

I think this was a great video giving an objective view on a controversial topic. And unfortunately, as with most things, the difficulty lies in its practical application.

[@chodzom7287]

You can't change the past. There have been many injusticies in the past, but it is impossible to compensate historical inequalities today. We need to live from today and ahead. Trying to repair old injusticies is pointledd, it will never work. The risk is that would create newwer injusticies.

[@vinwonsenobi]

This is actually very interesting to me. I am planning on learning more about it. At this point, (this is the first video I have seen on the topic so I am still very uneducated) it seems to me that a major player in the continued inequality of races is definitely wealth based. With the Wealthiest (individuals, or groups) being able to stack the deck, with lobbying and manipulation of the rules to keep themselves, and their friends, on top. Though the resolution of this issue would be massively altering to our current structure. and the issue is the structure is still built so those changes are still being voted on and therefore controlled by the wealthy.

[@HonestDogAL]

CRT (& intersectionality) is a means to an end. 1. Gain power (positions in institutions) 2. Disrupt the system (cause conflict and discomfort in people's lives) 3. Blame Capitalism (aka "Whiteness", colonialism, patriarchy, nuclear family) 4. Usher in their Marxist utopia as the solution. CRT is part of phase 2.

[@AndyWearsPants]

Irony is putting MLK's face on a video about CRT. Keep in mind that he argued for content of character over color of skin while CRT does exactly the opposite. Racism is a collectivist ideology by definition, because it groups people in ways that fail to account for differences in individuals and personal circumstances. Moreover, CRT advocates either ignore or attribute to race causes of disparities such as fatherlessness, to name one - children, regardless of race, have comparably poor life outcomes when the nuclear family breaks down. CRT erases individualism and groups people by race, then places racial groups in hierarchies of oppression. Therefore, CRT is racist. Its advocates are racists. It is everything MLK stood against.

[@doodleprophet]

Have you ever read MLK speeches?

[@doodleprophet]

"Well I think the dilemma is much deeper and I think one during this period of transition has to be very honest with America and honesty impels me to admit that America has broad racist elements still alive. Racism is still existing in American society in many areas of the society, North and South, and the other thing is that there has never been a single, solid, determined commitment of large segments of white America on the whole question of racial equality. I think we have to see that vacillation has always existed, ambivalence has always existed and this to me is the so-called white backlash. It's merely a new name for an old phenomenon. I see the white backlash is a continuation of the same ambivalence and vacillation of white America and the whole question of racial justice that existed since the founding of our nation" -MLK

[@blankname5177]

Never read or heard MLK beyond I have dream, eh? Read the individual you are using to support your belief.

[@blackguy6567]

@@blankname5177what’s important is context Martin Luther King was living in a time where the experiences of white and black people were for the most part universally similar however in our current society black people have been granted significant opportunities which allow us to pursue different lifestyles which means that as of today white and black people do not share similar experiences this is what Martin Luther King would’ve wanted but it seems like CRT wants to reinforce the idea that we are still living in a society where racism is significant and tries diminish our individual experiences and places us into racial categories just like segregation in the 1950’s in other words CRT is hypocritical and endorsed exactly what it’s against and if Martian Luther King we’re alive today I don’t think he would endorse it it’s not to say that some thing about CRT aren’t true though

[@Ajamu_Kipwaa]

Read the last book Dr. King wrote which was published the year he was assassinated entitled, "Where Do We Go From Here". It's FREE online (google) in PDF and ebook formats.

[@monkeymox2544]

21-minute video of someone clearly and accurately explaining what CRT is. Comment section full of people complaining about what it isn't, or redefining it according to what some right-wing moron has incorrectly told them it is. I hate the internet, sometimes.

[@tb8827]

Thanks!

[@michaelpcoffee]

The operative question is: Do you support using government force to implement racial discrimination? All the rest is academic.

[@doodleprophet]

No, the operative question here is "What is Critical Race Theory?" Your dedication to willful ignorance is impressive 👏 I admire your commitment

[@MrTigerniger]

Yes. The government already discriminates. The government can't do anything in the manner of maintaining social order without discrimination. All people don't need a public housing unit, just those incapable of working. All people don't need food stamps, all people don't need medical transport, all people don't need disability payments, or unemployment benefits. The government already discriminates. I do believe it is absolutely necessary for the government to institute equitable racial discrimination in order to remedy the social ills that persist in poor communities of color AND to rid the white community of their racism. The new DOJ study of Minneapolis is a miserable reminder that racism will continue unless the government responds by forcing people, through education, to recognize what happened to racial minorities. And by forcing corporations and wealthy people, through taxes, to pay reparations to those people. It's simple. But the same as the Massive Resistances movement, you will have reactionary stagnation to the progress, or outright resistance to equity aa we're seeing in Tennessee and Florida.

[@darklelouchg8505]

@@doodleprophet Except it always ends up with that same question being asked, unfortunately for you

[@doodleprophet]

@@darklelouchg8505 The government force question that doesn't provide any context for what you consider government force or racial discrimination? Bad faith questions that don't engage with anyone or anything accomplish nothing but vapid virtue signaling. By all means, signal your virtues. We might actually agree on something 😂

[@michaelpcoffee]

@@doodleprophet I certainly understand your reticence to state your position. That would be telling. Nevermind; your refusal to answer is answer enough.

[@EdT.-xt6yv]

8:40 objection

[@redsparks2025]

The real world problem with CRT is it's title. If it has a long boring academic title then it would of flown under the radar of those minds that are susceptible of getting their "news" via memes. Anyway thank you for clarifying the real academic understanding of CRT and giving us a good video to point to when I have to debate those minds whose worldview is governed by memes. BTW because the word "inequality" comes up so many times then a better title would of been Theory On Inequality; a title that does not lend itself easy to being turned into a meme. Anyway the horse has already bolted on that issue on a less meme like title but something that academics should seriously consider.

[@Summer-kb2dm]

Thanks for doing this. Well done! I think one thing that is generally overlooked is Moral or Ethical responsibility to help people who are less fortunate - period! We traded our humanity for capital. Using the defense that a person should not be responsible for injustice of ancestors is avoiding the responsibility a person has to the less fortunate that remains regardless of the past. For the benefits of CRT in schools - specifically in black schools see Critical Consciousness as addressed by Paulo Ferrara. It is a fight against internalized racism - which for me is the start. To those "poor white middle middle income folks" who feel guilty: I don't want you to feel guilty - I want you to feel ethically responsible to helping the less fortunate. And last - actual racism still exists. Equality under the law is not guaranteed by the people who are supposed to uphold it.

[@ZacharyBittner]

You first have to justify why what you think is good is good. I think this is a big weakness for CRT. It’s still one of these “Is good because I feel it is” kinda philosophies.

[@andreions]

​@@ZacharyBittner So, helping less fortunate people doesn’t matter in your eyes is what I’m getting from your comment. Countless studies show that when you have your basic needs met you are better off than marginalized and poor individuals. People don't become or stay poor due to choice but because the system keeps them that way. This philosophy is not a “Is good because I feel it is”, it is back up with facts so don’t come here with your emotions.

[@Dayglodaydreams]

God, the comments section is negative.

[@troywilliams4753]

It's Marxist.

[@stevencere]

Great video!!

[@CarneadesOfCyrene]

Thanks!

[@riveraharper8166]

Thanks for the explanation. Disagree with every turn... I find the anglo-saxon approach that education is just a question of money hillarious and offensive... Same for the measurement of families. We all know which systems of the 20th century wanted to educate children instead of families. Orwell wrote that well... Those bored professors in Yale or Harvard should hunt for String Theory or Quantum gravity problmes instead of this...

[@standowner6979]

What?

[@afazekas81]

@@standowner6979 You heard the man! Want further explanation?

[@tonic4120]

The family is institution responsible for the greatest amount of disparity. You’d need to ban parents spending money on extra lessons, teaching their kids advanced math ahead of schedule, speaking with an advanced vocabulary around the house, or even passing their genes to their children to eliminate this source of disparity.

[@justlol7281]

It’s genetics. The different racial groups evolved slightly differently.

[@OmniMale]

Choice is the factor and the black community makes poor choices.

[@kingdavid7516]

no thanks.

[@ipilotaneva2586]

wack

[@LorcaLoca]

roman statue avatar

[@kingdavid7516]

@@LorcaLoca calm down, son, it's just a profile picture. my name's david, david is a popular name and figure, i'm borrowing its likeness for an anonymous internet moniker. it's no deeper than that. some of us put very little effort into our KZbin profiles - others, like yourself, put in even less effort. but yeah, i'm not interested in any of this mental illness. enjoy your 1619 project and soy latte, friendo! 😎

[@standowner6979]

Why?

[@quartytypo]

Every school test at all grade levels and university level must have questions concerning critical race theory. This will test the students' knowledge of the subject.

[@darklelouchg8505]

Why precisely would we do that?

[@docdoc4129]

Are jewish people considered as white in the medium household income of 187k? I do not know anyone personally, that's a conservative white christian family making that kind of money. I have no clue where you get your statistics from but it must be google who pushes this narrative. Also single black females with multiple children from multiple dads are included in the low, those are not family incomes. A family consists of a woman and man both working, or at least it should. Just as with a recent incident at the white house where an indian guy was considered white or a light skinned phenotype so thats white now? Statistcs are meant to sway popular opinion and the mean, mode nor margin of error is rarely explained in the data. 😐

[@CarneadesOfCyrene]

I personally know several conservative Christian families with incomes over $300k and assets over $1 million. You can find citations for the racial weath gap in quite a few publications including the census, major universities, and even Fox News (www.foxnews.com/opinion/simple-way-fix-wealth-gap-between-blacks-whites-far-better-reparations.amp). That said, there is a lot of poverty in white communities as well, which is one of the reasons that explicitly race-based solutions often fail. Even if white people are richer on aggregate, that does nothing to help poor white families.

[@Pfhorrest]

The $187k figure was median *wealth* not income (which includes the value of non-liquid assets like one's home, not just cash savings). The claim is that half of white households have accumulated that much or more over their lifetimes, not that they make that every year.

[@docdoc4129]

@@Pfhorrest real non-jewish, christian americans rarely accumulate generational wealth whereby only having to pay property taxes. Minorities do though and they'll have multiple generations living in the same home. I'm sure I'm the exception but I'm one of the most impoverished white n's there are. I just don't see the "asset gap" that far apart. Especially with affirmative action crap. Loans are more easily accessible to minorities, child support is not near as daunting...Sure there are outliers with athletes and such but typically whites are more enslaved that other minorities from my perspective.

[@mgu1N1n1]

Yeah, try being born and raised in an American city... then bring me your "racist" non-sense from the 'burbs... if you know.....