I have started going over to McWhorter's substacks (he has two) instead of waiting to catch him linked in other print publications or his biweekly exchanges with Glenn Loury on "The Glenn Show." Loury is also now on substack. Some content is for paid subscribers only. I haven't yet, but probably should.
John has a recent essay "You Are Not a Racist to Criticize Critical Race Theory." It is simple, commonsensical, and answering some of the charges the critics have thrown at them. I particularly like his attention to the slippery definitions of terms - which is what one hopes for from in a linguist - of the attempt of some, especially academics, to retreat into what the term Critical Race Theory originally meant, and is therefore supposed to mean. It is the flip side of the discussion we just had about the word racism, in which I cautioned conservatives against blaming the dictionary for printing definitions that reflect what some people mean by the term, even if others object to it as an illegitimate expansion of the meaning. The same thing is happening here, and it is fair to hold leftists to their own standard. What CRT is "supposed" to mean in an academic legal setting is not the whole story. It has in fact expanded in meaning on the lips of its users and those who approve of it, not just its critics trying to turn it into something it isn't.
It will be interesting if dictionaries hold to their own standards and include this expanded version of CRT in the next few years. If they don't then they are open to charges of playing favorites.
CRT, like racism and feminism, are canonical examples of the motte and bailey doctrine. When leftists talk about CRT amongst themselves, CRT grows to encompass "whiteness" and so forth. When CRT is criticized, its defendants retreat to saying "we're just talking about the legacy of slavery".
ReplyDeleteCome to think of it, Motte-and-bailey thought does tend to permeate most postmodernist/leftist thought.
While I shouldn't over-comment, I'd also like to link to Freddie DeBoer's essay on The Selfish Fallacy. Freddie's as Marxist as they come, but he's got some good ideas here.
ReplyDeleteEric, the bailey is even deeper in than that! CRT is originally only a legal theory of always including race in any understanding of justice.
ReplyDeleteMcWhorter has some great essays on this, wokism, etc., on Substack. I've been enjoying them.
ReplyDeleteDictionaries are supposed to reflect usage, which is contestable enough with single words.
ReplyDeleteA three-eyed freak like CRT . . . even tougher.
CR Theorists should have heeded Mencken: anyone who inflicts his ideas on the world must expect to be misunderstood.
Cousin Eddie
That line is a definite keeper. I will post on it.
ReplyDeleteWhere was Cousin Eddie when Jesus needed this advice??
ReplyDeleteIt did frustrate him when the disciples kept not getting him, didn't it?
ReplyDelete"Where was Cousin Eddie when Jesus needed this advice?"
ReplyDeleteHey, that was WAY before my time, or even Mencken's, and he's like, dead.
Cousin Eddie
Ah, the War on Christmas seems to start earlier every year.
ReplyDeleteMcWhorter is correct about conflation. The political right has chosen "Critical Race Theory" to label what they find anathema, such as diversity training, while also using the conflation to denigrate the entire concept of systemic racism.
McWhorter is correct that there is a distinction to be drawn between the finding of systemic racism and what to do about it. Conflating the two only serves to confuse. Indeed, it helps demonstrate systemic racism.
I don't see color.
ReplyDeleteBe less white, Zachriel.
ReplyDelete