By Rob Meyne
As we have discussed in this space, most public policy decisions involve a distinct choice between alternatives that either decrease or increase freedom for our citizens. Invariably, expensive national programs that are purported to benefit Americans do so at a high cost of reducing our freedom while increasing the size and power of government..
On a broad scale, the major policies advocated by the more conservative of U. S. political parties, the Republicans, tend to protect our constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. The more leftist of the major parties, the Democrats, generally promote actions that place more power and resources in government, particularly Washington.
There are several prominent Democratic leaders and officeholders who embrace socialism and proudly claim that moniker for themselves. On the GOP side, there are none. You could hold a meeting of Republican Socialists in a phone booth (remember those?) and have room left over for an adult manatee. (In some cases, that animal might be a significant upgrade over the incumbents!)
One can argue about the extent of the ideological differences in the two parties but cannot dispute its existence. The parties are neither as similar, nor as different, as many claim. However, depending on what you value – freedom, for example – you cannot make a coherent argument there is no difference.
By Rob Meyne
Critical Race Theory is a controversial topic. If you’ve been hearing from “both sides” of the debate, you might benefit from just looking at what its advocates say about it. As a conservative constitutionalist, I’d recommend you do just that.
Looking at what its supporters say gives you all the information you need to combat it. When the truth is this damaging, you don’t need to make things up.
There is no shortage of information out there about CRT. If you’re looking for a place to start, here is one option. Another piece takes an interesting look at the issue against the background of Glenn Youngkin’s victory in the governor’s race in Virginia. Youngkin won partially because of his opposition to CRT.
It is good to understand that CRT is a strategy with specific goals, not a body of knowledge. It is more about persuading, not facts.
This piece from the Heritage Foundation goes into the key tenets of CRT and touches on some of the activities being undertaken to push back on it. Many explanations of CRT list different concepts, but these are fairly consistent across-the-board:
- CRT is a way to challenge and reform our government and economy, by viewing it all through the lens of race.
- CRT asserts that racism is pervasive and unavoidable in America, embedded in our institutions and government. The belief is that our nation, as constituted, cannot combat racism because it is racist.
- CRT puts a priority on examples and stories about racism conveyed by those who experienced it.
- CRT proponents believe America has a class system where all white people are part of an oppressive elite, and benefit from white privilege, while all black people are victims and unable to succeed. (The fact that examples of the falsity of these premises are abundant doesn’t seem to discourage them. Nor do CRT advocates ever explain why, if we are so racist, the cohort with the highest average income and arguably greatest success, Asians, is non-white.)
That is a quick summary, and many would challenge some of these generalizations, but the overall message is clear: America is run by racists, through racist institutions, and oppressed groups cannot succeed unless we replace it with a new system.
It should not be hard to understand why parents, and others, have a problem with these theories being promoted in public schools. More to come on the arguments each side makes on CRT.
By Rob Meyne
Critical Race Theory (CRT) may be the most contentious issue in America today. Worst case it is probably second just behind abortion. People who hadn’t heard of CRT five years ago now attend school board meetings to make sure it isn’t taught to their children. Nearly every day, we learn about another venue where it is being promoted, including governmental agencies, non-profits, and corporations.
People who oppose racism in all forms – often constitutional conservatives – object to CRT because its ideas are astonishingly racist and controversial. CRT holds that all white Americans are oppressors, all blacks are victims, and that racism is built into our society, government, and institutions. CRT adherents maintain the worst effects of racism come from that which is embedded into our social structure, rather than from individuals.
Supporters of CRT claim its critics misrepresent it. They claim the real goal of its opponents is to prevent discussion of race and slavery. But even a cursory look at the actual tenets of CRT reveals it to be, unquestionably, despicable, hateful, and racist. It is intended to divide us and promote racist policies with the excuse that they “right previous wrongs.”
The origins of CRT in Marxist Critical Theory have been scrubbed from many social media platforms and search engines. You have to look a little harder to find the connection today than you once did. For more, look at this discussion of the left’s attempts to push back on criticisms of CRT.
If your education in public schools was anything like mine, we learned about slavery, the civil war, and the battle for civil rights. It is possible all of that has been excised from the applicable curricula since my own matriculation in Vigo County, Indiana. But no discussion of our history can avoid the Civil War and slavery, nor should it.