Some of this sounds like recycled countercultural anti-establishment notions about work and conformity etc. along with a dose of anti-intellectualism. That any of it is being put forth as a serious path forward for the already undereducated, both Black and White, tells me that our society is in deep trouble.
I know I'm late to your essay. I so appreciate your intensity and commitment around this maddening issue.
Part of me thinks this is the result of education schools full of self-justifying, mediocre careerists getting ahold of theoretical perspectives to which the rest of us were introduced 40 years ago and, as usual, simplifying and executing it at a powerpoint and handout level.
John, I haven't read your first books, but I'm assuming you've grappled with situating post-MLK racial politics within Havelock, Ong, and the whole "psychology of orality vs literacy" framework. Much of what these bozos are delineating seems like a retread celebration of "secondary orality," a concept that has a lot more implications with the onset of mainstream digital literacy and social media (see MIT's Media Lab work on the "Gutenberg parenthesis". Interestingly, rap and sampling are central examples of this departure from the fetish of authorship that's emerged in the West in the early 17th century.) Like, have any of these people read Ong, FFS?
Then you have the weird centering of critiques of positivism and the Enlightenment into something called "whiteness," when if objectivist epistemology resides in any "class" of humans and inherently depends upon the invisible labor of a devalued Other, it's men (this was a big discussion in the emerging field of feminist philosophy in the 1980s, before they caved to the genderists). Whiteness as a construct is barely 300 years old, and yet Kendi Rogers et al are ascribing all of Western thought to some white/black binary that wasn't really psychologically plausible to its literate Westerners until 1700.
And then, they really don't grasp the central issue of post-modernism, which is that if all of human thought is conditioned, and thus power dynamics are a social construction, there is no way for humans NOT to engage in conditioned symbolic thought, and reproduce some form of power within it. We cannot escape it, though there are some strategies for coping with this that are more reliable than others.
I'm beginning to understand why monks and priests in the past hoarded knowledge and made novitiates jump through a lot of hoops to access it, given the way grifters and mediocre do-gooders are dangerously oversimplifying Critical Theory. I had a difficult time explaining these basic concepts to education faculty twenty years ago. Now, they spout it on my Facebook page as if St. Michael the Archangel has just come down from heaven--e.g., these are people who specifically denied the existence of the real racism I called out in a deans' meeting literally 20 years ago, who are now preaching to me about the very thing they couldn't comprehend.
Most educated people alive today have had that "ah-ha" moment as undergrads when we understood the limits of "objectivist epistemology" and the "social construction of knowledge" and the nature of power dynamics reproducing themselves through language. For some of us that's part of a larger non-dualist understanding--we can tolerate the "samsara" of the messy imperfect ego-driven nature of symbolic reality because we have faith in an unconditioned nirvana, however unattainable it is to the symbolic mind. This latter part is the humility that the Elect are missing.
I wonder if the cult-ish, zealous nature of the Elect is in part due to grafting of the "a-ha" grasping of the social construction of knowledge onto the preexisting phenom of victim mentalities, their cynical exploitation by whites, the deliberate obfuscation of class issues, etc. These folks are CERTAIN that EVERYthing in Western culture for the past 500 years at least is all "white." What they mean, were they not so emotionally exercised, is that yes, the "knowledge"--the literate world-- that has commanded their respect and even intimidation their entire lives turns out to be imbricated with various power dynamics that definitely have had racial dynamics to it, given the forced illteracy of Blacks in America for a few hundred years. This understanding is a powerful methodological tool. What they don't grasp is that knowledge, including rigor and debate and precision, ALWAYS WILL BE infused with power dynamics, just in different form. And that profound intellectual and spiritual humility (whether through faith in God, awe in nature, whatever) is the critical first step after this recognition. Instead, for the Elect this "a ha" moment, that resonates at some level because they're grasping that yes, there is a psychological shift from a highly literate culture to subcultures that celebrate secondary orality, and yes, what one believes is true is never utterly "objective"--this emotional eureka moment is proof in their heads that their cause of critical race theory is beyond question.
Sadly, folks at this level of conversion aren't really open, as you've so vividly described, to further reading and discussion on these topics, mostly and paradoxically because they're consumed by power dynamics that they're incapable of realizing. That'd include the fear of banishment, joblessness, homelessness, ostracism, ridicule, self-loathing, embarassment...and the desire to enjoy their newfound power over others. I don't know how you keep up the discipline of calling this out, but thanks again for your hard work.
This article appeared in NRO today. Since National Review and The American Enterprise Institute (the authors organization) are known as conservative and the piece says something positive about Trump some may dismiss it as irrelevant. However it's worth reading for a clear explanation of the phenomenon called CRT.
Ah...all of those great African kingdoms. Ah...those Kings and Queens! The cities they built! The civilizations they gave birth to! Was that not the great retort by so-called black intellectuals to racist America just a half a minute ago? But wait. How exactly were the great pyramids built? Those great cities that adorned Northern Africa? Those powerful Nubian armies? All of that was done without precision, planning, scheduling, mathematical reasoning, hard work, etc.?
The stupidity is astounding. But what's more astounding is how the thinking John refers to could last a second in the light of day. As Malcolm Muggeridge once said...."we (the West) have educated ourselves into imbecility". This ideology is making a strong foothold in our culture and society. We either cut it from the vine now or watch the vine burn to the ground later. There is little time to waste.
Those near my age may recognize this as a repackaging of the "self esteem" movement which became prominent in education in the 1990s. I was fortunate to have this occur mostly after my time in school, but I watched it play a role in the unraveling of my younger brother's grade school education. The entire ideology revolved around discrediting achievement in favor of effort, or some similarly abstract and unempirical attribute which alleviates the requirement to actually learn something.
The impetus behind these ideas is as transparent now as it was then. Schools which don't issue grades (where people "just learn") have an obvious appeal to those who struggle to maintain good grades - i.e. to demonstrate what they have "just learned". But this mollycoddling of students was much easier to push back against when it wasn't being fueled by white guilt (and ultimately, elitist black guilt).
Nonetheless, ideas about education that is "holistic, organic, authentic, ..." or otherwise discribed by some litany of new-age, hipster buzzwords should be seen for what they really are, because they have been around forever. They are the province of those with an abundance of empathy but a dearth of good sense. The well-meaning who take for granted a world which doesn't actually run on good intentions. The people who always hate subjects like math and science, because there are right and wrong answers. The kind of people who equate rationality with close-mindedness, or who value charisma over competence and inspiration over education, or who think real learning requires Dead Poet Society theatrics. The kind of people who will declare an "autonomous zone" in a major city where nobody will need cops or public services because they have a bunch of college-age, utopian tag-artists ordering pizza and singing songs.
No, these ideas aren't "black" and they certainly aren't "anti-racist". They are anti-modernity, anti-society, anti-structure, anti-responsibility, and all too often, anti-reality. They are nothing more than simple Bohemianism: otherwise known as hippie bullsh*t. Which can be fun for a spell, even interesting for a long visit - but you wouldn't want to construct a society out of it.
There are so many disturbing implications in this blogpost I don’t know where to start.
One, the revolutionary Left, having given up on the working class as a revolutionary vanguard, has reframed the language of revolution in terms of race. Replace “white’ with bourgeois and you’d think you were listening to an old-style leftist.
Two, they have been able to reel in many gullible White middle-class liberals revealing a disturbing form of racism among them. You have the white supremacists who angrily declare that Blacks can’t achieve because they are black, and you now see the White liberal who sadly declares Blacks can’t achieve because they are black. Racism is much more widespread in America than anyone wants to admit. African Americans must realize they can only lift themselves up. They need to give up on White help not “white” values.
Third and most disturbing of all, too many African Americans are willing to see themselves the way Whites see them. We may lose another generation thanks to the bad policies that arise from the ridiculous ideas of critical race theory and that will be tragedy.
We have not transcended race in America, and it may be a bigger and longer lasting problem than anyone can imagine.
You, sir, have sold out your mind, your, people, and your culture to assimilate to the thought patterns of a cancerous, diseased strain of humanity that should have never existed to begin with.
"The idea seems to be that mathematical reasoning is not 'how we black people think'...” For professional reasons, I know a fair amount about the brain and cognition. I've always wanted to ask someone who holds such a belief what the underlying physiological mechanism is between skin color, brain, and cognition. And, someone tell me again what the difference is between a racist and the Woke? Sometimes I have trouble telling the difference. Don't hate me for being confused.
What always strikes me odd about the Kendi/DiAngelo position is that their funding comes from the system of whiteness they decry. They assume we can make these changes to our society without it impacting productivity. The way to win this argument is to focus on the way their proposals will impact productivity, and to point out that their theories would have a negative impact on the way of life we currently enjoy.
Black or white, one can appreciate both graffiti on a 1972 NYC subway car and calculus, Biggie and Dostoyevsky, quantum mechanics, and a ridiculous ankle breaking crossover with some shit talking thrown in.
Well, well, well, John McWhorter on Fox News tonight with Ben Dominich. Glad to see it. CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBC etc. don't want to hear what he has to say so a guys gotta do what a guys gotta do.
This reminds me very much of what in some circles is called an example of "the pre/trans fallacy": that pre-rational stages of development are the same as trans-rational stages--because they are both NON-rational. But, this is a fallacy. Three-year-old inhabits a "spunky, funky, holistic, intuitive world" simply because they have not yet progressed through the rational stages of human development. Whereas an adult who has become capable of rational thought, self-reflection, critical judgment, etc., (apparently to some now a racist "white" concept) can also experience and appreciate "a holistic, intuitive" mode of existence, but it is a state dependent on, informed by, and shaped through rational processes. (As everyone knows, the concept of a more enlightened, more authentic, and more intuitive self is sometimes described as one's "inner Child" precisely because it's meant to imply a way of being that is free of reasonable, rational, critical thought and processes.) In reality, of course, a psychologically sound adult cannot remain a child in his or her way of successfully navigating life. But since these same non-rational modes (spontaneous, organic, intuitive, "keeping-it-real" ways of interacting) are also available to healthy adults and judged to be positive, pleasant, and even therapeutic, you get adults who elevate the PRE-rational childlike way of life as if it were the same thing as a TRANS-rational. They conflate the two because they are both NON-rational. So, no, it is not actually true that one can just jettison a whole stage of personal development (rational) and arrive at adulthood as an authentic, true, healthy, and fulfilled person in the world.
I must admit John, I use my iPhone’s “Look Up” feature for word definitions quite often when I read your posts. Learning lots! Thanks.
Some of this sounds like recycled countercultural anti-establishment notions about work and conformity etc. along with a dose of anti-intellectualism. That any of it is being put forth as a serious path forward for the already undereducated, both Black and White, tells me that our society is in deep trouble.
Are these columns archived on a website somewhere?
I know I'm late to your essay. I so appreciate your intensity and commitment around this maddening issue.
Part of me thinks this is the result of education schools full of self-justifying, mediocre careerists getting ahold of theoretical perspectives to which the rest of us were introduced 40 years ago and, as usual, simplifying and executing it at a powerpoint and handout level.
John, I haven't read your first books, but I'm assuming you've grappled with situating post-MLK racial politics within Havelock, Ong, and the whole "psychology of orality vs literacy" framework. Much of what these bozos are delineating seems like a retread celebration of "secondary orality," a concept that has a lot more implications with the onset of mainstream digital literacy and social media (see MIT's Media Lab work on the "Gutenberg parenthesis". Interestingly, rap and sampling are central examples of this departure from the fetish of authorship that's emerged in the West in the early 17th century.) Like, have any of these people read Ong, FFS?
Then you have the weird centering of critiques of positivism and the Enlightenment into something called "whiteness," when if objectivist epistemology resides in any "class" of humans and inherently depends upon the invisible labor of a devalued Other, it's men (this was a big discussion in the emerging field of feminist philosophy in the 1980s, before they caved to the genderists). Whiteness as a construct is barely 300 years old, and yet Kendi Rogers et al are ascribing all of Western thought to some white/black binary that wasn't really psychologically plausible to its literate Westerners until 1700.
And then, they really don't grasp the central issue of post-modernism, which is that if all of human thought is conditioned, and thus power dynamics are a social construction, there is no way for humans NOT to engage in conditioned symbolic thought, and reproduce some form of power within it. We cannot escape it, though there are some strategies for coping with this that are more reliable than others.
I'm beginning to understand why monks and priests in the past hoarded knowledge and made novitiates jump through a lot of hoops to access it, given the way grifters and mediocre do-gooders are dangerously oversimplifying Critical Theory. I had a difficult time explaining these basic concepts to education faculty twenty years ago. Now, they spout it on my Facebook page as if St. Michael the Archangel has just come down from heaven--e.g., these are people who specifically denied the existence of the real racism I called out in a deans' meeting literally 20 years ago, who are now preaching to me about the very thing they couldn't comprehend.
Most educated people alive today have had that "ah-ha" moment as undergrads when we understood the limits of "objectivist epistemology" and the "social construction of knowledge" and the nature of power dynamics reproducing themselves through language. For some of us that's part of a larger non-dualist understanding--we can tolerate the "samsara" of the messy imperfect ego-driven nature of symbolic reality because we have faith in an unconditioned nirvana, however unattainable it is to the symbolic mind. This latter part is the humility that the Elect are missing.
I wonder if the cult-ish, zealous nature of the Elect is in part due to grafting of the "a-ha" grasping of the social construction of knowledge onto the preexisting phenom of victim mentalities, their cynical exploitation by whites, the deliberate obfuscation of class issues, etc. These folks are CERTAIN that EVERYthing in Western culture for the past 500 years at least is all "white." What they mean, were they not so emotionally exercised, is that yes, the "knowledge"--the literate world-- that has commanded their respect and even intimidation their entire lives turns out to be imbricated with various power dynamics that definitely have had racial dynamics to it, given the forced illteracy of Blacks in America for a few hundred years. This understanding is a powerful methodological tool. What they don't grasp is that knowledge, including rigor and debate and precision, ALWAYS WILL BE infused with power dynamics, just in different form. And that profound intellectual and spiritual humility (whether through faith in God, awe in nature, whatever) is the critical first step after this recognition. Instead, for the Elect this "a ha" moment, that resonates at some level because they're grasping that yes, there is a psychological shift from a highly literate culture to subcultures that celebrate secondary orality, and yes, what one believes is true is never utterly "objective"--this emotional eureka moment is proof in their heads that their cause of critical race theory is beyond question.
Sadly, folks at this level of conversion aren't really open, as you've so vividly described, to further reading and discussion on these topics, mostly and paradoxically because they're consumed by power dynamics that they're incapable of realizing. That'd include the fear of banishment, joblessness, homelessness, ostracism, ridicule, self-loathing, embarassment...and the desire to enjoy their newfound power over others. I don't know how you keep up the discipline of calling this out, but thanks again for your hard work.
I'm so relieved that this Substack exists. Thanks, John.
This article appeared in NRO today. Since National Review and The American Enterprise Institute (the authors organization) are known as conservative and the piece says something positive about Trump some may dismiss it as irrelevant. However it's worth reading for a clear explanation of the phenomenon called CRT.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/04/critical-race-theory-the-enemy-of-reason-evidence-and-open-debate/
Ah...all of those great African kingdoms. Ah...those Kings and Queens! The cities they built! The civilizations they gave birth to! Was that not the great retort by so-called black intellectuals to racist America just a half a minute ago? But wait. How exactly were the great pyramids built? Those great cities that adorned Northern Africa? Those powerful Nubian armies? All of that was done without precision, planning, scheduling, mathematical reasoning, hard work, etc.?
The stupidity is astounding. But what's more astounding is how the thinking John refers to could last a second in the light of day. As Malcolm Muggeridge once said...."we (the West) have educated ourselves into imbecility". This ideology is making a strong foothold in our culture and society. We either cut it from the vine now or watch the vine burn to the ground later. There is little time to waste.
Those near my age may recognize this as a repackaging of the "self esteem" movement which became prominent in education in the 1990s. I was fortunate to have this occur mostly after my time in school, but I watched it play a role in the unraveling of my younger brother's grade school education. The entire ideology revolved around discrediting achievement in favor of effort, or some similarly abstract and unempirical attribute which alleviates the requirement to actually learn something.
The impetus behind these ideas is as transparent now as it was then. Schools which don't issue grades (where people "just learn") have an obvious appeal to those who struggle to maintain good grades - i.e. to demonstrate what they have "just learned". But this mollycoddling of students was much easier to push back against when it wasn't being fueled by white guilt (and ultimately, elitist black guilt).
Nonetheless, ideas about education that is "holistic, organic, authentic, ..." or otherwise discribed by some litany of new-age, hipster buzzwords should be seen for what they really are, because they have been around forever. They are the province of those with an abundance of empathy but a dearth of good sense. The well-meaning who take for granted a world which doesn't actually run on good intentions. The people who always hate subjects like math and science, because there are right and wrong answers. The kind of people who equate rationality with close-mindedness, or who value charisma over competence and inspiration over education, or who think real learning requires Dead Poet Society theatrics. The kind of people who will declare an "autonomous zone" in a major city where nobody will need cops or public services because they have a bunch of college-age, utopian tag-artists ordering pizza and singing songs.
No, these ideas aren't "black" and they certainly aren't "anti-racist". They are anti-modernity, anti-society, anti-structure, anti-responsibility, and all too often, anti-reality. They are nothing more than simple Bohemianism: otherwise known as hippie bullsh*t. Which can be fun for a spell, even interesting for a long visit - but you wouldn't want to construct a society out of it.
There are so many disturbing implications in this blogpost I don’t know where to start.
One, the revolutionary Left, having given up on the working class as a revolutionary vanguard, has reframed the language of revolution in terms of race. Replace “white’ with bourgeois and you’d think you were listening to an old-style leftist.
Two, they have been able to reel in many gullible White middle-class liberals revealing a disturbing form of racism among them. You have the white supremacists who angrily declare that Blacks can’t achieve because they are black, and you now see the White liberal who sadly declares Blacks can’t achieve because they are black. Racism is much more widespread in America than anyone wants to admit. African Americans must realize they can only lift themselves up. They need to give up on White help not “white” values.
Third and most disturbing of all, too many African Americans are willing to see themselves the way Whites see them. We may lose another generation thanks to the bad policies that arise from the ridiculous ideas of critical race theory and that will be tragedy.
We have not transcended race in America, and it may be a bigger and longer lasting problem than anyone can imagine.
You, sir, have sold out your mind, your, people, and your culture to assimilate to the thought patterns of a cancerous, diseased strain of humanity that should have never existed to begin with.
I still have that "educational infographic" saved for when the opportunity occurs where I am doubted for arguing, "they really do mean these things."
"The idea seems to be that mathematical reasoning is not 'how we black people think'...” For professional reasons, I know a fair amount about the brain and cognition. I've always wanted to ask someone who holds such a belief what the underlying physiological mechanism is between skin color, brain, and cognition. And, someone tell me again what the difference is between a racist and the Woke? Sometimes I have trouble telling the difference. Don't hate me for being confused.
What always strikes me odd about the Kendi/DiAngelo position is that their funding comes from the system of whiteness they decry. They assume we can make these changes to our society without it impacting productivity. The way to win this argument is to focus on the way their proposals will impact productivity, and to point out that their theories would have a negative impact on the way of life we currently enjoy.
Black or white, one can appreciate both graffiti on a 1972 NYC subway car and calculus, Biggie and Dostoyevsky, quantum mechanics, and a ridiculous ankle breaking crossover with some shit talking thrown in.
Well, well, well, John McWhorter on Fox News tonight with Ben Dominich. Glad to see it. CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBC etc. don't want to hear what he has to say so a guys gotta do what a guys gotta do.
This reminds me very much of what in some circles is called an example of "the pre/trans fallacy": that pre-rational stages of development are the same as trans-rational stages--because they are both NON-rational. But, this is a fallacy. Three-year-old inhabits a "spunky, funky, holistic, intuitive world" simply because they have not yet progressed through the rational stages of human development. Whereas an adult who has become capable of rational thought, self-reflection, critical judgment, etc., (apparently to some now a racist "white" concept) can also experience and appreciate "a holistic, intuitive" mode of existence, but it is a state dependent on, informed by, and shaped through rational processes. (As everyone knows, the concept of a more enlightened, more authentic, and more intuitive self is sometimes described as one's "inner Child" precisely because it's meant to imply a way of being that is free of reasonable, rational, critical thought and processes.) In reality, of course, a psychologically sound adult cannot remain a child in his or her way of successfully navigating life. But since these same non-rational modes (spontaneous, organic, intuitive, "keeping-it-real" ways of interacting) are also available to healthy adults and judged to be positive, pleasant, and even therapeutic, you get adults who elevate the PRE-rational childlike way of life as if it were the same thing as a TRANS-rational. They conflate the two because they are both NON-rational. So, no, it is not actually true that one can just jettison a whole stage of personal development (rational) and arrive at adulthood as an authentic, true, healthy, and fulfilled person in the world.