Point #2. The narrative from the right, in this case the far
right, Fox News and Trump supporters, is that CRT is radical and all
encompassing. They believe the left is systemically pushing CRT and is hell
bent on the complete annihilation of western institutions because they are
indelibly corrupt with bias for those in power (white males) and that this is
by design to favor white males because of their inherently biased
institutions. The goal is for white
males to remain in power until their foundational institutions of privilege are
torn down. Again, that is what the Far
Right believes CRT is all about and why they want to highlight it's content
because they believe it infuriates and activates their base.
So those of us with a more rational bent, and in the center
politically, are watching the radical left pull us into the abyss known as
Marxism, and the radical right, clearly in favor of authoritarian Fascism, pull
us in the other direction. The clear
take away is that both radical sides totally suck and both are bad directions
for this country. If these radical extremes divide our country further, they
will rip us apart. I think it is
important to examine both of these extremes that are causing the most harm and
address those first. White supremacy, on
the right, is vile and clearly must go.
The corollary, on the radical left, that every white man is a racist, is
just as racist a notion. Hypocrisy at its highest peak. The cause of that hypocrisy and roots of
that thinking are the academic origins of CRT.
As a consequence, those roots must be clearly examined. To me it’s unfair to group vague notions of
CRT, those who haven’t studied in, with its origins. Those only in favor of social justice, most
of us, thus are not to blame, and should not be blamed just for a casual
favorable glance in it’s direction. However,
there is so much else involved, it can’t be left unsaid. Let’s dive in.
So to start, admit, yeah, white supremacy is definitely a
thing, it will unfortunately always exist because humans evolved to protect the
home team. But as evolved humans we know that racism is a vile thing and we are
not going to tolerate it within our country.
It needs to crawl back under the rock where it came from and never peek
out again. Trump turned over that rock.
Now we must push that rock back in place. On the other hand, Wokism is also a
thing. While not vile, in the sense that
white supremist are morally wrong, those pushing the woke agenda are definitely
on higher moral ground, however as mentioned, they are also wrong and also
hypocrites. Thus they do not propose a clear or compelling argument. Wokism is rife with it’s own brand of bias
and social injustice. The problem is
that wokeism doesn’t stop until it eliminates freedoms so basic to human
dignity, that one can only arrive at the conclusion that wokism is the new
religion of the hypocrite. Other religions can now pick their heads back
up. How can clearly intelligent people
become so backward in their search for something reasonable...social
justice...and throw the baby out with the bath water? This is a true social conundrum.
That’s a very long introduction, with little content from
the book I just finished. Cynical
Theories, by Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay.
The introduction I just wrote was necessary, to claim my independence
from either side. Although, alas,
remaining impartial in this book review will be subjective and individual. Those who read it will immediately cast me in
one group or the other. I hope not. Cynical Theories is just a book. I’m just a reader. Everyone should read this book because it
was written by centrist and intelligent liberals, not by the radical left or or
the deplorable white supremist right. It attempts to decipher the rise of CRT
from it’s safe harbor in legal academic scholarship through it’s creation of
wokism in our free societies. Ironically,
within free societies, being the only environment, such thoughts could even
muster... and how we came to the place in our country where simply saying something
perceived as politically incorrect can cost you your job and all your
friends. I simply read the book...I
don’t want to lose my job or my friends over it. That is a real concern and it has caused me
to be pensive to even write this book review. Which is clearly part of the canx
culture. If I can’t write a simple book
review for fear of backlash I have been cancelled. So I’m going to write about this book because
I still live in the United States of America and we still have a viable
constitution with a Bill of Rights. And
we haven’t started the book burning yet, at least not in District 12 where I
live...
So this book is not just about CRT as it applies to the
oppression of minorities in our Country it also addresses how every group of
marginalized people use it’s tenants to claim institutionalized oppression at
the hands of a westernized environment (political, economic, and social) that
was created to keep the oppressed and those in power (white men) in power. That’s the theory. In this case, CRT, is referred to as
“Theory” and can be equally applied to the oppression of black Americans, women,
the LGBTQ community, as well as the disabled and those who are weight
challenged. There are, seemingly, a lot of oppressed classes of people in our
country, yet everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, can still buy a cup of coffee at
Starbucks on a Sunday morning and still pay $5 for it. And it doesn’t matter where you are. You can live in Trump Country, deep in
Florida, or in the heart of Bernie Sanders country, where Duncan Donuts still
believes they make a better cup of coffee...when we all know they simply make
better donuts. Going to Duncan Donuts
for the coffee is like saying you still go to Hooters for the chicken wings (or
read Playboy Magazine for the articles--just to be edgy). Just to name two
companies which seemingly benefit from the abject exploitation of women
(Playboy and Hooters) that still seem to fare well in the US despite their
obvious lack of wokism in the feminism department. It’s a good place to consider hypocrisy. Not the hypocrisy of Hooters or Playboy, but
the hypocrisy of an outward, Puritan culture, with an inner lust for life...or
something more basic.
So why this book? I
think this book was necessary because CRT as a theory has no scientific
basis. It’s a social theory. There is no empirical data to support the
institutional wide belief that western democracy, a construct of western values
and ideas, can speak to why Rodney King was severely beaten 30 years ago or why
George Floyd was choked to death last year.
Systemic racism is the rally cry but the criticism of that rally cry is
not that racism doesn’t exist in the US.
It most certainly does…and it could be systemic in some circles. The criticism is that the pantheon of Western
culture is inherently racist and thus begets racism through all of it’s
institutions which include philosophy, theology, language, literature,
economics, governance, social structures, and most recently added, art. Thus vigilance is required to root out the
inherent bias at the most basic levels.
The most basic of those is the language itself. The vigilant proponents of CRT search for
subtle clues in language to make discoveries pertaining to its existence in the
use of words that denote a power balance...or imbalance. Specifically, who is in charge? And who is
not in charge? Who is the oppressed and
who is the oppressor in any given logical construct? Who is privileged and who is not privileged
in the sentence? I’ll admit, white
privilege is difficult for white people to see.
It’s like breathing air. We wake
up and breathe. Our privilege is
invisible. But that doesn’t mean we are
not also oppressed by “our own” system.
For sure I do not worry about my physical safety when stopped by a
highway police officer or when going for a run in the park. It’s simply never something that has ever
occurred to me. But that doesn’t mean
I’m not frustrated by western institutions.
Take any of them… the DMV, the
IRS, the fact that I do have to drive 55 mph and have to get my car inspected.
The fact that I can’t shop at trade stores run by licensed union members… HVAC being the strictest, but so to salon
product distributors. But the fact that
I can’t pollute the environment or raise dangerous animals in the city (I’d
like to own a Bengal Tiger -- who wouldn’t).
Or I can’t own harmless chicken birds without having to fight city hall
for two years (that actually happened).
But I don’t feel like living in a society for the good of all, the
oppression and frustration I feel, all day every day, when I don’t have the
right paperwork at the DVM, or must fight City Hall for a permit, is a result
of the color of my skin. I do feel
oppressed by the institutions of government.
Whatever you want to call that...it’s probably not PC anymore to say, as
a white man, that I’ve been oppressed by “The Man”. CRT will say, I am that Man. But we all are oppressed by the rules of
society. That’s just a thing. That’s not systemic racism. If I’m a female, should I blame it on my
gender? If I’m gay or disabled should I
blame it on my happenstance? If I’m
challenged by weight, is everyone out to get me? No generically, no. The
institutions that strive to create fair treatment are oppressive simply because
they set rules...and rules suck. They are equal opportunity oppressors of all
who must abide by the rules.
Stepping beyond this book I now draw your attention to this
recent article about paper being published by the Metropolitan Museum of Art
(The MET) in New York City…
https://hyperallergic.com/673046/what-every-sexual-assault-depicted-at-the-met-museum-tells-us-about-rape-culture/
Read this article and listen to the way the author of the
published paper being interviewed talks about her subject. She is completely
creating a fictional narrative out of thin air...she is speculating about
something based on language research (in English) based on a subject (Art) that
was done 500 years ago by artists who were not even speaking English. In the first example they are from France,
speaking French. She is essentially saying that there is a rape culture in the
west because white people have glorified rape in their artwork for the past 500
years. She does this by searching for
words in the description of the art.
English words, from art from around the world.
I'm not an art historian but this definitely has me feeling
like she is trying to rewrite history. A common theme these days. And OMG she
is an art curator. So she is attacking her very own people. I can just imagine the uproar at the
museum...but they are not going to cancel her, for sure, she is one of
them. So they will listen to her and
think deeply...maybe? And a conspiracy
will start...and it will add to the other theories. This is really weird and a danger to cultures
across the planet. This is how you start
to rewrite history if you are a nitwit.
This is so disconcerting because these are obviously very
intelligent people. It's almost like
they have intelligent minds that are so active they are searching to make
connections...and their intelligent brains work over time and they invent these
conspiracies. In this case, the conspiracy can't lead to any one piece of art,
or any one museum doing something "bad" or without sensitivity. It can only lead to finding something wrong
with the larger hierarchy of "Things" as they are. It's the system that is bad. The system must be changed. A system that has provided freedom and
liberty from oppression for hundreds of years and brought the world out of the
dark ages.
Is there something
wrong with the System--let’s call it democracy based on capitalism? There are certainly things wrong in the
system...and that will always be the case...but is there something inherently
wrong with the system? Is permissive
Rape culture a product of Western Thought.
Im pretty sure, no I’m 100% confident that rape has always been illegal
in western cultures. Recording of the culture is what makes it history, whether
written in a book or painted as art, or cast into a statue. This is the work this curator now
attacks. She is rewriting history.
This article helps me because it's a great example of
applying Theory away from the thorniness of talking about Race, and seeing if
it holds up. Of course rape is also a thorny topic...so I guess I run the risk
of being labeled for pushing back a little.
But this can't hold up in the art world....it's just plain whacky. The
posting of Art has to be done objectively...if it is done subjectively, and
bias accompanies the work of art in the form of commentary (this is how you
should interpret this artist work) is purely subjective.
The trouble with this theory, beyond the acceptable and
laudable use of such a search to discover perspective from a thought
experiment, is that it fails to meet the necessary test of reality. People have to communicate. Language is a very real and very necessary
component of a functioning society.
Hidden meanings beyond the scope of intended communication belong in the
cult of paranoia and false information theory.
Not mainstream, purposeful, dialogue between two parties. As well as good journalism...hello? Without language communication, society would
consist of sniffing butts and biting ears.
To suggest power dynamics are egalitarian in the animal
kingdom...without language entirely...really begins to strain the credulity of
reason itself when understanding how CRT even became a thing. The academics who came up with it seemed not
educated in anything but their own feelings.
Which is a dangerous place to develop theories anyplace outside of the
dark web. Particularly if these theories take root without merit. Feelings are subjective. I feel oppressed. Feelings are different from fact. You are not
a victim of a hate crime at the hands of an institution. Individuals commit hate crimes not
institutions. Bad and racist cops are to
blame for racist and discriminating behaviors.
Laws are put in place to punish the perpetrators not institutions.
Permissive environments exist. Those are
to blame, not the institutions as they exist.
The institutions are fundamental good for society.
With radicals on the left pushing banners such as “Defund
the Police” one has to wonder where it came from and why? And, no, I don’t need to hear from the
apologetics telling me, that’s not what they mean (see Point #1 above). That is because I know what you will say, you
will say, “What they really mean is that the cops shouldn’t be social
workers”. Except, no. That’s what you believe, that’s not what
purveyors of CRT actually believe. They
do mean, “Defund the Police”, as an institution. And that’s exactly what the right
fears. So they are not wrong about
CRT...they are simply wrong that that’s what everyone on the left actually
believes. This is akin to the belief that everyone not supporting Trump is a
closet Marxist. Definitely not
true. In fact most on the Left are not
Marxist, that title belongs only to radical clowns on the far left that haven’t
read Animal Farm yet…
So perhaps that’s enough.
This is a long post. There is so
much more to the discussion. Don’t label
me a racist because I’m not woke. Label
me an American with grave concerns about the radicalism on both the left and
the right. CRT is not helpful as
anything more than the notion of social injustice. And a strong desire to make democracy and
it’s tenets of justice and liberty for all prevail in a confusing world.
No comments:
Post a Comment