The authenticity trap
John McWhorter has views on Critical Race Theory and how it’s being deployed in education.
The organization 1776Unites, founded by my mentor and model Bob Woodson, has tweeted out a video where various black people decry a now fashionable idea that “whiteness” includes being smart. As in, precise, objective, fond of the written word, oriented towards dispassion, on time.
Those things are all manifestations of intelligence, vigilance, discipline. But according to our Elect folk, we black people are best off channeling our Crazy Badass Mothafucka. Because that’s more “authentic.” And, I get the feeling, fun to watch.
Well, that last is debatable. Personally I find McWhorter very fun to watch when he’s doing the tv talking head thing.
Because so many think that the battle that I and others are waging against Critical Race Theory’s transmogrification into education for children is an obsession with something that isn’t a real problem, I want to explore a bit.
…
I knew something was really wrong when in 2019 at a conference in New York City for the city’s principals and superintendents, participants were presented with an idea that to teach with sensitivity to race issues meant keeping certain issues in mind.
These included ways of looking at things that are “white” rather than correct: namely, objectivity, individualism, and valuing the written word.
Yes. I did a post last August about Robin DiAngelo and that whole idea. One paragraph from that post:
What’s the problem? The problem is ascribing things like “emphasis on scientific method” to whiteness ffs! Bam, with one blow of their fist they declare black people uninterested in science. That will work out well! I guess Katherine Johnson was just mistakenly trying to be “white” with all that math skill she had? Neil Tyson should have played basketball instead?
So, yes, I’m on Team McWhorter on this one.
Schools Chancellor Richard Carranza was fine with this, happily telling the media that it’s white people’s job to do the “work” of identifying the racist assumptions in how they go about their business.
So: to stand outside of matters and analyze them with one’s own private mind, and perhaps couch one’s conclusions with the considered artifice of writing rather than the spontaneity of speaking, is inauthentic for black and Latino people. It is racist to impose such things on black and Latino (and Native American?) kids. Or at best, brown kids should be taught this uptight “white” business only as a gloomy alternative to the realness of just hanging out sharing passing personal impressions via chatting.
There’s nothing progressive about telling people that science and learning are for the dominant people and that the subordinate people are “authentic” instead of learned and that’s a better [read: holier] thing to be.
The Voice and Speech Trainers Association has posted a “White Supremacy Culture Daily Self-Check-in” ushering members through exactly this kind of mantra, including “The belief that progress is bigger and more” and “Fear of open conflict” as “white” things to cleanse yourself of. In other words, one is supposed to distrust wanting to expand or increase, and one is to cherish people yelling at each other, which, I’m sorry, is a cute way of saying that America needs some ghetto authenticity in the way people talk to each other when they disagree. … This view of precision and detachment as white is a view about, more economically, reason. The idea is that to master close reasoning is suspect. It is exactly the roots of the “Math is Racist” notion, and if you want a whiff of how religiously people can glom on to such ideas, take a look at my Twitter feed in the week after I posted about that here.
Yet, seeing this educational philosophy laid out in the sunlight, The Elect cannot dismiss it as fringe “kookiness” — unless they want to insult the curators of a national museum devoted to celebrating the very black people The Elect live to liberate. At the African-American History Museum in Washington, D.C., for a hot minute or two in 2020 you could see a variation on the Jones-Okun business, an expanded presentation of what we must reject as “white” evil. An educational poster was displayed that slammed not only objectivity, individualism, and writing, but linear thinking, quantitative reasoning, the Protestant work ethic, planning for the future, and being on time.
That’s the one that prompted the post last August.
Yes, this was real – from people who surely bemoan the stereotype of black people as dumb and lazy! Again, only a mental override could explain why the people responsible for this display would allow that emblazonment of precisely the stereotypes lobbed at black people for centuries. Tarring whites as imposers of alien values felt more important than considering that the poster depicted black people as gorillas – and was created by a white woman!
Exactly. You couldn’t make it up.
Not two minutes after I read this post, I saw that Howard University students are protesting the elimination of the Classics Department (the only such department at an HBCU). I have an impression of Classics as the kind of subject that would be decried as “white” under Critical Race Theory, but (this was news to me) the field was strong at Howard, pervasive in the program, and highly valued. I recognize that the Howard decision is more about economics than Critical Race Theory, but I do wonder what the Theorists might be saying about this move.
It really seems eerily similar to the idea that women have special ways of knowing, and doing science (or math, logic, etc.) is inauthentic subservience to patriarchy.
Sackbut: A quick google search pulled up an article saying this about Classics: “The field is a product and accomplice of white supremacy.”
“ unless they want to insult the curators of a national museum devoted to celebrating the very black people The Elect live to liberate. ”
Well that’s a little unfair, they corrected that mistake pretty quickly.
They did, yes, and McWhorter says that, but still it’s disturbing that they fell for it even briefly.
Nullius – The two are closely related. Standpoint epistemology and all that.
This might be a bit of a stretch, but I can see a connsction here with TA ideas such as the denigration of supposedly “White feminism,” the centrality and superiority of “lived experience,” and the strategy of “no debate.” The lack of good arguments on the TA side is certainly a good reason to avoid debate at all cost, but where some degree of engagement is required, downplaying the tools of reason is at the ready.
In Miscellany Room 6, I posted about Callie Burt’s removal from the editorial board of the journal Femminist Criminology, for a piece that looked at the loss of specific protections for women in U.S. law because of incorporation of “gender identity” into the definition of “woman.” http://www.butterfliesandwheels.org/2020/miscellany-room-6/#comment-2858372 The abstract for a response to this piece is fairly dripping with conempt for Burt’s alleged “white feminism:”
I’m willing to bet large sums of money that Nishant Upadhyay goes nowhere near addressing any of the points made by Burt. This is a refusal to engage due to irredeemible Evil and Corruption. She has been branded a White witch. Any “who espouse transphobic discourses” are also White Witches. Burt’s ideas must be denied any legitimation, and no dignity of response is to be admitted. The only reason to bring them up is to condemn them out of hand, completely and utterly.
Oh dear god.
Ah, “the racism of lowered expectations.”
I think people place too much emphasis on who is saying, versus what is being said. Lift out this aspect of Critical Race Theory and put it in a paper “explaining” that it originated in white Evangelical circles and many of its proponents would quickly discover the flaw. Do the same with gender identity — it comes from God and defies the material component of sex — and the same might happen.
As uncomfortable as I am being in agreement with conservatives on certain issues, at least I can try to comfort myself with the hope that going against so many fellow liberals might mean I’m evaluating the idea more objectively.
@YNnB #5
I’m pretty sure that heteropatriarchy predates colonialism by a substantial margin.
Typical, using Western, imperialist tools of chronology, causation, and logic! “Dates” and “margins” are inherently problematic, othering, violent, discourses/texts imposed or superposed upon non-date, margin-less cultures as part of the White, hegemonic program. AND YOU FORGOT “CIS”! TRANSPHOBE!! WITCH!!!
Did I miss anything?
Oh, I dunno, does stoving in Ug’s head and stealing his wife Ug count as colonialism yet, or do we have to grow the tribe a bit bigger?
As I’ve said before, one key thing to keep in mind in these discussions is that even when we seemingly agree with Conservatives, it’s usually in a ‘stopped clock’ fashion. They’re not ‘right’ because of sound reasoning from true premises, but rather a demonstration of the aphorism that you can prove anything–including the truth–from a false premise.
Also, “detachment” and “objectivity” have a lot to answer for. Every time there’s another protest against cops shooting unarmed black kids, there’s nattering naysayers who object to the lack of reasoned discourse about it. And of course, “objectivity” has become a fetish for the mainstream news media (really, only in living memory), wherein they immediately trot out an ‘opposing view’ even to the most fundamental truths. So they always have to have the apologist for systemic racism, or whatever other evil progressives are trying to maybe, just maybe, moderate a bit, because otherwise they’ll get accused of being biased (meanwhile, the conservative media machine has no issue with being biased). As for the scientific method… IQ tests, anyone?
But all of these critiques require the person to first understand what GOOD uses of objectivity, dispassion and objectivity look like, and then to see how the above are examples of bad-faith twisting of the concepts. As such, they’re something a teacher should learn, but not something a student would need to be aware of, until they actually are at the point of either an advanced high school course, or straight up college classes.
Yes, almost universally the right-wingers are correct because of hypocritical and/or self-serving reasons. That’s a defining feature of “conservatism”.
Cornel West and Jeremy Tate wrote an Op-Ed for the Washington Post last week defending the teaching of classics. I guess that makes Cornel West a white supremacist.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/04/19/cornel-west-howard-classics/%3foutputType=amp
So much of what we discuss here could come straight out of an achingly political, woke version of IDIOCRACY.