Thread by @bartbarber

Today's data from the CRT/I polling I did earlier: Let's look at the people who said "I endorse (and perhaps even teach) Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality."

These are self-identified proponents of CRT/I. What can we learn about them?

94% of the self-identified proponents of CRT/I also DENIED that "every white person is a racist, just by virtue of being white," (although I've heard many friends say that this is a core teaching of CRT/I).

59% of the pro-CRT respondents DENIED that "when it comes to the topic of racism, we should listen to what black people have to say and not listen to what white people have to say." Again, many friends have suggested that this is a core teaching of CRT/I.

The pro-CRT respondents were far more likely to say that "America should strive toward equality of outcomes for all people regardless of race," which appeared immediately after and in contrast to "equality of opportunity" questions. They were 68% in affirmation.

That worries me a bit, because "equality of outcomes" language tends significantly toward communism, especially if "America should strive" is taken as "the American government should take measures to ensure."

The definitions of CRT given by those who identified as proponents of CRT were generally consistent, centered around legal theories explaining how racism can persist in the legal system even after overt racism is abolished from the law.

How can it be that these CRT-endorsing respondents deny several of the tenets that my CRT-opposing friends say are a key part of what CRT means? One of the definitions of CRT given by a pro-CRT respondent stands out in this regard.

That respondent defined CRT by saying, "Two parts: Academic vs Popular. Academic, looking at laws (redlining, etc.) is sound. Popular use of CRT has people going crazy."

So, in light of all of that, here's an appeal to my fellow Southern Baptists: Even if you think CRT is troublesome (I do), and even if you think "sound, academic" CRT is prone to facilitate or lead to "popular, people-going-crazy" CRT eventually,...

EVEN THEN, doesn't honesty and respect for one another require clearly differentiating between pro-CRT people who reject the popular version of the theory on the one hand and the "crazy" people on the other hand?

Because I haven't seen enough of that on Twitter.

By the way, some of the most frequently appearing words in CRT definitions by CRT-proponents were systems/systemic, legal, theory, institutions, race, social/society, and power.

Also, although some friends have defined CRT as the assertion that EVERY system in American society is totally racist, the average response by pro-CRT respondents was actually right in the middle: "Several...institutions...are at least subtly racist."

The average respondent who did not endorse CRT said that "A few" American institutions are at least subtly racist. Only a slight difference.

The average pro-CRT respondent said that the US has made superficial progress but is still inherently racist. The average anti-CRT respondent said that the US has made a good start of improving, but still has a long way to go. Again, only a one-step difference separating the two.