Black on Black Bitch-Slap! Critical RACE Theory, Brothers With “Skin in the Game”?

Black on Black Bitch-Slap! Now That’s What I Call Having “Skin in the Game.” Critical Race Theorists, a “HATE CRIME” or “microaggression”? CRTs, gonna cancel Will or Chris? Can’t you take a joke?

Knock Knock

Who’s there?

Gen Y&Z CRTS

Gen Y&Z CRTS? Ahh, who gives a fuck

Guys, you sure could use a smile.

Talented Comedians like the great Johnny Carson, Richard Pryor, Joan Rivers, George Carlin, Dick Gregory, Rodney Dangerfield, Benny Hill, Bob Hope………may be gone.

But their talents and laughter resonates through those who are here, Bill Maher, Eddie Murphy, Jerry Seinfeld, George Lopez, Wanda Sykes, Ken Jeong, Gabriel ‘Fluffy’ Iglesias, Chris Rock, Ellen DeGeneres, Kelsey Grammer, Sarah Silverman, Jay Leno, Dave Chappelle, Conan O’Brien, and many, many more.

Ironic is it not, that comedians, a group whose diversity encompasses CRTS prerequisites of Race-Gender-Class-National Origin-Sexual Orientation are cancelled and turned away. Instead of welcoming laughter to your much needed “safe spaces,” you shun it.

Not everything is about knowledge. Da Vinci is said to have been a bastard, left-handed and gay. Difference is he had talent, created in the open spaces of art, math, and science. And he had a sense of humor!

So WTF is CRT?

“Critical race theory (CRT) is an academic movement that emerged in the mid-1970s to critically engage the intersection of race and the law and to advocate for fresh, more radical approaches to the pursuit of racial justice.”

CRTs beginnings had a clear legal foundation. “Perhaps the most prominent exponent in the early generation was Derrick Bell. Bell developed a theory…or the idea that Blacks will advance only if their interests converge with the interests of the White majority. Since racism benefits many Whites… they have little incentive to transcend it.” So CRT did its own transcendence.

Critical to point out “In the mid-1980s, there occurred a series of forums hosted by Critical Legal Studies (CLS), a closely aligned progressive movement within the law…” It is within these forums that CRT crawled its newly transcended ugly head to foment the idea: Race trumps class. In other words, CRT got hijacked:

“CRT scholars challenged CLS with paying undue attention to class and economic structures at the expense of race and urged CLS to pay better attention to the particularity of race and its formative role in not  just reflecting and upholding but also producing racial power and constituting racial subjects.”

So focus more on RACE. Racial power means racial subjects. Money is not as important?  Some may call it Cult Racially Transformed Subjects (CRTS). Seems the only thing critical is getting member for their “Race Theory.”

It appears that good intentions paved the road to hell. So what is the controversy? The “notion of “legal instrumentalism,” a version of Black empowerment developed as a response to the discretionary power…by the police and the courts.” Beat them at their own power game?

Protests for “Black Power” are innocuous with some exceptions. Those that go from the streets to the court of law can transcend. “Sometimes this takes the form of advocating for Black juries to acquit Black defendants who are not dangers to the community, as in the example of a Black youth convicted on drug charges.”

The danger comes when in the spirit of “Black Power” no justice is the verdict for those with “White Power.”  Case in point: “Case of the Century.” Somewhere along the path of reason and logic, CRT took a left turn. Between King and Floyd, Simpson arose like a dangerous “bump on the road.”

In “The Bloods and the Crits,” Jeffrey Rosen’s 1996 article in the New Republic, points to what I see as signs that warned of why and how this bump arose. “The claim that these scholars make…since the white majority can never transcend its racist perspectives, formally neutral laws will continue to fuel white domination.”

End of the road? “Critical race theorists have largely rejected law as an instrument of racial progress and turned instead to extralegal prescriptions.”

In his paper Rosen examines “O.J. Simpson, critical race theory, the law, and the triumph of color in America.”  Rosen’s in depth analysis is clear and convincing. His observations as to the “Crits” are accurately depicted.

Ironically, Rosen’s concluding remark resonates 26 years later, especially in the aftermath of the People vs Chauvin.  “For we will be blind to color or we will be blind to justice.”

Here the dangerous bump on the road was busted thanks to a LOUD Jackhammer, the sound of logic, reason and clear evidence.

The “Pied Piper” and Dangerous Liaisons

I came face to face with the “Pied Piper” and her Dangerous Liaisons and theinner workings of Critical Race Theorists or what I term CRTS: Teachers, Administrators and Students, who the public knows as Politically Correct Professors PCPs, “snowflakes” and “justice warriors.”

With the exception of some truly fine professors and scholars, these teachers foster divisive and dangerous ideas.  Class requirements for my majors included some cross discipline courses.

I share my experiencesattending undergrad and grad school during the years of 2010-2016 in my February 2020 report, US Toy Soldiers: My Brothers and Sisters, Who Are Your Keepers.

I saw first-hand the offspring of what I find in Rosen’ depiction in “The Bloods and the Crits.” Emotions and feelings were brought up by one of the teachers when I debated an argument by a student on the bases of lack of facts to substantiate it. She, the teacher, in turn said, “It’s not about logic, reason, or facts. It’s about feelings.” 

At first, I was taken aback by such an illogical statement given my schooling in critical thinking and the scientific method. Familiar with litigation, I understood her “logic” as she informed the class that she had worked with attorneys and jurors.

Of course, her point made “sense” if one considers that sentimental appeal can and has won cases.  By simply tapping into the jurors’ hearts and minds, you can, sometimes, change their minds to side with your client regardless of the truth.

To be fair, as these dangerous liaisons are found primarily in the Department of the Humanities, I think it best to not hold an entire university responsible. Not being private schools leaves one to conclude that these sirens’ calls scream from the sea of the State infested waters of Southern California.

In my Undergrad program, on the first day of my Social & Political Philosophy class, the teacher began by telling students that “we’re not going to be reading a big book about old white men.” Instead, as his syllabus stipulated, students would focus on Marxism and Socialist theories. After class, I informed him that I signed up and paid to study the greats of Analytic and Continental philosophy. And yes, they were white men.

Referring to his syllabi, I noted the readings (African American Studies, Chicano Studies, and Gender Studies etc.). I did not enroll and pay for those classes, I said. The teacher’s response, not pleased, was that he was abiding by the department’s curriculum.

According to Kenneth Levin, “…curriculum in the humanities and the social sciences has changed, and that this has something to do with gender, race, and sexuality, but in what ways, precisely, few are sure.” I think it is a means of gratifying their agendas, personally and professionally.

In my Master’s program, on the first day of class the “Pied Piper,” shared her feelings of inadequacy and lack of confidence when she first attended college, finding it necessary to cry in the process.

The story of her college experience incited fear, hate, anger, and racism promoting victimization through notions of what she termed “microaggressions.” Clearly, “misery loves company” and soon self-proclaimed victimized students shares their miserable stories. And the “crying game” began.

In “The Coddling of the American Mind,” Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt with The Atlantic offer insights into what I see as the molding of these minds. “In the name of emotional well-being, college students are increasingly demanding protection from words and ideas they don’t like. Here’s why that’s disastrous for education—and mental health.”

The “Pied Piper” promoted and appeared to sell as her idea microaggression, but it was not unique to her. Lukianoff and Haidt note, “The term microaggression originated in the 1970s and referred to subtle, often unconscious racist affronts. The definition has expanded in recent years to include anything that can be perceived as discriminatory on virtually any basis.” 

It’s no joke. “Even joking about microaggressions can be seen as an aggression, warranting punishment.” Damn, I’d HATE to see what they’d do about MACROAGGRESSIONS. 😉

So WTF are these little shits? “Microaggressions are small actions or word choices that seem on their face to have no malicious intent but that are thought of as a kind of violence nonetheless. For example, by some campus guidelines, it is a microaggression to ask an Asian American or Latino American “Where were you born?,” because this implies that he or she is not a real American.” Oh boy, Border & Customs Agents must have been cited thousands of times.

But classes are “safe spaces.” Shit, so how do teachers and student engage in getting to know someone? No problem, CRTS came up with warnings. “Trigger warnings are alerts that professors are expected to issue if something in a course might cause a strong emotional response.”

Basically, “The ultimate aim, it seems, is to turn campuses into “safe spaces” where young adults are shielded from words and ideas that make some uncomfortable.” Is this a cult? Apparently, “this movement seeks to punish anyone who interferes with that aim, even accidentally. You might call this impulse vindictive protectiveness.”

Or, what I call the “Thought Police.” For as the authors say, “It is creating a culture in which everyone must think twice before speaking up, lest they face charges of insensitivity, aggression, or worse.” Huxley must be turning over his grave. It sure is no Brave New World.

Blacklisted

Question the cause(s) and expect to be blacklisted or as the Pied Piper said to me, “we teachers talk.” Of course, what she meant was expect to be put on their “blacklist” and receive a lower grade and no letter of recommendation. Unbeknownst to these teachers, I had already obtained references letters from my employer and the advisor of my major.

Manipulation of students’ freedom of speech is very real. Teachers’ use of intimidation exploits   the system to control students. It also takes the form of peer pressure. For instance, a teacher said once that the class would be attending a campus organization meeting to show “solidarity” for the LGBTQ community. 

Never mind that you did not share their views.  As the class left to attend, those remaining seated not joining received glances from the teacher. Sure, she didn’t outright say you had to attend. It was implied.

Blacklisting of tenured-track teachers is also real. Where once “rate my professor” was intended to rate the teacher and course, “social media has also fundamentally shifted the balance of power in relationships between students and faculty.” It’s become “berate my professor.”

Trigger Warning! These self-identified prisoners are running the prison.

“Professors increasingly fear what students might do to their reputations and careers by stirring up online mobs against them,” according to Jonathan Haidt, social psychologist and Thomas Cooley professor of ethical leadership at the NYU-Stern School of Business, authors of The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion.

Identities, Got an App for that?

Identities or a Smorgasbord  of Intersectionalities? More like “Oppression Olympics.”

Current culture in some Humanities and Liberal Arts departments has turned oppression into a sport.

Race-Gender-Class-National Origin-Sexual Orientation with the Victim Card line across all three wins in this game of Oppression like in an ID Tic-Tac-Toe. In this game, non-participants lose.

Reading the syllabus in one class, I noted the statement “this is not a graduate seminar in Kumbaya or the Oppression Olympics.” Ironically, that was exactly what several of the students promoted. Instead of “constructive and respectful…group norms” they resorted to “group think” and identity politics. What was it like?

Trigger Warning!  Picture sports stadiums where teams cheer themselves for always winning and never losing a game. Why? Because in these spaces, the mentality is there are no “stick and stones” that “may break my bones” but “words CAN hurt me.” In the “Oppression Olympics” every identity group is a victim by choice. How does one safely speak out amidst mob rule? Sign up to be a victim.

Goals of victims?  Emasculation appears to be one goal. As some articles have explained “…it is about encouraging young men to feel guilty about being born male…” and white. Moreover, such ideas are found in countless universities.

Why academic settings?  Some would argue it is because there is a demand for these ideas of identifying with the oppressed and schools are happy to supply the platform. No different than social media, one mouthpiece is exchanged for data and the other $$$.

The Socialist-Communist-Capitalist Connection

For Marxists according to Professor Zeus Leonardo, “Race is not real like the economy is real,” but “ideational.” We partly agree. Race as Religion are socially manufactured phenomenon. But, economy and constructs of Race create brutal and deadly realities for the economically and racially disenfranchised.

Ideas, like Religion and Race, have been powerful forces throughout history, utilized for good and evil. Both the cause of war and conflict.  

Leonardo, a professor of education at the University of California, Berkeley spoke at a virtual event last October. In it he noted, “One of Said’s great points,” Dr. Leonardo said, “is that anything humans can make, humans can unmake. To the extent that race and racism are human-made, there is always a possibility that we can unmake those things.”

Possibility like hope “springs eternal.” Said’s point is great in principle. But weak in practice. Material man-made objects differ from man-made ideas.   

I as a business leader can call to all humans to unmake all Nutcrackers as they pose a danger to the world. Such a task is attainable. But unlike material figures (e.g. Confederation flags and statues) ideas of race and racism are not tangible.

Success or failure of carrying out such a task lies more on the length of time humans have attached value and/or belief to the object. Religious groups understand full well these implications.

Perhaps, Dr. Leonardo, CST scholars may wish to entertain their secondary presumption. Or as you posit,“Colorism is a kind of secondary phenomenon that imitates the primary structure of racism.” Call it what you like, “imitation is the greatest form of flattery.”

As the economy is comprised of classes, so too is “colorism.”  And like the systemic nature of the class system, “colorism is real and has real effects.” Moreover, as you point out, “The darker you are, the harsher the treatment….” But remember the economic reality of a capitalist system is if you can’t pay you can’t play, no matter your color.

In his 2004 essay “Critical Social Theory and Transformative Knowledge: The Functions of Criticism in Quality Education,” Leonardo clarifies that “pedagogues recognize that racism is not the problem of white supremacist fringe groups, but a general institutional arrangement created between whites and people of color…” Point taken. A socially manufactured phenomenon.  Problem is systemic not individual.

However, James Baldwin may not altogether agree with your second point, “the social definition of exploitation is not found in the practices of individual GM executives or Microsoft’s Bill Gates, but in the productive relations found in capitalism entered into by workers and owners…”

Baldwin notes, “I don’t think that General Electric or General Motors…or Mobil Oil or Coca Cola or Pepsi-Cola or Firestone or the Board of Education or the textbook industry or Hollywood or Broadway or television–or Wall Street… or Washington–are controlled by Jews. I think they are controlled by Americans, and the American Negro situation is a direct result of this control…” Let’s think about that.

Control correlates with power. Lack of power can put one at risk of being ruled or oppressed. Sure, some African Americans are economically disadvantaged while others in a position of power or influence. But unlike CRTS, they do not stoop to guilty charges against all whites threatening freedom of speech and vindictive blacklists including their own brothers and sisters.

Targeting of Jews by CRTS seek to weaponized their education against the people and State of Israel. Baldwin clarifies, “anti-Semitism among Negroes, inevitable as it may be, and understandable, alas, as it is, does not operate to menace this control, but only to confirm it. It is not the Jew who controls the American drama. It is the Christian.” And so we’re back to the true dominate faith.

Are the ruling corporations, Christians, creating economic instability resulting in communities pinned neighbor against neighbor? Pray tell my minority colored friends, why your preference for the image of Jesus Christ, a white male with blonde hair and blue eyes?  Are we to understand it arises out of a long value laden attachment you cannot unmake as a human or are you simply color blind?

As to racism and socialism, Leonardo acknowledges that “although a socialist educational system may give rise to a condition free of labor exploitation, it cannot guarantee the disappearance of racism or patriarchy.”  This assertion begs the question: In a public educational setting why hold individual white students who are subject to the same setting responsible?  

Unlike CRTs, “critical social theorists are not in the habit of justifying that oppression exists, but prefer describing the form it takes. Instead, their intellectual energy is spent on critiquing notions of power and privilege, whether in the form of cash or culture.” Herein lies the problem.

If by culture one focuses only on education, it begs the question further: As “cash is King” why not spend the energy protesting employers?  It appears that as CRTs function is to keep alive oppression holding it like a proud banner, CSTs weave it creating many forms.

Lastly, Leonardo points to educators’ “battles for language rights for Latino students.” Here again, there is a nebulous conflict, a form created by the CSTs for the function of one group, the majority within a “minority group” Latinos.

Language as a Right or Privilege?

Freedom of speech is a right. Driving is a privilege. If a State is to educate all in a given language, does it not show a preference by focusing on one privileged group through its English as a Second Language (ESL) program for Spanish speakers? By contrast, a Private Institution reserves the right to include in its curriculum a chosen language.

For example, in my course on Language and Educational Policy, I chose to research two “diverse” languages: Arabic and Hebrew. I observed that both were private schools.

In the first, the school has no ESL program. The school language policy requires that applicants be English Proficient. While the school teaches Arabic as an elective, it is not part of the core curriculum. However, like instruction in the Qur’an, the Arabic language is part of the overall curriculum. Arabic language and prayer is done in an effort to maintain identity.

In the second, there is no ESL program, and so, students come into the K-12 program fully proficient in English. The school language policy requires that applicants be English proficient. While the school teaches Hebrew as part of the core program, students need not have knowledge of Hebrew Language or Jewish studies when enrolling. However, Hebrew language and Judaic studies are part of the overall curriculum. Policy supports the vision and mission of the school to maintain the identity and culture through language and religion.

Some Mexican student bilingual speakers argue against a white hegemony intending to squash their native language. Spanish, they say is a part of their identity with their country. My response: First, the white hegemony that squashed your indigenous language was the Spaniards. Second, I thought the U.S was your country?

By learning Spanish and English, do you not serve two white masters? Muslims and Jews identities are the only ones intact. So CRTS, why side with Palestine but not Israel?

Critical of a white hegemony? Concern for equality?  What about yours or your parents’ native land, Mexico? I posed these questions to the students after a presentation on the subject.  

“Death: The HIGH price of Higher Education!” is a paper I presented in class on the subject  Education and Global (In)Equality, highlighted below:

Is death the price students must pay for speaking up for education? The killing of students has bluntly demonstrated governments’ contempt for human rights. We are witnessing a horrifying rise of global inequality and an attack on education.

Speaking up for justice in our education and government system has become a deadly activity. Just 10 days after the celebration of Mexican Independence Day, the people of Mexico have tears in their eyes but they are not tears of joy and pride.

On September 26, 2014, 43 students from Raul Isidro Burgos Rural Teacher’s College in Iguala, Guerrero, Mexico went missing. What was to be a planned protest against “government education reform” argues R. Lewis from Aljazeera became a kidnapping for hire and murder scheme. The plot ultimately led to the arrest of the mayor reiterating the “unholy union of Mexico’s political institutions and organized crime” according to R. Davis from Truthdig.

Six tormenting weeks later, on November 7th, the families were told of the findings of human remains. Unfortunately, the bodies were so badly decomposed they were unidentifiable. Conflict between the people of Mexico and its government is not new.

Historically, “the state of Guerrero, rural and poor, has a history of anti-government mobilizations” posits J. Partlow from the Washington Post and this recent act shined light on the inequality in Mexico and the government’s attack on its people.

Mexico y su gente es lindo pero no querido por todos.

Anti-Semitism, Call IT What IT Is

Witnessing the growth of the poisonous anti-Semitic tree, I saw and heard the cries of those in solidarity with Palestine regardless of any first-hand knowledge. Students from the Americas, North and South who had never lay foot in the East based their opinions on social media.

Recall the Pied Piper? On the second week of class, she put up a PPT slide with an image of people holding a sign that read “Diversity = White Genocide.” Not only did she not explain the slide, she called on students seeking their reactions. I stated that individuals demonstrating such a provocative sign were irresponsible and disrespectful to the victims of genocides.

The teacher was not alone in irresponsibly misappropriating historical events. Some students hijacked the tragedy of the Holocaust while denigrating the very people who endured its suffering and replacing it with their own idea of victimization.

Richard B. Stone, Professor, Columbia University Law School argues that antisemitism arises from the “left, white supremacy, and Islam…” Is it any wonder that in the West and in these times, to be Jewish means being targeting from all directions.

“Shadow University”: Educated or Getting Indoctrinated?

Watch out, CRTS spiked the punch bowl. Are you sure you wanna drink their “Kool-Aid?”

According to Professors Alan Charles Kors and Harvey A. Silverglate, who delved in these shadows, this “totalitarian mindset” goes back decades.  In their 1998 book, The Shadow University. The Betrayal of Liberty on America’s Campuses, their findings are both disturbing and relevant:

“Universities still set themselves apart from American society, but now they do so by enforcing their own politically correct worldview through censorship, double standards, and a judicial system without due process. Faculty and students who threaten the prevailing norms may be forced to undergo “thought reform.”

Professors’ Kors and Silverglate present examples of multiple legal cases disclosing the early beginnings of the end of free speech in all its forms. The scholars’ discoveries:

“lay bare the totalitarian mindset that undergirds speech codes, conduct codes, and “campus life” bureaucracies through which a cadre of deans and counselors indoctrinate students and faculty in an ideology that favors group rights over individual rights, sacrificing free speech and academic freedom to spare the sensitives of currently favored groups.” 

I found that in the course of teachers shaping and reshaping student’s minds with a milieu of counter-productive real and imagined aggressions, students developed antipathy towards those who disagreed.  Kors and Silverglate are correct, “Indeed….For administrative salary…tenure…promotion? There should be no rewards for infamy.”

My professional experience highly contrasts to my academic one. Perhaps because as Levin concludes, “Physics, fundraising, athletics, microbiology, the medical schools, mathematics…business…are not in the hands of ideological zealots.” It’s only a matter of time. Have not the “zealots” seethed their way into government agencies relying on their need for funding or political agendas?  

Feds and the Departments of Justice and Education dropped the ball and “greatly broadened the definition of sexual harassment to include verbal conduct that is simply “unwelcome.” Out of fear of federal investigations, universities are now applying that standard…not just to sex, but to race, religion, and veteran status as well…Emotional reasoning is now accepted as evidence.” But wait, wasn’t justice in the law for the Black Race the priority?

Nope, that was just a theory that morphed into many. Apparently it was not about solving socio- economic problems. But about throwing out many and seeing which one sticks. Like the CRTS, their counterpart the CSTS understood this. 

Prof. Leonardo posits “CST does not always offer a blueprint solution to a given problem, like racism (how does one “end” racism?), but rather to pose it as a problem…” Sir, tell us what solutions you do offer?

Says Leonardo, “In whiteness studies, whiteness is the problem to be posed, if not also solved.” As you go in circles, your words suggest there is a possible solution to whiteness but no end to racism? Is this to say that as your colleague, the “Pied-Pier,” your solution is “Diversity = White Genocide.”

Is this Racism acceptable to the minorities to exist and survive as colorism between black, brown and yellow? But be warned, in time a color group will be the majority at the expense of the minority.  It is the natural order of things.

Pray tell Professor, if as you say the “idea of who is white changes over time” where more and more non-whites become white, does this argument not invite the idea of becoming white;  especially if as you say “Whites are not born white, they have to become white?”

Let’s humor your point and entertain it. One could argue that O.J. Simpson, who some argue did not see himself as black, was seen by those born white as white. And those with the “white power” supported his verdict of not guilty.

A verdict not of 12 angry black men but the power of a black majority.  My black friends, now that you’ve had a taste of power, deep down in your skin you understand well why my white friends will not go down without a fight.

By the same token, one could put the shoe on the other foot and argue that “Blacks are not born black, they have to become black.” But unlike beauty, blackness is skin deep.

No matter how much a person, say a white born President, endears himself with the black community, he will always be a white with privileges. By contrast, a black born President seen as being white is not as endearing.

However, a person’s outside appearance can determine that individual’s advantages or disadvantages. Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder, but in the eye of society it is not skin deep, as one beholding victims of the “ugly stick” or deformity can attest to.

Adding gender to the equation, Leonardo may argue based on his theories that the idea of who is male (or female) changes over time where non males become males.  But unlike beauty, one’s sexual preference determines who that individual is. So choose well my gender oriented friends.

Seems CSTS are quite good at creating forms by which CRTS can function in society. All in all, socially manufactured phenomenon.  Speaking of the use of color as a weapon to obtain power, let’s walk from the courtroom to the classroom.

Weaponizing Education

Trigger Warning! Oppression, Not Racism, seems to be the ulterior motive and ultimate goal. In these times, young minds are facing multiple challenges in the “real world” only to face more in academia.

In “How Powerful People Use Education”  Janette Fuller points out that “…race relations, gender relations, and sexual relations seem to be atop the list of priorities of oppressive situations.” Actual practice of education, whatever they think it means, comes second.

If young minds are repeatedly drilled as African Americans and Latin Americans that their chances of advancement to higher positons are unlikely compared to whites, then these proponents accomplish three things: Confusion, Division and Anger at whites. Also, seems counterintuitive to end up paying for student loans when their prospects are bad – not a good gamble.

Trigger Warning! Students shoulders are not only laid with their race/gender “identity chips” of not fitting in to societal classes and norms but thrown the heavy chains of the past expecting them to “solve it” and save their cultures.

Fuller explains, “The goal of introducing widespread engagement with critical pedagogy in and outside of the classroom is to create a world in which “oppression” is eradicated. The proponents of this engagement with critical pedagogy believe that all human beings have an inalienable right to be free…” So in four years, each cohort is expected to accomplish this?

The real irony may be “that many persons who have got and are getting relief from their sources of oppression have been and will, inadvertently, find ways to oppress those who do not fully share their beliefs. This has been the way of the world throughout history” argues Fuller. So how is one to love thy brother?

Impact to students playing the ‘victim?” Turning the classroom into a warzone “universities are teaching students that their emotions can be used effectively as weapons… Schools may be training students in thinking styles that will damage their careers and friendships, along with their mental health.”

What does this mean for the “oppressor?” As the adage states, “All is fair in Love and War.” Release the beasts of “microaggressions” with no Trigger Warnings!  It’s become a game of “survival of the fittest.” So arm your shoulders with all your God given White & Straight Privileges.

Loss of Economic Power: How CRTS Beat Themselves At Their Own Game

Recall Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, emphasize that “…vindictive protectiveness teaches students to think in a very different way. It prepares them poorly for professional life…A campus culture devoted to policing speech and punishing speakers is likely to engender patterns of thought…similar to those long identified by cognitive behavioral therapists as causes of depression and anxiety. The new protectiveness may be teaching students to think pathologically.”

Jal Mehta’s FOREIGN AFFAIRS  2013 article , “Why American Education Fails” still holds true today. Pointing to the sociologist Daniel Bell, future success “would require advanced skills and creativity.”  Neither of which CRTS and many of the students focused on “Pedagogies of the Oppressed” built their education on.  

Trigger Warning! “U.S. schools…half a century after the end of official segregation, huge gaps continue to divide students by race and class, with the average black 12th grader scoring in reading at a level equivalent to the average white eighth grader…” Although some of the students I came across were brilliant, having graduated at the top of their class, a large number had no business being in an Undergrad let alone a Master’s Program.

Problem stems from Admissions rate promoted faculty. Sure, the Pied Piper and other teachers can afford to drink the Oppression “Kool-Aid.” They get paid. Sadly, few students who go on to get a PhD are likely to get a job, but pay heavily in student loans. And all they have to show for it is a piece of paper.

Hey, but they can tell the world, they’re the first in their family to get a degree. A degree with no value other than proof they spent 4,5 or 6 years practicing race theories (several get comfy in their safe spaces). Yet, they wouldn’t know CRITICAL THINKING even if it bit them in the ass. The only thing critical they no is criticism of those who disagree.

Mehta explains further:

“A major obstacle to progress in education is that nobody is specifically tasked with developing such a shared knowledge base. Education researchers write mainly for other researchers; teachers generate new ideas daily but don’t necessarily share them or put them to a test; an entire industry…focuses more on what will be bought by districts and states than on what would improve learning for teachers or students.”

Math, now that’s scary?

For example, I’ll share what I saw as a common theme by some students. While it may be “hard to measure motivation,” one can observe behavior. I’ve listened to and observed students apprehensive of numbers.

One instance come to mind, where before the start of a class, I heard some students critique calculations left on the board by the previous professor. When I and a group of students enthusiastically approached the board to decipher the formula, I was questioned indignantly “why are you doing that.” 

When I replied that it would be fun to figure out the calculus equations, their response was to simply erase the board. I’ve seen this type of reaction primarily with Hispanic students. When I question their apprehension some respond that these calculations are “ugly” and the sight of something they do not understand makes them uncomfortable.

In my research on social capital, my interview with faculty and students suggested that there were underlying factors irrespective of a student’s capability with math or science: student’s preconceived biases and overt cognitive dissonance. For example, when I proposed math is ubiquitous in our daily lives and its importance for personal finances and or research in the  sciences, the became silent.

Then, when I pointed to the connection of math and economics and its interplay with globalization and trade, students reply was simply that “capitalism is evil” thereby rejecting any suggestion to become knowledgeable in these disciplines. It appeared to me that they were uncomfortable with the sight of math as they probably have grown a disdain for what they never learned to love, much less respect especially if numbers correlate to currency = profits = capitalism.

Attempting in my study to control for societal biases vs math aptitude I posed the question to individuals and groups: What are your plans after graduation, some replied that they were distressed with their job interviewing experiences as most if not all organizations were led by “white” individuals and not Hispanic. Any attempt I made to counter their assertions quickly turned into a group think scenario where the majority of the students (non-white) became uncomfortable. 

While these findings are not a generalization of Hispanics, they do offer a window into the genesis of some students disdain for math: the strong alignment of one’s perception of “whites” to one’s negative view of “whites” and capitalism. Transference of sorts.

While for some their inability to comprehend complex math problems reinforced their negating any attempt to learn, for others, their mathematical ability was neither swayed by positive or negative views of “whites” as their love of math superseded these views.

Such thinking is a testament to the statistics. The 2016 National Assessment of Educational Progress, also known as the “Nation’s Report Card,” reported “In math, 47% of Asian students performed at or above proficiency. So did 32% of white students, 12% of Hispanic students and 7% of black students.” Moreover, “In reading, 49% of Asian students performed at or above proficiency last year. So did 46% of white students, 25% of Hispanic students and 17% of black students.”

Trigger Warning! “U.S. education system has long operated on the principle of teacher equality — the idea that each teacher possesses equivalent levels of knowledge and skill. But this is clearly not true, and the country should not organize its schools as if it were.”

Recall the student complaining of a math problem left on the board that made her feel uneasy?

 “What exactly are students learning when they spend four years or more in a community that polices unintentional slights, places warning labels on works of classic literature…”

My Commencement Speech to CRTS

It’s no joke. Let’s face it. Students with poor writing and reading skills are given a “free pass” in these social and cultural programs, but will ultimately pay for it. Transfers from private schools like Princeton and Chapman University are not uncommon.

Funny thing is that instead of being proud of your acceptance to a private and/or ivy league school, many of you complained of feeling uncomfortable on campus.  

Even funnier was you not stopping while you were ahead. A resume with a pristine school stands for itself. No, you had to go on and get a Master’s in an Urban and Social studies major focused on Oppression.

Mes American Misérables, amidst campus scandals and student loan debt, the youth of America faces real crises: suicide, substance abuse, depression, unemployment, homelessness…  Where’s the solidarity and protest against tuition hikes?

There you remain in your “safe spaces” full of confusion becoming easy targets of persuasion for movements who like sirens called out to you. Little did you know that“…the world beyond college will be far less willing to accommodate requests for trigger warnings and opt-outs.” I am reminded of actor Robert De Niro’s words to a graduating class, “You’re Fucked.”

Racism, in all its forms, is alive and kicking. There are NO SAFE SPACES. One could go as far back to the torture and murder of Emmett Till to Kings beating to the killing of George Floyd. Sure, Derek Chauvin’s knee on Floyd’s neck can be seen as the epitome of a white man’s power over blacks. But JUSTICE was done. HE, and only HE, was responsible and found GUILTY. Not your white classmate, neighbor or boss.

Dreamers who follow the CRTS, instead of living the dream, you’re living in a dream. Wake up or life is going to bitch slap you.

CRTS, if you can forgive a brother calling you a “Nigger” or bitch slapping you, then whose got the “privilege”? No matter how hard you convict all whites for their “privilege,” at the end of the day you’ll find you have no “skin in the game.”

White Brothers and Sisters, you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t. Blaming yourself and letting them shame you will not endear you to them because they don’t trust you. But defend your logical positions and they “cry wolf.” Some black gay actors may have no talent but proudly hone this skill.

So unless you enjoy “guilt trips” be reminded those guilty of past actions lie dead in the PAST. Responsibility of your actions lies in the PRESENT.

I leave you with a few words of wisdom: Eddie Glaude, echoing James Baldwin, “Grow up and confront ourselves honestly.” Bakari Seller brilliantly pointed out that he wants his children to thrive versus survive.

Remember, the only thing worse than not getting what you want is getting what you want and losing it. 

Well, actually it’s losing your sense of humor. Or, can’t you take a joke?