On slavery and discrimination,
First slavery...there has almost always (the last 5000 years at least) been people who were servants to others in anything after tribal nations. If you were indentured they would pay (housing in a safe location, food, sometimes even support for their families). The longer you worked for them the better the benefits. During raids you gained servants, you treat them well because they treated yours well and eventually they were either returned or became part of the tribe/clan. What we would consider as slaves, in the distant past, were not beaten because there was a certain amount of trust and respect was imbued upon them and there was a common dignity for all men. If you mistreated a person after they died those mistreated ones would become hostile spirits that would ruin crops, fishing and hunts. In later periods, there were a lot more indentured servants and there were people taken to ward off future raids and conquests.
Then came the ability to capture whole villages and take them greater distances to them where they became slaves because there was no commonality between and their captors. Still they had to clothe and feed them because they needed them to be physically robust day in, day out. The greater the distance the easier it was maintain control over them. And using captured slaves to control the other captured slaves.
No it wasn't okay or right but it is what happened but we as intelligent people need to put this behind us and learn to be a society.
And this society, in America, is changing for the better and in some ways towards the worst. The better is because there were blatant wrongs done to fellow citizens. These wrongs cannot be taken back and now there has to be a reckoning and I see this as an opportunity for this country to grow for the better for all the people.
This country was built by war and that war did not end with the signing of the Declaration of Independence; July 4th 1776 was the start of a war ... a bloody war. In some ways that war never stopped. The Declaration of Independence was not meant to be a stopping point with the amendments in the Bill of Rights ... it was meant to be a starting point. And at times it has been it has grown with us. It was written when there were only 14 colonies on a part of one of our coasts. Now we have a vast country with fifty states.
It hasn't grown enough. That does not mean that we should scrap everything and start over. Logistically that will not work; a quorum let alone a consensus would never be reached. We cannot do it with everyone shouting only their own thoughts and ideas, we still need a method of representation: a representation that all people can feel is fair and just: that has equality in its representation for everyone. But in the end it should be one person one vote. No electoral college. We have the technology to achieve this. Maybe it cannot be from our own homes: from our own personal computers, at least not yet. This is the only way we can achieve an honest representation of our people, without prejudice ... without discrimination. But that is politically.
How to do it on a personal level is a lot harder. It is a lot easier to be nonracist than it is to become antiracist. Even our 'color-blind' portion of society. "Oh I am color-blind", "I am not prejudice", " I don't discriminate". Crap! Do you go to their rallies? March with them, right up in front holding the banner? Actively go pamphleteering door-to-door in your nice WASP neighborhood? "Well yeah I am for them, I put 5 dollars in their tin at the grocery store. They were there getting sodas for the march they were going to." "But they never come out to my neighborhood!" "I am friends with all of them at work." "When they came applying for the job at work, I gave them all the chances in the world and then some." Discrimination Is an insidious critter. It sneaks in like a thief in the middle of the night. Ya got your windows locked don'tcha?
The problem is systemic. We learned it from birth. I am no better, I have to watch what I say all the time. I am also a victim of it everyday. I am White and I was raised in an upper middle-class suburban neighborhood, a stone's throw from my Catholic church. But I was a sickly child, plagued by chronic asthma before the days of inhalers. When I got sick it was rush me to the hospital and get me in an oxygen tent. I missed a lot of school, luckily I have an eidetic memory and was raised with books. I was a straight 'A' student. Dropped out of first year high school because I learned so fast they couldn't keep me interested. Went to work and got a GED. Grew my hair out long and had a car at 16. I was skinny still am rather effeminate in appearance with my ponytail. I get along with women great. But then there are the people who I intimidate with my intellect and my ease with women. I learn fast so I always get extra raises at work. Minorities think of me as a scrawny dude so they intimidate me. It has been going on all my life. I was raised to be respectful of women and to be a pacifist. Bullies find me to be an easy prey since I never have thrown a punch.
And I still find myself with some prejudice habits because I give minorities the benefit of the doubt and an extra chance to do what I would do or what I consider as applicable or have what a White person would want to have. But I don't stop to think that I am thinking the same way 19th century Northern landowners thought, that they want what a White man would want; that by giving them an extra chance I am not giving them the chance to do what I do not consider applicable or the chance to fail and learn from it. We have sat back and tried to teach them to be White people of European descent which is not what they want to be.
In college learning anthropology I learned Black Urban Vernacular but that was the 1980's a different time a different place. Hell, in 1934, the National Conference for Christians and Jews (NCCJ) came up with the bold idea of celebrating National Brotherhood Week during the third week of February. That lasted until the 1980’s. Totally different time and place.
So I ask you what do you actively do to change this culture ... this country ... this broken world?

This is an old band I like. I think all latter day leftists do is rage against the machine and there's nothing wrong with that.

In this song, they suggest that both MLK Jr and Malcolm X were assassinated by the FBI. Probably were.

"... And then came the shot!" :100: :fire:

But to put that tune in some historical context of what we are up against:

Check it,
SINCE FIFTEEN HUNDRED AND SIXTEEN,
minds attacked and overseen
Now crawl amidst the ruins
of this empty dream ...

:fire:

We have back-peddled so far that Critical Race Theory and its racist assumptions are mostly mainstream. The pseudoscience and false taxonomies of race are given state prestige. But thankfully views critical of CRT, their paramilitary wings, and their attempts at societal subversion haven’t been made completely verboten.

In the UK, where I believed sense had gone the way of the dodo, a small opposition has found itself protected by law.

The headline in the Times: “Law protects opposition to critical race theory, judge rules”.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/law-protects-opposition-to-critical-race-theory-judge-rules-rmrj2qnzt

https://archive.ph/La6Mf

Is the tide turning?

I’ll point you to the OP and the arguments.

What arguments in the OP? Some mild ranting with a few questions at the end.
The innocuous-sounding term “color-blindness”, which if was ever well-intentioned, is now distinctly ‘old hat’.
I take it you are not of African descent, nor have you been pulled over by the police or had your door kicked in by authorities for no reason.
So what Blacks say and write about their situation (CRT) doesn’t really directly concern you.

I imagine that you’d maybe like to trigger some libs to get your points across, but I’m done.
I’ve said all I have to say. Good bye and good luck to you.

CRT, like all theories, is open to legitimate criticism. However any intellectually honest review of it has to acknowledge that at this point both CRT and (especially) it's criticism have been co-opted by folks with political agendas to rile up their bases.

You assume on the basis of race and descent, like every racist in the history of mankind. If you hadn't made assumptions on the basis of race and descent, asked instead of assumed, you wouldn't be capable of making sweeping race-based claims without evidence. Good riddance.

CRT is an archetypal slave morality. Anybody that knows about its roots with derrick bell, who was heavily influenced by the Frankfurt School, can cleary see what complete hypocritical bullshit it is. However, insofar as some immoral shitbag might use it to manipulate the good will of unwitting nitwits, I can see its appeal.

It has also been used as catch-all phrase for woke racism, which may or may not have anything to do with CRT proper. The worst thing the opposition can do is to seek its silence. The surest way to lead pliant minds to wonder if there is something important in CRT would be for governments to ban it. It’s enough to just point at the racism, which can be opposed from any angle.

It has also been used as catch-all phrase for woke racism, which may or may not have anything to do with CRT proper. — NOS4A2

The woke position on the concept of race is undeniably based on crt proper. It may not appear so on the surface (which may be a strategy to assume plausible deniability). However there is a direct line tying woke activism to the specific theories, which are solely responsible for its grotesquely peculiar and hyper-conspicuos qualities.

Woke is a cult, and like any other cult, its initiates (the footsoldiers) are generally kept in the dark and have little knowledge of the theory that underlies their woke activism.

The worst thing the opposition can do is to seek its silence. The surest way to lead pliant minds to wonder if there is something important in CRT would be for governments to ban it. It’s enough to just point at the racism, which can be opposed from any angle. — NOS4A2

I agree. crt and woke racism is founded on pure contradiction. It will eat itself when sufficiently understood. The more it is exposed for what it is and where it comes from, the better. It is no different than what became of Empiricism in its inevitable defeat, except that it is easier to see how stupid it is and much easier to squash.

Do you know any racists? I bet you do. So do I. So does everyone here. That suggests it's systemic, no?

Do you know any racists? I bet you do. So do I. So does everyone here. That suggests it's systemic, no? — RogueAI

Or that that the term “racist” is being too liberally applied.

I do. But I think racism is an aberration of thought and belief rather than a feature of some particular system.

Or that that the term “racist” is being too liberally applied. — DingoJones

Except I know some racist people for whom the term is not being too liberally applied and I bet everyone here does too.

I do. But I think racism is an aberration of thought and belief rather than a feature of some particular system. — NOS4A2

It's a feature of any human system.

How so?

How so? — NOS4A2

I'd use "characteristic" rather than "feature", but we are evolutionarily inclined to be somewhat xenophobic. You might call it an aspect of monkey mindedness that humanity has to deal with.

I don’t doubt that. But it’s difficult to be xenophobic towards members of groups that do not exist, like a race, rather than towards groups that do exist, like people who are not a member of your community.

Critical race theory. :lol:

The latest engineered outrage from the right, trickled down to internet trolls.

Critical race theory. :lol:

The latest engineered outrage from the right, trickled down to internet trolls. — Mikie

Weird that it could have been engineered by the "right".

I was under the impression that it originated in the field of critical legal studies, present in all the major universities.

But, maybe that is just another conspiracy cooked up by the "right".

I think the engineered outrage is the connection to "wokeness" as that's easier to attack. Critical race theory is simply an academic discipline that applies critical thought to the phenomenon of race in society. I'm pretty sure those attacking it have no idea what it is or much appreciation of academic thought in general as they seem incapable of formulating a coherent argument that might discredit it. I don't even think such arguments can't be good ones, it's just the loudest critics of CRT never bother trying.

I'm pretty sure those attacking it have no idea what it is or much appreciation of academic thought in general as they seem incapable of formulating a coherent argument that might discredit it. — Baden

Yeah, it’s just a catch-all term for “everything we hate,” real or imaginary. Mostly imaginary.

Activist scholarship is dog shit, in my opinion. Woke corporate racism, that Diversity, Equity, Inclusion mantra, flows straight from that rotten core. The Skokal and grievance studies affairs basically prove that they peddle in nonsense.

Activist scholarship is dog shit, in my opinion. Woke corporate racism, that Diversity, Equity, Inclusion mantra, flows straight from that rotten core. The Skokal and grievance studies affairs basically prove that they peddle in nonsense.

Sure, the pendulum is swinging off center in that particular direction. But not acknowledging that in the past the pendulum was swung in other directions equally, or more off center that many people labeled "normal" is being somewhere between naive and disingenuous.

The pendulum metaphor doesn't work for me because I think it is all fruit from the same poisonous tree. The current racism is largely an extension of the old racism. The same taxonomies, the same tribalisms, the same methods—it's all there.

Call me a skeptic, but it seems like 'color-blindness' was only claimed as a virtue by white guys when they wanted to push back on affirmative action, reparations, Critical Race Theory, etc. They weren't promoting 'color-blindness' as a virtue when blackface was the height of comedy. Well, maybe a few were, but not many. In an ideal society, we would be color blind to superficial differences like skin color, but an ideal society also wouldn't have a history of race prejudice and slavery. The reality is we have a history of gross inequalities based on skin color and appearance that continue to have consequences to this day. Much as we'd like to, we can't just sweep it under the rug and say that's all over and everything's fine now. When I hear conservative white guys railing against 'Woke-ism' and CRT by promoting how 'color blind virtuous' they are it always sounds insincere to me. It sounds like disingenuously holding up a virtue shield against any complaints about social injustice or proposed responses to them.

The appeal of race consciousness and racial identity politics to supporters of it is that they get to retain the use of race as a heuristic in their thought, and all the perversions that necessarily arise from it. An example is on display in the criticisms above, where the race of the speakers and not their arguments are all that needs be considered, even if proponents of color-blindness are of all supposed races. The racial heuristic—used as it was in the old racism as it is today, and in the exact same fashion—serves to stop and hinder thought precisely when it is needed most.