Thread by @deonteleologist

It's that time folks: time for a highlight reel cataloguing the best and worst moments from the debate/car crash rollercoaster that @ETVPod and I had with some noble cultural warriors on the other side about CRT. 🧵

Let's start with my favorite short clip. Pure chef's kiss.

I think it's best to put these in chronological order; many clips refer to previous events in the "debate."

Here Karlyn Borysenko, Ph.D. (Capella University) introduces herself. "Everything that Sam and Aaron are going to bring to this conversation, I really don't care."

Originally I wasn't going to include this; it's not really much of a highlight, it's just where I introduce myself. But for the purposes of exposing rhetorical tricks, it'll be useful to include in the thread.

Here I ask Dr. Borysenko how she knows what CRT is if she isn't interested in academic scholarship.

Her answer: "It doesn't matter... There is a teacher in Beaverton, Oregon, today, who we have on tape saying that it is child abuse not to teach students critical race theory."

In fact, that teacher never even mentioned CRT. Of course, this didn't stop news outlets from using this new one-size-fits-all buzzword for "progressive race stuff I don't like." See for yourself. dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9…

Christian here embarks on his first philosophical voyage of the debate. Try and decipher what exactly he says here.

One problem was that Christian and Aaron had not each offered definitions of CRT yet, so I thought it would be worth pointing this out. Christian decided to use this as an opportunity to claim that I had squandered my intro time, despite the fact that he also hadn't defined CRT.

A few minutes into the debate, Aaron mentioned that he thinks people are often uncharitable to Kendi and construe him as saying things he never says. This is true.

Asked to explain, he does. Then KB comes in with a heater.

Here Christian responds. I found his use of "essentializing" very strange. As Aaron explains, there ARE people in the broad "antiracism" space who do fall into the error of race essentialism. Kendi, though?

Christian responds, for some reason continuing to insist on his strange use of the term "essentialism."

Here is Gothix's first question of the debate -- How do you know CRT is not a way to usher in communism? -- and my reply. The burden of proof is an important concept!

Then KB comes in with heater #2.

Karlyn coming through with a very odd and very performative reaction to Aaron saying "this is not to say all criticism of CRT is antisemitic."

Aaron takes a lighthearted jab at Karlyn's dichotomous framing of "equality of opportunity," and she goes into heater #3. I didn't respond out loud, but I'm happy to provide a resume if Karlyn wants to see it. I had to work 15 hrs/week during the first year of my PhD (7 classes).

Karlyn with heater #4, assuming Aaron and I never speak out against ridiculous versions of antiracist teaching.

Here Michael helpfully frames a question that is genuinely important: Does CRT teach that math and science are inherently racist/built on whiteness?

I answer: absolutely not. Then Christian tries to find a way to object, shifting the goalpost multiple times.

A fantastic distillation of the entire debate: Aaron points out that one of the most widely used examples of the alleged CRT infestation of the US public school system has been thoroughly debunked and is in fact evidence of the anti-CRT moral panic.

Their response is telling.

This is already at the top of the thread, but it’s worth another watch. This is where it appears chronologically.

Here I introduce my point that CRT is not in fact a new, radical, anti-American, anti-white, Marxist conspiratorial plot to topple "Western civilization." It is in many ways a straightforward extension of the work of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Gothix's objection: But he's dead tho

Here I elaborate upon the teachings of CRT by reading several quotes from the last book MLK wrote before his assassination, the 1967 masterpiece Where Do We Go From Here?

The central objection to mainstream "liberal civil rights discourse" from CRT, raised clearly by MLK, Jr. as well.

I'm reminded of that parent on Bari Weiss' blog: "We have not had systemic racism against Blacks in this country since the civil rights reforms of the 1960s."

Karlyn here with heater #5 bringing in Robin DiAngelo. She claims that critical race theorists "don't think MLK went far enough," exposing her impoverished understanding of both civil rights history, MLK, and CRT in one fell swoop.

Karlyn absolutely bodies us with heater #6. She struck us both out with this one: "the two of you have no real world experience."

Note here that Aaron asks Karlyn if he can ask her a final question. This is relevant for the next clip.

We learn that 2/3 of the panelists we were debating endorse putting cameras in every public school classroom. And merely pointing out this inconsistency with brandishing "Make Orwell Fiction Again" is sufficient to inspire Christian's noble defense of KB against such cruelty.

Gothix insists that we have not been able to give real examples of CRT. At this point in the debate, we had already done this--I explained Crenshaw's pathbreaking discussion of intersectionality, of which Aaron reminds them.

Gothix's response: you're not answering my question.

I try to give another example, referring to Charles Mills' book, The Racial Contract. But Gothix isn't familiar with social contract theory, so I start to give a brief explanation, but I am interrupted by The Social Contract Theory Understander.

Discussion successfully derailed.

Another good distillation of the debate: Gothix suggests again that we haven't given any real examples of CRT.

So I try to take some advice from @olivertraldi and ditch the name "CRT" so we can discuss what Gothix is really interested in. In response, she literally walks away.

Here is Christian demonstrating that he just wasn't listening to Aaron when Aaron describes the research from Roland Fryer on racial bias in police use of force.

Continuation. I misspoke when I called Fryer's study "one of the most... rigorous analyses of police violence that you can find." I don't know whether that's true, I just know many who claim there's no racism in policing say that. See criticisms here:

https://twitter.com/soashworth/status/1403162505380237316?s=20

Here Christian tries to destroy the entire construct of group interests. He demonstrates a basic misunderstanding of what Bell means when he presents his principle of interest convergence.

Just had to grab this and add the Spongebob in--even though it was actually only a 2 minute span between clips.

Gothix says she doesn't identify as Black or as a woman.

Gothix: "Two White men suggesting to a Black woman..."

Here is Christian's closing statement. We see him cite Shaun King as an example of what critical race theorists think, and then claiming he's not doing that. He appears to think CRT/"the idea of white privilege" says some races have differential worth.

Gothix's closing statement. I made the mistake of asking for evidence during a closing statement. But it's important to remember: the only alleged evidence of public schools implementing CRT that we covered is an absolute farce, and they refused to address that.

And my closing statement. Aaron’s is much longer, but it basically consists of him reading Lee Atwater’s “Southern strategy” and explaining how it relates to Chris Rufo’s transparent propaganda campaign that is taking over the GOP.

I suggest reading the thread that concludes here as well as the linked piece if you're interested in learning more about what Rufo is doing. He is one of the most respected (and thus one of the most dangerous) people doing the dirty work for the GOP. [fin]

https://twitter.com/deonteleologist/status/1402302611055808513?s=20