Critical Race Theory | Introduction

The Introduction to Critical Race Theory covers the following points:

• What Is Critical Race Theory?
• Early Origins
• Relationship to Previous Movements
• Principal Figures
• Spin-Off Movements
• Basic Tenets of Critical Race Theory
• How Much Racism Is There in the World?
• Organizations of This Book

These mostly point to future chapters, rather that expand on the topics in the Introduction. However, here are some of the things which stood out to me.

The initial example given, references if you are white:

• The response you get in the scenario from a (white) teacher, cashier, salespeople are all negative. Do you feel as though it is due to your race?

• Next imagine the negative responses are from persons of (color). Are you thrown off guard, angry or depressed?

The same scenario is run from the (color) person's viewpoint. 

• All of the negative responses are from (white) persons. What comes to mind? Do you feel you are treated this way because you are note (white)? Do you feel angry, downcast, etc.?

• Suppose they are rather people of (color)? What if they are a person of (color) but from a different group that you?

"Sometimes actions like these stem from mere rudeness or indifference...But at other times, race seems to play a part. When it does, social scientists call the event a 'microaggression,' by which they mean one of those many sudden, stunning, or dispiriting transactions that mar the days of women and folks of color."

The writer speaks of "assumption about racial matters." Assumptions can be based on many things, including our presuppositions or desire to make the evidence point to what we want it to. I am not accusing the author of this, but rather stating where assumptions can arise from. 

Sometimes it is human nature (perhaps our sinful nature) that imagines the worst in people (first); especially if we feel like we are not treated the way we believe we deserve or desire. Or, that others are being treated better than we are. Yes, (all) people should be treated with respect; for we are all made in the image of God. It's called human decency, or, better yet, "love thy neighbour as thyself." [Mark 12:30-31]

So, looking at the examples, how do we really justify an assumption that negative interaction is directly related to race? I have had white and non-white persons mistreat me, in my opinion. I have no doubt been rude (or maybe come across as rude) to white and non-white persons at some point. But how do we determine the root cause is based on my race or their race in that moment? It might very well be, but it might very well not be as well. Basing our assumption of someone's action or reaction on their race (or our race) is no different than them basing their assumption of us on ours. Sure, our race plays a part in who we are, but that alone is not the whole of us.

//

Critical Race Theory movement is defined as:

A collection of activists and scholars engaged in studying and transforming the relationship among race, racism, and power...Unlike traditional civil rights discourse, which stresses incrementalism and step-by-step progress, critical race theory questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.

//

Critical Race Theory builds on:

• Critical legal studies movement
• Radical feminism movement
• Black Power movement
• Chicano movement

Along with drawing influence from persons such as:

• Antonio Gramsci
• Michel Foucault
• Jacques Derrida
• Sojourner Truth
• Frederick Douglass
• W. E. B. Du Bois
• Cesar Chavez
• Martin Luther King, Jr.

"From critical legal studies, the group borrowed the idea of legal indeterminacy—the idea that not every legal case has one correct outcome. Instead, one can decide most cases either way, by emphasizing one line of authority over another or interpreting one fact differently from the way one's adversary does."

Does this mean there is no black and white with the law, but rather a legality of gray; whereby, we can make the facts say what we want them to say or pick the authority which best suits our desire? I am hopeful the author will further expound on the ideas brought forth in the Introduction.

The committee of Resolution 9 of the 2019 Southern Baptist Convention noted that their use of critical race theory would be for analytics; however, according to the author of Critical Race Theory:

Unlike some academic disciplines, critical race theory contains an activist dimension. It tries not only to understand our social situation but to change it, setting not only to ascertain how society organizes itself along racial lines and hierarchies but to transform it for the better.

//

What do (not necessarily all) critical race theorists believe?

• "First, racism is ordinary, not aberrational—'normal science,' the usual way society does business, the common, everyday experience of most people of color in this country."

• "Second, most would agree that our system of white-over-color ascendancy serves important purposes, both psychic and material, for the dominant group."

It is stated:

Because racism advances the interests of both white elites (materially) and working-class whites (physically), large segments of society have little incentive to eradicate it.

I am not sure how I (a working-class white) have had my interests advanced by racism, but am hopeful the author will further explain them in future chapters of the book.

Another theme of critical race theory is "social construction." Whereby, it is held that "race and races are products of social thought and relations...categories that society invents, manipulates, or retires when convenient." People of common origins do share physical traits, but the main of a person (the "higher-order traits") are personality, intelligence, and moral behavior.

This would go back to asking the question of why are we focusing so much on race, even in critical race theory. By marginalizing persons into white and non-white (people of different colors), and in doing so to decide who or which race is racist (as a whole), it would seem we are missing the mark the critical race theorists wish to achieve. To base individuals on their own merit and not their race.

It appears that the author has no problem boxing whites into being racist, while declaring the wrongs of putting other people groups into categories based on the actions of persons, organizations, etc. of those people groups. If one should not assume a person is a criminal, illegal alien, or terrorist based on their race, neither should a white be deemed racist by his whiteness.

//

I was once told that only whites could be guilty of racism, because whites are the majority and oppress the minority. However, they did say that minorities could be guilty of discrimination.

Racism

"prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior." 

Discrimination

"the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex."

Here is my question: 

If a person believes their race is morally superior to another race, would that not be a form of racism?

//

We will leave the Introduction and proceed to Chapter 1 in the next post. Please remember these are my thoughts based on reading each individual chapter of Critical Race Theory (Third Edition): An Introduction by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic.