We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
CRT. If you read the actual scholastic theory, it's kinda dense. In common usage it can mean anything from anti-racism, anti-anti-racism, systemic racism, white privilege, intersectionality. I think it has almost lost any real meaning except as a signaling tool for both sides. That said, I think the most common aspect of CRT for proponents and objectors alike is "systemic racism". So a couple of thoughts.
If one believes CRT teaches there is unaddressed systemic racism in America, I only ask proponents to identify the specific system and how it can be made more neutral. If the answer to that question is “listen to the authentic voices of people of color”, then we are doing that (see protests all over the country). So what’s next? Well, there should be specific policy proposals, but when people object to “defund the police” or teaching kindergarteners that they have “white privilege” or the study of American history should focus on racism, then those objecting are declared to be not sufficiently anti-racist. I'm not against rooting out any systemic racism. I'm just not for specific policies that are actually damaging rather than helpful
However, my biggest problem with CRT, as I understand it, is that it supports a systemic victimhood created by looking backward rather than looking inward or forward. This applies not just to CRT, but to examples like Christians seeing themselves as victims of a hostile culture. These Christians then are focused on being victims of culture instead of focusing inward on how Christians have compromised with the culture or how they can positively influence the culture. This isn’t to say that Christians can’t battle the culture, but that battle should be internal as well as external. And that is the error I see in the proponents of CRT – a focus on victimhood and a dismissal of anything else.
CRT. If you read the actual scholastic theory, it's kinda dense. In common usage I think it has almost lost any real meaning except as a signaling tool for both sides. My biggest problem with CRT, as I understand it, is that it supports a systemic victimhood created by looking backward rather than looking inward or forward. And that is the error I see in the proponents of CRT – a focus on victimhood and a dismissal of anything else.
That's a pretty good summary, though one could go on and on and include the rewriting of history from an ideological perspective, and its view that peoples' behavior and life outcomes are entirely the result of their social environment.
In other words, it's good ol' Marxism, but with the purported conflict between the proletariat and the capitalists replaced by a purported conflict between racial oppressors and racial victim groups.
I would expect the outcome to be essentially the same as happened with the original version of Marxism, except that it might be a bit more interesting to watch here because so many of our citizens are armed and actually quite annoyed at the moment.
CRT is what it has been since the day it was conceived, whether it's taught in the university law school or the primary classroom. It's a tool to disrupt a level playing field in favor of a special interest, to modify the playing environment in order to skew the score and shift both favorable and unfavorable outcomes. It's pure power-politics.