A review by kahawa
Critical Race Theory, An Introduction by Richard Delgado
3.0
This was a pretty good overview of critical race theory. It wasn't polemic; it was a clear explanation of what it is and how to teach it and address it, with a strong emphasis on how it relates to law and policy making. I particularly liked the discussion questions. I would love to know how the authors themselves answer some of those. I think CRT (the theory, not the book) has flaws, and this book doesn't quite deal with those.
One issue I have is that CRT claims to be anti-essentialist. I think they get that backwards. I think CRT promotes essentialism through identities. In addressing anti-essentialism and intersectionality, the authors write, "No person has a single, easily stated, unitary identity ... Everyone has potentially conflicting, overlapping identities, loyalties, and allegiances." I think what CRT is unconsciously doing here is expanding essentialism, not eschewing it, by implying, 'these identities are real, but there's a LOT more of them than we initially thought' (this is, incidentally, why the letters after LGB keep growing (not a criticism, just an observation)). CRT sees identities everywhere as real, intrinsic parts of individuals, and keeps coming up with new ways to address these essentialistic identities. This is the invisible water in which CRT unwittingly swims.
When it comes to individual vs systemic responsibility, CRT's PoV misunderstands conservative thinking, and seems to misapply the failings of systems to the failings of individuals, as seen in the following quote: "is affirmative action a case of “reverse discrimination” against whites? Part of the argument for it rests on an implicit assumption of innocence on the part of the white displaced by affirmative action. The narrative behind this assumption characterizes whites as innocent, a powerful metaphor, and blacks as—what? Presumably, the opposite of innocent. Many critical race theorists and social scientists alike hold that racism is pervasive, systemic, and deeply ingrained. If we take this perspective, then no white member of society seems quite so innocent." I don't think people who are critical of affirmative action are thinking in terms of innocence and guilt, especially not individual innocence and guilt. Perhaps CRT is trying to say that all white people are benefactors of white privilege, but white people, as far as I know, are thinking in terms of individual merit and opportunity, not terms of innocence and guilt. This is a paradigm that I think CRT is projecting on others, because of CRT's inability to understand the conservative perspective. (Note: I think conservatives equally misunderstand CRT when they mistakenly assume the issue is about personal responsibility where systemic responsibility is actually the key issue - take 'apologising' for the actions of predecessors.)
Some of what CRT accuses 'whiteness' of is actually pretty ubiquitous among many different cultures. "Whites do not see themselves as having a race, but being, simply, people. They do not believe that they think and reason from a white viewpoint, but from a universally valid one—“the truth”—what everyone knows." This is certainly not unique to white people or white culture or European culture. The Kwaya people of Tanzania, among whom I lived for a decade, use the term for 'people' to refer to their people, and all non Kwaya are 'others'. They're not unique in this. It's hard to know what CRT is suggesting societies do about this kind of universal ethnocentrism.
I could go on, but I'll leave it here. Although 20 years old and getting a bit dated, this is a good book for an intro to CRT, and as a tool for teaching it to others, especially with its discussion questions and legal perspective. It won't bash the reader into submission, but it also doesn't quite grasp the 'other' side, and conservative (and non-'woke') readers might feel frustrated and misrepresented. If conservative readers can set that aside for a bit, they might realise that CRT (and other critical theories) makes important points about justice, equity, systemic influences, power, privilege, and supporting the oppressed.
Note: I read 'Critical Race Theory, An Introduction' shortly after reading 'Cynical Theories', a critique of critical theories. Review here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/4074618787?book_show_action=false&from_review_page=1
One issue I have is that CRT claims to be anti-essentialist. I think they get that backwards. I think CRT promotes essentialism through identities. In addressing anti-essentialism and intersectionality, the authors write, "No person has a single, easily stated, unitary identity ... Everyone has potentially conflicting, overlapping identities, loyalties, and allegiances." I think what CRT is unconsciously doing here is expanding essentialism, not eschewing it, by implying, 'these identities are real, but there's a LOT more of them than we initially thought' (this is, incidentally, why the letters after LGB keep growing (not a criticism, just an observation)). CRT sees identities everywhere as real, intrinsic parts of individuals, and keeps coming up with new ways to address these essentialistic identities. This is the invisible water in which CRT unwittingly swims.
When it comes to individual vs systemic responsibility, CRT's PoV misunderstands conservative thinking, and seems to misapply the failings of systems to the failings of individuals, as seen in the following quote: "is affirmative action a case of “reverse discrimination” against whites? Part of the argument for it rests on an implicit assumption of innocence on the part of the white displaced by affirmative action. The narrative behind this assumption characterizes whites as innocent, a powerful metaphor, and blacks as—what? Presumably, the opposite of innocent. Many critical race theorists and social scientists alike hold that racism is pervasive, systemic, and deeply ingrained. If we take this perspective, then no white member of society seems quite so innocent." I don't think people who are critical of affirmative action are thinking in terms of innocence and guilt, especially not individual innocence and guilt. Perhaps CRT is trying to say that all white people are benefactors of white privilege, but white people, as far as I know, are thinking in terms of individual merit and opportunity, not terms of innocence and guilt. This is a paradigm that I think CRT is projecting on others, because of CRT's inability to understand the conservative perspective. (Note: I think conservatives equally misunderstand CRT when they mistakenly assume the issue is about personal responsibility where systemic responsibility is actually the key issue - take 'apologising' for the actions of predecessors.)
Some of what CRT accuses 'whiteness' of is actually pretty ubiquitous among many different cultures. "Whites do not see themselves as having a race, but being, simply, people. They do not believe that they think and reason from a white viewpoint, but from a universally valid one—“the truth”—what everyone knows." This is certainly not unique to white people or white culture or European culture. The Kwaya people of Tanzania, among whom I lived for a decade, use the term for 'people' to refer to their people, and all non Kwaya are 'others'. They're not unique in this. It's hard to know what CRT is suggesting societies do about this kind of universal ethnocentrism.
I could go on, but I'll leave it here. Although 20 years old and getting a bit dated, this is a good book for an intro to CRT, and as a tool for teaching it to others, especially with its discussion questions and legal perspective. It won't bash the reader into submission, but it also doesn't quite grasp the 'other' side, and conservative (and non-'woke') readers might feel frustrated and misrepresented. If conservative readers can set that aside for a bit, they might realise that CRT (and other critical theories) makes important points about justice, equity, systemic influences, power, privilege, and supporting the oppressed.
Note: I read 'Critical Race Theory, An Introduction' shortly after reading 'Cynical Theories', a critique of critical theories. Review here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/4074618787?book_show_action=false&from_review_page=1