Critical race theory (1973- ) or CRT is a body of scholarship that examines how racism in the US works in practice, at the level of law and beyond, and what might be done about it. It grew out of disappointment with the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s: Jim Crow was overthrown yet racism remained. “Race, Racism, and American Law” (1973) by Derrick Bell was a founding text.
Republican propaganda uses “critical race theory” as an umbrella term for anti-racist thought in general. The Heritage Foundation calls it a “toxic ideology”. Critical race theory is something you might study in graduate school if you go into law or education, but panic-striken Republicans in red states are pushing through vague laws to prevent impressionable schoolchildren from being exposed to its “divisive” ideas:
Ideas: race as a social construct, White privilege, intersectionality, internalized racism, institutional racism, microaggressions, psychological wage, the voice of colour, racial standing, convergence of interests, the Black-White binary, Critical White Studies, and so on, have come out of critical race theory or have become part of it.
People: Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Lani Guinier (the Quota Queen), Patricia J. Williams, Camara Phyllis Jones, Dorothy Roberts, Mari Matsuda, and so on, are critical race theorists – “crits”.
It started with anti-Black racism but has since branched out to look at the marginalizations of Asian, Latino, Native, disabled, and queer Americans.
Crits look at elite interests and unintended consequences of laws. They are critical of White Liberals, not just Republicans. They think racism is largely institutional not personal. It is baked in, not just a matter of a few bad laws or bigots.
Is it anti-White? Critical race theory is against racism, which only the White elites have an actual material interest in. For most Whites, the wages they get from racism are mainly psychological.
Is it Marxist? It has been affected by Marxist thinkers, particulary Gramsci, but its roots are in critical legal studies and radical feminism. It is much closer to Black Liberalism than Black Marxism. It is more reformist than revolutionary.
Realists and idealists: Realist crits see power as the most important thing – racist ideas merely providing a self-serving cover for elite interests. Idealist crits see ideas as most important, as the cause of racist policies.
Critiques of the Civil Rights Movement:
- Rights – over time these get whittled away by court cases. And usually put the burden on marginalized people to enforce them. In practice, they require the interest of White elites to maintain them – which Blacks briefly enjoyed during the height of the Cold War in the 1950s and 1960s when the US was trying to win over the hearts and minds of Asia and Africa.
- Colour-blind laws – in practice these can only strike down the most clear-cut cases of racism, the racism that even White people can see. If a racist tree falls in a forest and no White person heard it, it didn’t make a sound.
– Abagond, 2021.
Sources: Google Images, NBC News, Dr Imani Perry (YouTube video, 9 minutes), “Critical Race Theory” (2001) by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic.
See also:
- Black Liberals
- White Liberals
- Jim Crow
- Derrick Bell
- ideas
- race as a social construct
- White privilege
- intersectionality
- internalized racism
- institutional racism
- microaggressions
- psycholgical wage
- the voice of colour
- racial standing
- convergence of interests
- the Black-White binary
- Critical White Studies
- Gramsci
569
Abagond 
Inclusion of intersectionality has broadened CRT. (Neil Gotanda and others…)
Yet–its premise replicates racist paradigm instead of rejecting it and building a “new” paradigm of thought. CRT –at its core—is an analysis of power dynamics of a legal and social “system”. The artificial construct of “race” need not be the only systemic power dynamic at play—in fact, it is a construct that dominates the “West”. Systemic prejudice, inequity, discrimination are a global problem.
When we look at the colonial “system”—there were 3 “tiers”/class –the powerful and the unempowered are the 2 most obvious—but there is a “class” in-between which the colonizers referred to as the “buffer”—those in-between the power group and the unempowered group. In “racist” language/paradigm—these are the “Asians” or other POC that belong to neither group but enjoy some privileges of the “power” group as well as the disadvantages of the unempowered group. Such intersections create complexity in an analysis of “systems”.
This type of “system infrastructure” is also replicated in “Apartheid” and in other unjust models/paradigms. (…including Nationalism)
If the terms and definitions were more broader–looking at the infrastructure of power rather than race—it could have much more far reaching and beneficial consequences…?…
Once the system infrastructure of power is analyzed—it is time to “solve it” and that cannot come unless a new system is built —one that is premised on the “unity of humanity”. a) The earth belongs to ALL its inhabitants and b) this premise brings with it certain rights and responsibilities to ALL humanity. c) Because of our humanity all human beings are of equivalent value—none superior/inferior to the other. Unless one can imagine a systemic infrastructure based on this new paradigm…one cannot create it—which means any band-aid solutions applied to the old foundations are bound to fail.
LikeLike
“For most Whites, the only wages they get from racism are psychological.”
You mentioned something similar in another thread recently. Maybe I’m not understanding but, doesn’t this counter the premise of White privilege?
LikeLike
Conservatives trying to mute Nicole Hannah-Jones and her 1619 Project. Which is very good. White America does not want to confront it’s misdeeds in white supremacy.
LikeLike
Critical Race Theory as defined by White people: “Any theory that is critical of my race.”
LikeLike
@ Open Minded Observer
I should rephrase that to:
Not “only” but “mainly”.
White privilege is where middle and working-class Whites, on average, get more crumbs than Blacks – while White elites keep the pie for themselves.
So, for example, because of racism Whites live longer than Blacks on average, but also because of racism there is no universal health care. Racism is used to get rank-and-file Whites to vote against their class interests.
Most White people would do way better under a system where EVERYONE regardless of race or income can get decent education, housing and health care. But instead we live in a land of billionaire jackals who literally pay starvation wages.
LikeLike
“Most White people would do way better under a system where EVERYONE…”
I follow you now. I was limiting my thinking to the current structure and thinking of all the ways my privilege manifests by comparison. But, I completely agree that all would profoundly benefit in a system without racism. I appreciate the feedback.
LikeLike
“…unity of humanity”. a) The earth belongs to ALL its inhabitants and b) this premise brings with it certain rights and responsibilities to ALL humanity. c) Because of our humanity all human beings are of equivalent value—none superior/inferior to the other.”
“All Lives Matter” propaganda (aka hollow words) designed to derail discussion about the reality that Black Lives don’t matter in the USA or the rest of the globe.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Afrofem
I agree that “All Lives Matter” was an intentional counter-slogan for derailment and sabotage. However, CRT replicates a racial premise in its language which will also derail a robust/comprehensive analysis of power-dynamics (because power is not about race—but racializing power makes it about race)
LikeLike
Conservatives hate the truth.
LikeLike
Critical Race theory has become a sort of boogeyman for the dominant culture, especially Conservatives, and they don’t even know what it is. Conservatives are so afraid of facing the truth about racism in this country and how they benefited from white supremacy. They want to tell history through the lens of white men and the date 1776.
LikeLike
@ anon
“…power is not about race—but racializing power makes it about race.”
Not really.
That argument employs a false equivalence. Arguments that “racializing power makes it about race” contends that discussion, critiques and examinations racial systems is somehow “racist”. Or in other words, talking about race is racist.
CRT is doesn’t mirror or “replicate” the current racial system, it dissects the system.
The pupose of that argument is to maintain control of the narrative that White Supremacists in the US have used since colonial times. Portions of the narrative have included:
The Doctrine of Discovery
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2014/11/18/vine-deloria-jr-conquest-masquerading-as-law/
Manifest Destiny
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2014/09/25/manifest-destiny/
White Man’s Burden
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2010/10/02/white-mans-burden/
The supremacy of “Western Civilization”
These are just some of the self-serving fictions that have dominated our national discourse for centuries.
CRT disrupts and undermines that narrative by examining the system as a whole with special emphasis on the how it affects the people oppressed by that system.
Examining a superstructure of power built on racializing various people is just that, an examination of the tools those in power use to maintain their power. “Race” as it is currently defined is just one of those tools.
White Supremacist forces in the current moment are reacting because they feel their longstanding narratives are no longer perceived as legitimate.
The multi-ethnic and international protests following the brazen public murder of George Floyd caught them White Supremacist forces by surprise. Since they lack new ideas they are resorting to their usual misdirection and strawman trickery to shut down discussion of uncomfortable ideas like microaggressions and White privilege.
Such discussions are labeled “racist” by the White Supremacists, not the actions or privileges themselves.
LikeLike
I understand what you are saying—and agree that CRT is about analyzing how the law biases towards white people in the West—in particular, in the U.S.
It is a useful—and perhaps essential—tool as an analysis…..however, the power dynamics of what is labeled “white supremacy”—is replicated even when there is no “white race” involved—for example, the apartheid of Israel/Palestine is between 2 groups of Semites. Israeli =Jew and Arab =Muslim/Christian
(though the reality on the ground does not fall so neatly into such artificial constructs….)
In Legal analysis of power-dynamics—it is important to ask the question—who gets to make the law and how. In a democracy–one would expect that the “state” represented by the elected officials make “law”—but the reality is that the capitalist system encourages the accumulation of wealth which is turned into power and this power is what makes the “law” —this law is then used to benefit the “elite”—which happen to be white in the West—but not necessarily so in the rest of the world.
The American revolution was also about the SAME power dynamics–because colonialism was based on this (apartheid) system—except—in the case of the U.S.—both the colonizers and the colonized happened to be white. After the U.S. revolution—the same system was replicated—but with a different “underclass”.
(U.S.) White supremacists (white/christian ethno-religio–nationalists) came out of the woodwork when Obama became president—because of the perceived shift in “power-dynamics” —the power of the non-white “vote”—the relationship between power, democracy, and demographics. Why?…because in an apartheid system privilege is “legalized”—to privilege one group of people over the other is THE law itself.
So…this would mean that under the current “system” —a (U.S.) demographic shift might help to also shift some of the racial dynamics in terms of law—but it wont shift the power-dynamics arising from wealth disparity and its power over law and state. —in particular, the international mega corporations, who are above the “law” because they operate in a space were law and its enforcement is most feeble.
If the very foundation of this “system” of law is rotten, how long will solutions that attempt to “fix” it work?—sooner or later, someone will have to analyze the foundation itself and re-do it.
why?—because this is an international problem—it is creating a toxicity everywhere because changes in both globalization and demographics are creating complex disharmonies….The IMF, World Bank…and other such institutions are also replicating the SAME apartheid systems on a global scale.
Mega-corporations are stealing assets and wealth from Africa and other countries for personal/individual benefit of the few elites….that is how our system—political, economic, legal—is built….regardless of it being on a national or international scale.
LikeLike
@ anon
Thank you for clarifying and expanding on your position. I agree with your overview on global power and how it operates unfettered by law, convention or morality.
It is true that, “power dynamics of what is labeled “white supremacy”—is replicated even when there is no “white race” involved”. Opressive power dynamics operate between ethnic groups, inside ethnic groups and in other heirachies of oppression like gender, sexual identity and disability.
David Theo Goldberg in his article, “The War on Critical Race Theory” points out how Dr. Kimberle Crenshaw, a CRT scholar, felt a “single axis framework” was too limiting. Goldberg notes:
https://bostonreview.net/race-politics/david-theo-goldberg-war-critical-race-theory
It is my understanding that the CRT framework has been adapted by other groups who are not oppressed by race to examine the power structures they struggle against.
I’m sure that adds more impetus to the White Supremacist attacks against CRT. The leaders of those attacks want to shut one avenue of critique to silence other avenues of critique. Those other avenues may involve race or not.
The leaders want to protect their own intersectional privileges. Abagond described the leaders in his “Stamped From The Beginning” post:
I have a different take on the power dynamics of the American Revolution. After listening to an interview with the brilliant historian, Dr. Gerald Horne, (University of Houston), I now understand how the American Revolution is shrouded in myth.
Dr. Horne wrote a book in which he describes the American Revolution as a slaveholder’s rebellion against the British Crown. By the early 1770s, the Crown was moving toward abolition of slavery throughout the empire. Abolition would have not only impacted slaveholders, but also slave traders, ship builders (for hauling Africans across the Atlantic), ship provisioners and manacle manufacturers among many other industries based in the American colonies— North and South.
Dr. Horne’s aptly titled book, The Counter-Revolution of 1776: Slave Resistance and the Origins of the United States of America, explores the high drama of who actually fought who and which groups were the “colonized” and the oppressed before, during and after the American Revolution.
A full transcript of Dr. Horne’s 2014 interview on Democracy Now! is published here:
https://www.zinnedproject.org/news/1776-counter-revolution-us-origins/
You point about the struggle between two groups of Semites in Palestine/Israel is well taken. I see that situation as a settler colonial replay of large scale ethnic expulsion of an indigenous group (the Palestinians) by Israeli colonizers. Techniques honed in the Americas and Southern Africa are being used to dispossess the Palestinians of their land and resources.
Finally, the megacorporations are not the only entities plundering African, Latin American and Southeast Asian resources. The Gulf States covet the water and arable land resources of Eastern African countries. Various billionaires seek to exploit the Global South for their GMO seed schemes. The usual suspects pay mercenaries to masquarade as religious militias to expel people from their land.
LikeLike
Intersectionality—is very important analysis, I would say, more so than “race”….
M Matsuda and N Gotanda have important perspectives and histories to share
When anti-Muslim propaganda started in the U.S. after 9/11…the Japanese-American community were quick to recognize its dangers and speak out—meanwhile, the many “white” academics dismissed it as “growing pains” —something all immigrant communities go through…they claimed. The African-American/Black community were slow to see its implications…they were too fixed on the duality of “Black(oppressed) vs White (oppressor) and did not comprehend the in-between category—benefiting from institutional privilege to a degree but also oppressed to a degree…
This type of “blindness” was a criticism that Islamic/Muslim “feminist” charged onto Western feminists who also divided gender power dynamics into Male vs Female—without regard to those in-between—(male vs male, strong vs weak, represented vs unrepresented…etc). Intersectionality does add much needed nuance…but it must go further and interrogate the very foundational assumptions of our “systems”……
Dr Horne—He may have a point about U.S. attitudes—but perhaps “abolition” is related to how wealth creates “power”?—the Industrial revolution was underway in Europe/Britain…and the white working class were ready to be exploited…there was no need to purchase labor from across the ocean….(that would only create a demographic “problem”.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution
The exploitation of Asia until WW2 is a good example of how core attitudes never changed—the system remained the same—only the methods/technology of exploitation changed.
Mega-Corporations—agri-bussiness is avery profitable part of the portfolio of international mega-corporations. They steal wealth through the commodities trading system and channeled various paper companies (called “subsidiaries”)
…as is mining and logging….
Al Jazeera also has documentaries on it….
LikeLike
“The African-American/Black community were slow to see its implications…they were too fixed on the duality of “Black(oppressed) vs White (oppressor) and did not comprehend the in-between category…”
Perhaps so and perhaps not.
20 percent of American Muslims are Black Americans. They deal with the same anti-Black bigotry other sectors of the Black community contend with on a daily basis. Black American Muslims also deal with anti-Black bigotry from Muslim immigrants from North Africa, West Asia and South Asia.
So much for a religion of “peace and brotherhood”.
Prior to 9-11, many non-Black Muslim immigrants were not treated as an “in-between category”. They enjoyed honorary White status in the US.
They were just as hostile and arrogant to Black people as other White people. Their behavior was indistinguishable from Euro-American Christians.
Perhaps Black Americans were not as ” fixed on duality” as much as seeing anti-Muslim bigotry against honorary White immigrants as an expected (and unremarkable) reaction from Euro-American Christians.
LikeLike
“…the Industrial revolution was underway in Europe/Britain…and the white working class were ready to be exploited…there was no need to purchase labor from across the ocean…”
The people who directed the Industrial Revolution in Europe used a variety of exploited labor pools. The European working class was just one group they exploited.
European labor was primarily used to process raw materials into value added products. African and Indigenous labor was used primarily to produce raw materials for the Industrial Revolution through agriculture (cotton, sugar, indigo, tobacco and rice) and mining precious metals.
African and Indigenous laborers were also pressed into logging, salt making and trapping fur bearing animals for European fashion.
The leaders of the Industrial Revolution did not operate on “need”. They were driven by desire for more profit.
LikeLike
Asian prejudice—I agree that the Asian community (including Muslims) is prejudiced. Also, even after 9/11—while anti-Muslim prejudice increased, it was not at the level of institutional discrimination and disenfranchisement that the Black community (regardless of religion) experiences in the West.
One reason may be that the rhetoric of prejudice was so similar/same as anti-semitic prejudice..?….and if you look at the data—every time anti-muslim prejudice increases, anti-Jewish sentiments also increase. And because the 2 religions are so similar, actions against one impacts the other —such as actions against halal food impacts kosher food…etc. From what I know…-Jewish community had legal mechanisms built within Western societies (ACLU?)—and the (Asian) Muslim communities took advantage of it in fighting some of the prejudice….
So. perhaps the Asian community has not had it as bad as the African-American/Black community…..however, that does not mean that systemic oppression had no effect on the Asian community. It did….and still does….
Unremarkable reaction of Euro-American Christians—Yes—that was my point too. The colonial system was also set up with a buffer class in between so that resentment was directed to the less protected (more accessible) buffer-class instead of the oppressors themselves. Today there are many videos circulating here in the East of African-American/Black violence against Asians (in Western society) It may be propaganda (Biden and wuhan lab conspiracy…etc) …but it is having a real-life negative effect here in the East—particularly as many in the East had sided with BLM. —what could have developed into a useful global alliance against an internationally oppressive system might be in jeopardy?
Just as the “white” definition is expanded—maybe “Blacks” need to re-define their definitions too?……..colonial/apartheid/supremacist system is a global one….
Agree with your point about the Industrial revolution—greed was the motivating factor—and still is today…the voracious appetite for greed is a hunger that is never satisfied—even at the cost of destruction.
LikeLike
In the politico-economic system we have today—there r 2 ways to get legal/state power—a) though a (demographic) majority (vote) and 2) through wealth. As long as these 2 routes to power are controlled—power itself can be controlled.
—that is why immigration becomes a problem. It can destabilize demographics——and therefore the control of power.
–that is why wall street and the bankers were saved with huge bailouts. Wealth is state/legal power. …so even when they steal from a nation-state—it is legal
LikeLike
Perhaps the term Critcal Race Theory is just a term to muddy the water about the truth of what happened and what is continuing to happen in this country. Throwing Black Americans a bone by making Juneteenth a holiday, while not being able to teach about systemic racism in America makes this holiday toothless. We don’t need a holiday, we need to address voter suppression of Black Americans and how our rights are going to be taken away.
LikeLike
The majority of the dominant culture is frightened their children will learn they have been complicit in a system that upholds whiteness.
LikeLiked by 2 people
CRT, a term to muddy the water.—The focus on legal analysis of discrimination/apartheid is good. However, “power” is about getting and keeping privileges/entitlements. These can be taken through law or wealth. The IMF, World Bank, and Commodities/stock markets are global tools for stealing massive amounts of wealth and transferring it to a few “elites”.
Consider—in order to steal gold from the Spanish ships—England made a law that gave license for stealing it—thus making it LEGAL. Privateering as opposed to pirating—same action, but one has state power behind it. This type of intersection between law and wealth needs to be examined and analyzed in order for the acquisition and deployment of systemic power to be wholistically understood….?…..
But this type of focus can bring up uncomfortable questions for Black and POC Americans in our internet age—because if Black lives matter—what of Afghan lives—innocent civilians being killed by U.S. drones–(and the U.S. factories that employ people to make such things)—–if abuse of power by the police is bad,(Domestic) abuse of power by the military(international) is also bad.(Both paid by U.S. taxpayers) If systemic rascism and aparthied is bad domestically—it is also equally bad internationally. Increasingly—the 2 cannot be disconnected anymore … because both systems (domestic and international) stem from the same foundations.
Incremental changes may not be enough—perhaps some degree of global revolution—or at least re-thinking is required?…..
LikeLike
” We don’t need a holiday, we need to address voter suppression of Black Americans and how our rights are going to be taken away.”
Well said, Mary B.!
A Juneteenth holiday bill is typical “Do Nothing” Democratic party posturing.
They can’t bring themselves to pass national voting laws, universal healthcare or a comprehensive infrastructure bill, but they easily pass BS like this.
The only Black people fooled by this Juneteenth charade are the “illusion of inclusion” types.
Plus a national Juneteenth holiday enables the very same corporations that give money to police groups who kill Black people with impunity to pretend they care about Black people. Ugh!
LikeLiked by 3 people
@Afrofem: I like how comedian DL Hugley expressed his feelings about the holiday, I am paraphrasing, “ It’s like you ordered something in the mail, they send you something else, it’s not what you ordered but it’s cool so you keep it. We ordered justice.” This is a great analogy. We ordered to pass a bill to protect the voting rights of Black Americans, the Anti-Lynching bill passed, Police Reform, George Floyd bill. We didn’t get any of this. But a holiday is cool, we will take it. I guess we have to keep fighting to get our freedom.
LikeLike
“The white man will try to satisfy us with symbolic victories rather than economic equity and real justice.” —Malcolm X
LikeLike
@ Mary Burrell
Yes, the struggle continues…
sigh
LikeLiked by 1 person
“CRT, a term to muddy the water.—The focus on legal analysis of discrimination/apartheid is good. However, “power” is about getting and keeping privileges/entitlements.”
Au Contraire!
A good portion of “power” is about controlling the narrative. People who wield power consider “glorious” origin stories, myth making and setting the terms of acceptable discourse an important part of maintaining their power.
That is why there are legislative, academic and media attacks on CRT in the current moment. Every Republican governor, statehouse legislator and congress member has declared war on CRT. They are joined by politicians in Britain, France, Australia and elsewhere in loudly denouncing CRT.
A little too loudly….
Far from muddying the water, CRT clears the water. CRT analyzes and exposes the various systems powerful people (in this case, Euro-Americans and European descent people) created and maintained to oppress and exploit other people around the globe.
It is difficult to get or keep “privileges/entitlements” if enough people believe those perks are illegitimate or undeserved.
LikeLike
@ Afrofem
I am not sure—I do agree about “controlling the narrative”—but not the motive…its not about “legitimization”—since even obviously wrong actions—such as torture in Bagram, Guantanomo..etc…or the privateering example previously given—are easily “legitimized” simply by making it “legal”…..(and that is “power”)
I think the motive behind “controlling the narrative” is to deflect from the “truth”. (…another way to deflect is wars—creating another enemy..and so deflect from domestic problems to artificial international ones?…)
Consider—Asians who come to the U.S. , assimilate the prejudice against heritage African-Americans because of the dominant “narrative”—likewise African-Americans assimilate the “model minority” myth which encourages prejudice against Asian Americans. These divisions work well to deflect from the truth and “muddy the waters”. Feminism is also the same—its focus on gender equality—while admirable, left out many others who were also oppressed because its focus was too narrow. Had “feminism” allowed itself to fight against all systems of oppression it might have taken a different path. The truth is, one cannot fight against one aspect of oppression and ignore others…such a way of tackling oppression is hypocrisy and hypocrisy never gives wholistic long term solutions.
That does not mean that as tools of analysis feminism, CRT, neo-economics…etc are unhelpful. These are necessary tools for understanding the various parts of the problem. They are simply only part of the pieces—not the whole. This is most obvious in Asian nations that do not have the racial component, yet have the same problems of oppression, wealth gaps, privileged elites, broken political and judicial systems…etc….
LikeLike
This may be an interesting addition to our conversation….
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29lXsOYBaow)
LikeLike