Critical Race Theory: what it is, its origins and its critics

 Critical Race Theory came to my attention when it was announced in September, President Donald Trump and the White House Office of Management and Budget would take the steps to cancel funding for training in Critical Race Theory among federal agencies. Their reasoning is it was a divisive un-American propaganda. After this announcement, the news and the internet exploded with outrage. People were proclaiming how dare he?!?! And it was a step backward. It was pushing the white supremacy agenda. I had no idea what Critical Race Theory is and why people were so upset. I had never heard it before. And like I have done with many other terms, I decided to investigate the theory. In 2002, over 20 American law schools offered Critical Race Theory courses. In addition to law, Critical Race Theory is taught in the fields including education, political science, women’s studies, and ethnic studies.

Critical Race Theory (CRT) is a theoretical framework in the social sciences that examines society and culture as they relate to race, law, and power. It developed out of critical theory of social philosophy where social problems are influenced and created more by societal structures and cultural assumptions than by individual and psychological factors. A few of the important scholars in CRT includes Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, and Camara Phyllis Jones. Critical Race Theory began in the 1980s as people of color students art Harvard Law school organized protests the lack of racial diversity in the curriculum as well as in students and facility. The students supported Professor Derrick Bell’s racial law courses to be taught by a faculty of color. After the school ignored their required hired two white civil rights activists. A number of students boycotted and organized to develop an alternative course using Derrick Bell’s Race, Racism and American Law (1973, 1^st edition). Harvard Law School continued to ignore the students requests led to the creation of Critical Race Theory in 1987 as an offshoot of critical legal studies. According to Crenshaw, "one might say that CRT was the offspring of a post-civil rights institutional activism that was generated and informed by an oppositionalist orientation toward racial power” (Gottesman, 2016).

There are several themes in CRT. Rather than overwhelm my readers with the information, I will discuss a few. First, CRT criticizes liberalism. CRT favor a more aggressive approach as opposed to liberalism’s cautious approach and rejects affirmative action, color blindness, role modeling (emulating a successful person) and merit principle (goods and services are received through talent, effort, and achievement) (Delgado & Stefancic, 1993). Second, CRT uses storytelling, counter-storytelling or “naming one’s own reality.” It is the use of narratives to explain and explore experiences of racial oppression (Delgado & Stefancic, 1993). Third, CRT offers revisionist interpretations of American civil rights laws and progress. Derrick Bell argued that civil rights advances for blacks coincided with the self-interest of white elitists. Mary L Dudziak (1998) suggests that the civil rights legislations were passed to improve the US image to third world countries as the US needed allies during the Cold War. Lastly, institutional racism. According to Camara Phyllis Jones (2002) the structures, policies, practices, and norms result in the differential access to the goods, services, and opportunities by race. Historically, institutional racism was slavery, segregation, internment camps and reservations. Modern examples are bank lending practices, housing contracts, profiling by law enforcement and representation in news and media.

Many of the Critical Race Theory critics take issue with its foundations in postmodernisms and reliance on moral relativism and social constructionism. Richard Posner, a judge for the US Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals (1981-2017), argued that critical race theorists have “succumbed completely to postmodernist absurdity” and “radical legal egalitarianism” (1997). Alex Kozinski, a judge for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (1985-2017), argued that CRT is a philosophy which “raises insuperable barriers to mutual understanding” and makes valid exchange of ideas impossible (1997). George Will (1996) argued that CRT’s use of storytelling and the insistence of racism “so institutionalized that all blacks are victims by definition” and not by an “identifiable act of discrimination.” Eleanor Krasne (2020) argued that CRT, rooted in Marxism, doesn’t allow for meaningful discourse that “questioning their ideas amount to tacit support of racism and makes you a racist.” She further states that “you either agree with the left’s worldview or you are an enemy of all that is good” (Krasne, 2020). Dan Subotnik also argues that leaving whites out of the race conversation doesn’t help anyone. “White males tempted to participate in the conversation were condemned in advance as interlopers, even imperialists” (Subotnik, 1998). Essentially whites were, and still, are told to step aside, sit down, and shut up, you have no say in the matter as you would not understand.

For far too long, minorities have been kept out of history, their roles pushed to the background and ignored and left out the conversations. There's no denying it. They have fought to be included in the history lessons and the conversation about today’s issues, to have their current contributions counted and celebrated as they should. However, there are a few are now enacting their revenge as they turn the tables on whites. “You left us out, now it’s your turn.” Critical Race Theory, at first look, seems like a good idea; however, in practice, it is an “agree with me or you’re my enemy” paradigm. It is still racism when the roles are reversed. An adage says, “An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.” Repaying evil with evil does not overcome evil. Evil is only overcome with kindness. Human nature has a long way to go.

 

References

 

Delgado, Richard and Stefancic, Jean (1993). Critical Race Theory: An Annotated Bibliography. Virginia Law Review. 79 (2): 461–516.

 

Dudziak, Mary L. (November 1998). Desegregation as a Cold War Imperative. Stanford Law Review. 41(1):61-120.

 

Gottesman, Isaac (2016). Critical Race Theory and Legal Studies. The Critical Turn in Education: From Marxist Critique to Poststructuralist Feminism to Critical Theories of Race. London, England: Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1317670957.

 

Jones, Camara Phyllis (2002). Confronting Institutionalized Racism. Phylon. 50(1/2): 7-22.

 

Krasne, Eleanor (June 29, 2020). How Leftists’ Critical Race Theory Poisons Our Discussion of Racism. The Heritage Foundation. www.heritage.org/civil-society/commentary/how-leftists-critical-race-theory-poisons-our-discussion-racism. Retrieved October 18, 2020.

 

Kozinski, Alex (November 2, 1997). Bending the Law. The New York Times Archives. www.archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/97/11/02/reviews/971102.02kosinst.html. Retrieved October 17, 2020.

 

Posner, Richard A. (October 13, 1997). The Skin Trade. The New Republic.

Star Wars The Last Jedi: a great action film which takes the galaxy in a new direction

Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi opened on December 15^th to rave critic reviews and mixed fan reactions. The Last Jedi continues the story of Rey, Finn and the Resistance as they fight against the First Order. In the two years since The Force Awakens, there were many fan theories floating around the internet and fans were eagerly awaiting The Last Jedi to see which theories were right and see how the story continues. I finally was able to see it a few days after it opened and heard the criticisms of fans. I will discuss what I liked, what I didn’t and the critics, fans and even Mark Hamill’s remarks about the film.

There is so much that I liked about the film; however, I will discuss a few storylines I enjoyed the most. First, I liked the interactions between Rey and Luke. The closing scene of The Force Awakens, we see Rey handing Luke his original lightsaber as the camera pans out over the island. In The Last Jedi, the first scene we see with Rey and Luke is the continuation of that scene. While I will not give away what his reaction is, I will say it was highly appropriate. Luke had been living in exile after Kylo Ren destroys Luke’s new Jedi academy and temple and turns to the dark side. Luke realizing his failure as a teacher, decides to leave everything behind and Rey has a tough road to convince him to help the Resistance and teach her the ways of the Force. Second, I enjoyed the character of Kylo Ren in this film. He was far less emo and more dark and conflicted as he struggles with the aftermath of the Force Awakens and his master, Snoke’s, disappointed in him. Adam Driver delivered a superb performance as Kylo Ren, especially toward the end as he decides which direction he wants to go. Does he embrace the dark side? Or does he turn to the light side? Third, I enjoyed Finn and Rose’s (played by Kelly Marie Tran) story as they find a way to help the Resistance escape the First Order. As Finn still struggles with his defection from the First Order and Rose is dealing with her hatred of the First Order, together they learn what they are fighting for and who they can trust in their fight against the First Order.

There was only a couple things that I disliked about the film. First, there were a few unnecessarily scenes. One in particular was on the island as Luke goes about his life, ignoring Rey’s presence. I won’t reveal what the scene was; however, when I saw it both my daughter and I looked at each other and whispered “ewwww!” I understand that the scene’s purpose was to show how Luke survived on the island but I felt it was unnecessarily and his survival on the island could have been shown a litter better. And some of the humorous scenes may have had the joke go on a little too long. There is one scene in which Poe (played by Oscar Isaac) plays a joke on General Hux (played by Domhnall Gleeson). While the joke was funny at first, it dragged on a little too long. Second, there is still a great mystery about who Snoke is. The movie did not reveal anything about where he came from, who he is or how he knows the Force. In this film, we see he is an imposing figure and would strike fear in anyone who stands in his presence. However, we don’t know why he is such an imposing character. Third, the porgs, one of the creatures who live on Luke’s island, are cute but add nothing more to the story than to show the cycle of life on the island. They were in the movie for too long especially once the story leaves the island.

The reviews and opinions run the gambit from favorable to absolutely hated. First, the critics gave this film rave reviews. The consensus on Rotten Tomatoes is that the film “honors the rich legacy while adding some surprising twists and delivering all the emotion-rich action fans could hope for.” I would agree. It paid homage to the original trilogy in particular The Empire Strikes Back and some could agree The Return of the Jedi. Second, fans continue to be adamant in their disagreement with the critics. Many of the fans are blaming Disney for putting profits over story. Some said that the story strayed too much from the original trilogy while others would argue it was a copy of Empire like the Force Awakens was a copy of A New Hope. I disagree with them on both counts. I think some of the fans are just so invested in the Star Wars saga that they don’t know what they want. They don’t want copies of the original trilogy but they don’t like the new material. Fans used Mark Hamill’s remarks about the film where he said he “fundamentally disagreed with every choice for Luke” as proof that Disney screwed up. I disagree with Mr. Hamill and these fans. I loved Luke’s progression in this movie. I think it fit. Without going into detail for those who have not yet seen it, as an avid reader and writer, I can see why the writer took him in that direction. Yes, Luke was very much the optimist in the original trilogy; however 30 years have passed and that’s a long time and a person can change especially when one of his students turns on him. It can be and was the hit to his ego that sent him into exile.  

In conclusion, I enjoyed The Last Jedi. I left the theater with a sense of awe and excitement. I know that many fans did not feel this way, my husband included. He had to see it again to understand more of the story. My cousin in law has seen it three times and he even admits that one viewing isn’t enough. The original trilogy is still beloved to me as an important part of my childhood; however, it is time to move on from the Skywalker storyline of Star Wars into the greater universe and galaxy that’s out there. Of the new Disney/Star Wars films, Rogue One (2016) is still my favorite so far. The Last Jedi adds more depth and drama to the Star Wars universe. It adds the struggles of life, that everything isn’t so black and white, good vs evil. I highly recommend The Last Jedi. Watch it without any expectations and see it for what it is: a great action film with heart and life lessons