There are some folks out there who don’t believe that Critical Race Theory exists. (This despite the fact that many organizations have unapologetically come forward admitting that it does.) Others believe it’s just “teaching our history.” (This despite the fact that we’ve been “teaching our history,” more or less, warts and all, at least since I was in first grade, 36 years ago.) But I get it. It’s a subjective term and hard to define. So let’s get rid of the hard-to-define terms and go with some hard, factual examples.
This particular example doesn’t come from the education sphere, but it does show how race (which, as a reminder, is a made-up construct — we all belong to only one race: the human race) has been “weaponized.” And when everything is racist, nothing is racist.
It involves two “minorities” (again, I don’t even know what that particular term really means, but it’s what the left would like us to focus on, so I’ll play the left’s game for the purposes of this example and point it out), Lorena Gonzales, a Hispanic woman, and Bruce Harrell, a half-black, half-Japanese man.
The two are running for mayor of Seattle. Harrell said something a number of years ago when the gay white mayor at the time was accused by numerous men of child sexual molestation. (I don’t care how much pigment is in your skin or whom you’re attracted to, but since this is all about identity politics and that man was elected largely because he was the “gay candidate,” I figure I’ll include it in the narrative.)
Before all the facts had come to light and that mayor had resigned in disgrace after it was clear the allegations weren’t just “a homophobic attack trying to paint all gay men as child sex abusers,” Harrell came to his defense by speaking the unspeakable — namely, pointing out that we should, gasp, follow due process and not jump to any conclusions.Top Articles By American ThinkerRead More
People Notice When the Elites Lienull
Because of Harrell’s unspeakable comment, Gonzalez has launched a campaign ad using those and other things he’s said out of context as well as having some other people insinuate that he is a “rape apologist.”
Dirty politics is nothing new. What is fairly new is immediately defaulting to “YOU’RE A RACIST!!!” In this case, according to those deemed worthy to judge these things, Gonzalez is a racist because, apparently, there’s some racist trope about black men being rapists, and Harrell is apparently black. (Not that I’ve ever given it any thought, but when I saw this article and was forced to think about his race, because I’ve known of Harrell for a number of years, my immediate thought was, “Isn’t he Japanese?”) It can’t be that Gonzalez is just playing dirty politics that has nothing to do with Harrell’s skin color — although it is good to know where black/Japanese men rank compared to Hispanic women the next time I’m playing “intersectionality bingo.”
To bring this back to the beginning, CRT views all of history and socio-political relations through the lens of race. As I heard one proponent of CRT quip, “racism in America is like a pie; it’s baked right in.”
If someone cuts you off in traffic and you happen to be black, he’s a racist. If you don’t get a job, it’s because the company is racist. The disproportionate number of black people in prison can only be attributed to racism. There can’t possibly be another explanation. It can’t be that the person who cut you off is a bad driver or rushing home because his wife just went into labor. It can’t be that the other person was just more qualified, did a better job at interviewing, or provided better references. It can’t be that over 90% of prison inmates grew up without a father.
If your opponent attacks you in an admittedly dirty way, it can’t be that she’s just doing what politicians have been doing since the dawn of time and just trying to get a shot in any way she can. It has to be that she’s racist.
It’s gotten so bad that it’s almost comical. The L.A. Times ran a column calling Larry Elder “the black face of white supremacy.” “#UncleTim” trended on Twitter after Senator Tim Scott gave the response to the State of the Union address. Joe Biden told voters “you ain’t black” if you won’t vote for him.
Examples like this make it clear that this has zero to do with race and everything to do with pushing a statist agenda. Those who get in line are everything that is good and holy in the world. Those who don’t are racist.
We get what we focus on. If we want to be divided by race and all the other fun little boxes those who seek to control us are trying to put us in, we’ll get those boxes and that division. Or we could follow the words of Morgan Freeman and just stop talking about it. There used to be rampant discrimination against Italians, Irish, and Catholics. Joe Biden’s Catholicism was barely mentioned during the 2020 election.
If we don’t seek to stop division, it will never be stopped. Let’s say we “solve racism.” People will just find another reason to divide themselves. (Read “The Butter Battle Book” by Dr. Seuss, which was an allegory for the then-raging Cold War but involved two groups at war over something as silly as whether they ate their toast butter side up or butter side down. Considering some of the silly things we see fights break out over, I’m not sure that would qualify as satire anymore.)
So the next time someone says something you perceive as mean or unfair, or cuts you off in traffic, or you lose out on a job or a table at a restaurant to someone else who happens to be of a different ethnicity, religion, sex, etc., you can throw yourself a pity party; call up the ACLU, NAACP, and whatever other acronym you can think of; and sue everyone in sight over the great tragedy — or you can think, “Hmm, that person must be having a bad day, or maybe he just has different opinions from mine, and it doesn’t have a thing to do with the color of his skin or any other superficial difference that exists, and maybe I should see what I can do to bless him or what common ground we can find.”
Around The Web
FOLLOW US ON
Google has reportedly launched an “antiracism” initiative that claims American capitalism is “white supremacist.”
Only a racist would equate capitalism–economic freedom–with white supremacy. Because when you claim that some races can flourish under economic freedom while some races cannot, you are in fact being racist. It takes an individualist–the total opposite of a racist–to embrace meritocracy and dispense with all concerns about race.
Today’s real racists are those fixated on race, the pompous and self-described progressives. They project their own racism onto people who cherish freedom and liberty. In the process, they are bringing down all freedom and ushering in a world where people of all races will suffer from stagnation, poverty and despair. It’s so utterly irrational, so wrong and so tragically unnecessary.
Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason
There’s so much talk of “privilege”. The mere term is used to invoke guilt. Privilege refers to something you didn’t EARN — something that was handed to you.
In other words, if you achieve a lot of success, you are “privileged”. But how is it privilege if you earned it? If Joe Biden or Nancy Pelosi become billionaires through the abuse of power and redistribution of wealth, then I get how it’s privilege.
But if your commercial enterprise makes you a billionaire, you earned it. Biden and Pelosi didn’t earn anything. But most of us do honestly earn what we produce.
To make matters worse, we’re now attaching the concept of “privilege” to race. If you’re of one race (we’re told), you’re privileged and automatically undeserving of whatever success or happiness you enjoy; if you’re of a different race (we’re told), then you’re automatically and always deserving of achievement and success.
It doesn’t matter if you call it “progressive”; this kind of thinking is still racism. Racism is racism. RACE has nothing to do with achievement or failure. Your actions and choices do. The minute you claim (or imply) that race determines your moral status, YOU ARE A RACIST.
Our culture cannot and will not go on with this irrationality. We’re falling apart, and gradually collapsing into anarchy and division. Ideas have consequences, and rotten ideas lead to bad things. The billions of dollars of Zuckerberg, Dorsey, Gates or Bezos cannot turn falsehood into truth; or vicious prejudice into enlightenment. If the majority continue to accept this kind of thinking, or even pretend they do, it’s going to end in disaster. It always has.
Change your thinking, people: While you still can.
Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason
The 1619 Project was developed by Nikole Hannah-Jones of the New York Times that supposedly focuses on the cause(s) and consequences of slavery, etc, but does this “project” miss the target intentionally or otherwise?
Before anything like this “project” (opposed by President Donald Trump and numerous other politicians, educators, etc, across the United States) should have even been attempted, much less potentially taught within classrooms in high school or beyond, were the times before the 1600’s explored or even much less considered? Those origins could be covered in a “1400’s Project” that deals with how the slave trade began in the 1400’s with African tribes who collaborated with Europeans in the slave trade. A further examination of the slave trade could be brought about by delving into the rampant slavery conducted by Muslim areas of the Middle East even before the 1400’s and the degree to which they enslaved both blacks and whites. And did any nations in the Middle East before the 700’s-1000’s AD engage in a slave trade, even during BC times?
Pertaining to the slave trade and the 1600’s, has an in-depth and comprehensive analysis been conducted and published looking beyond merely which nations were involved and perusing which specific companies were involved in any way or capacity (primarily, secondarily or even tangentially), who owned the slave ships, where were the slave houses in Europe or across the ocean located, on what days was the selling of slaves conducted, and on and on?
Pertaining to CRT and/or any of its proponents, how could they, if they were to say so, possibly declare that enslaving others is indicative of only one race and ignore it being a problem potentially found within all humans of the past?
We have to remember a few things. Leftists do not care about justice. Justice applies to the individual. Leftist notions of “social justice” sacrifice the individual to society (in theory) and to the brutality of the state (in practice). Leftists do not care about racism. They ARE racists. They suggest that race is the defining and only important attribute of an individual; that the individual has no identity, no freedom of choice, no unique characteristics — only DNA. THIS IS RACISM.
Leftism is not a mixture of right and wrong, or good and bad, as most philosophies and ideologies are. Leftism, especially the Communist-woke type overwhelmingly dominating our culture today, is raw, undiluted, uncompromising and irredeemable evil.
Also, from Tucker Carlson:
It’s that simple: violent protests get results. That’s a threat, obviously. But it’s also, unfortunately true. Rioting does work. When you burn cities, you get what you want. You get rich from corporate handouts. You get the jury verdicts you’ve demanded. Rioters know this very well, even if the rest of us won’t admit it. By allowing Wendy’s to be torched and Macy’s to be looted and police stations to be destroyed, the rest of us have relinquished our power as citizens and instead handed it to the most violent, unreasonable, and least productive people in the country. Why would we do something like this? Maybe historians will be able to explain it. In the meantime prepare for the next phase. But, once again, don’t kid yourself. Derek Chauvin’s conviction didn’t settle accounts. It merely increased the debt.
Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason
Since the death of George Floyd, our esteemed media, as well as their Democratic allies, have suggested that Floyd’s alleged murder is representative of broader American white supremacy, that Floyd’s experience with law enforcement is indicative of how American police pose an existential threat to black Americans. They have offered no evidence for this proposition. Not a shred of evidence has been presented to suggest that former police officer Derek Chauvin’s actions the day of Floyd’s death were motivated by race. Not a shred of evidence has been presented to suggest that black Americans live at threat of extermination from whites or police officers: As of 2013, according to Reuters, a black person’s chances of being murdered by a white person were 5 in 1 million, and according to The Washington Post database of police shootings, as of 2019, a black person’s chances of being shot by the police while unarmed were approximately 3 in 10 million.
But facts don’t matter when you’re pressing forward a narrative.
Now that Chauvin is on trial for Floyd’s murder, the facts will once again become secondary to the narrative. Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., said that police reform is dependent on Chauvin’s conviction: “If there was ever a case that you can just not argue, it is this one. This trial has got to come out the right way, and we have to deliver.” Floyd family lawyer Benjamin Crump stated, “Today starts a landmark trial that will be a referendum on how far America has come in its quest for equality and justice for all.”
That’s simply not true.
Bass, Crump and the rest of the establishment media assume that Chauvin’s case is clear-cut — that nobody could possibly vote to acquit. The fact pattern, however, presents serious issues for the prosecution. Chauvin has been charged with second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. All three charges are a challenge.
The prosecution first has to show beyond a reasonable doubt that Floyd’s death was caused by Chauvin’s actions. But the autopsy report shows that Floyd had fentanyl and methamphetamine in his system and had a serious heart problem, and that Chauvin’s neck hold did not in fact cause damage to Floyd’s trachea. That means that while Chauvin’s neck restraint may have contributed to Floyd’s death by ratcheting up his blood pressure, for example, it’s uncertain that it caused Floyd’s death more than, say, the excited delirium from which Floyd may have already been suffering.
Second-degree murder requires that the prosecution prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Chauvin unintentionally killed Floyd while committing a felony — in this case, felony assault. But felony assault requires “intentional” infliction of bodily harm — that Chauvin wanted to hurt Floyd, not just use a suppression tactic already greenlit by the Minneapolis Police Department.
Third-degree murder — depraved-heart murder — doesn’t actually seem to fit the crime here, since it requires proving beyond a reasonable doubt that Chauvin acted in a way “eminently dangerous to others.” Others — plural. Usually, depraved-heart murder applies to someone who fires a gun into a crowd, not a person who targets an individual.
Second-degree manslaughter requires that the prosecution prove that Chauvin acted with “gross negligence.” But such gross negligence would have to show that Chauvin should have known that his behavior might cause Floyd’s death — an unlikely expectation, since the Minneapolis Police Department actively taught neck holds of the type Chauvin used, and which Chauvin applied only after Floyd resisted arrest and refused to be confined to the back seat of a police car.
The Chauvin case, then, is a legally complex one. But such complexities have been abandoned in favor of narrative. Should Chauvin be acquitted, we are likely to hear that America has proved its racism once again. The only thing that has already been proved, however, is that the “America as white supremacist” lie will remain the media’s dominant narrative, no matter the data.
Mea culpa. There is structural and systemic racism in the United States. The inconvenient truth is that it is perpetrated, propagated, and perpetuated by the Left. Birthed in the cesspool of radical Left university departments, demagogic terms like white privilege, whiteness, or white fragility are part of a poisonous and dangerous ideology that is meant to divide rather than unite. Critical race theory and racial equality can be summed up in a single statement: if you are white, you are racist and if you are a person of color, you are oppressed.
Democrats have been solely responsible for defending slavery, starting the Civil War, opposing reconstruction, lynching blacks, founding the Ku Klux Klan, Jim Crow laws and segregation, poll taxes and literacy tests. The Party voted against the 13th amendment (end slavery), 14th amendment (black citizenship), and 15th amendment (black right to vote), filibustered the 1960 Civil Rights Act (elimination of poll taxes), and tried to filibuster the 1964 Civil Rights Act for 60 days, the longest filibuster in Senate history.
The Civil War wasn’t North v. South, as highlighted in the Lincoln-Douglas debates in the northern state of Illinois. It was a Democrat v. Republican battle. The infamous Dred Scott decision (blacks were property) in 1857 was a Supreme Court vote of 7 Democrat justices for, and 2 Republican justices against. By 1900, more than 20 black Republicans had served in Congress. Democrats did not elect a single black congressman until 1935. And every black senator until 1979 was a Republican. When federal troops withdrew from the South after reconstruction ended, Democrats’ white supremacy laws re-emerged with a vengeance enforced by the paramilitary arm of the Democratic Party, the KKK, which was used to suppress blacks from voting Republican.
Democrats are also the party of abortion. Planned Parenthood, founded by eugenics racist Margaret Sanger was created to eliminate the “undesirables” and that continues today where there are more abortions in NYC of black babies than are born.
Democrat Woodrow Wilson re-segregated many federal agencies and screened the racist film Birth of a Nation at the White House. Democrat FDR refused to invite four-time gold medalist Jessie Owen (a staunch Republican) to the White House (only invited white athletes) and interned 120,000 Japanese Americans. Eisenhower re-integrated the military and forced the integration of schools in Little Rock against the wishes of Democrat governor Orval Faubus. The racist Democrat LBJ started the welfare state and said “I’ll have those n#@!rs voting Democrat for the next 200 years,” highlighting the fact that Democrats care about black votes but not blacks. The welfare state has decimated the black family with 77 percent of children growing up fatherless. JFK first mentioned Affirmative Action in 1961 but it was Nixon who passed it in 1971.
Democrat race hustlers Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton foment black victimhood. The party promotes racial identity politics because of the abject failure of its policies which continues to hurt black people and shows its continued contempt for blacks. Opposition to school choice keeps blacks in failing schools. Politically correct policing has left blacks as victims to violent crimes. In 2019, 9 unarmed blacks (the number is 19 for white people) were killed by police while more than 2,000 blacks were murdered by other blacks in 2018 and Democrats have had monopoly control of ALL the cities we hear and see about black plight: Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit..
If Democrats really wanted to help blacks, they would treat abortion as a tragedy, support school choice, work to end the failed welfare state, drop the idea of defunding police, promote advancement based on merit and character not the amount of melanin in your skin, end open borders which flood the market with cheap labor and steal jobs from black Americans, end their support of minimum wage laws which lead to higher black unemployment, and end their social justice mantra which is equality by group not the individual, anathema to America’s founding principles. I know, wishful thinking. So, whenever you hear Democrats calling Republicans racists, just know there is a simple psychological term for this: projection.