Posted on 08/08/2021 11:54:20 AM PDT by Mariner
1.1 THE CONCEPT OF CRITIQUE
Whether viewed as a tradition, as a set of questions, or as a ser ies of distinct thinkers, critical theory has continued to attract attention in academic circles throughout the post–World War II era. The reasons for this should come as lit-tle surprise. The members of the Institute of Social Research at the University of Frankfurt in the years leading up to the victory of Nazism in Germany— what we generally know as the Frankfurt School—had in view some of the most compelling problems and questions of modern society. Critical theory is not, however, simply a subfield within social theory, philosophy, or the social sciences. It is a distinctive form of theory in that it posits a more comprehen-sive means to grasp social reality and diagnose social pathologies. It is marked not by a priori ethical or political values that it seeks to assert in the world, but by its capacity to grasp the totality of individual and social life as well as the social processes that constitute them. It is a form of social criticism that con-tains within it the seeds of judgment, evaluation, and practical, transformative activity. Critical theory is, then, a radically different form of knowledge from mainstream theory and social science, one that the chapters contained in this book will explore and chart.
(Excerpt) Read more at academia.edu ...
I'd agree. Also, a lot of what people object to today was already underway before the German emigres got here, though it was much weaker than today. The left was bigger than just the Frankfurt School and American leftists had already begun looking for sources of discontent to exploit.
The keyword is theory-it’s not proven.
“It is marked not by a priori ethical or political values that it seeks to assert in the world, but by its capacity to grasp the totality of individual and social life as well as the social processes that constitute them. It is a form of social criticism that con-tains within it the seeds of judgment, evaluation, and practical, transformative activity. “
After reading that unintellible paragraph full of contradictions I know even less then before.
So it’s not a set of a priori ethical or political values, but contains the seeds of passing judgment.
How can it pass judgment without first having a set of values?
Critical theory is nothing more than a stupid name for the other stupidly named “deconstructionism” which is part of the stupidly named “postmodernism” philosophy which is the scourge of our society.
The most generous interpretation of deconstructionism (ie, critical theory) is that it is nothing more than an indepth, objective analysis of of whatever subject, or concept you wish to analyze and thus arrive (hopefully) at a deeper understanding of it.
Where it fails miserably is in the objective part. It usually starts with an “analyst” with an a priori theory and what he does is look for evidence that supports his theory while ignoring all the other evidence that might prove his theory wrong.
Critical Theory - the idea that you can destroy anything if you simply and only criticize it. Only look at the bad points, invent them if needed, e.g. “Bird watching is racist”.
The very idea of a just society itself is an impossibility without a standard that is impartial and also received after some fashion, something by which justice can be actually measured.
In a way, this is on steroids what I’ve long said about those Continental liberals from the 18th and 19th centuries — well before the Cultural Marxists — who would deride common law forms as the basis for laws as somehow arbitrary … for all they could possibly offer in place of them could only be expressly arbitrary.
That’s like the chamber pot calling out the silver service’s flaws.
And now their heirs are like chamber pots who break themselves and everything they can around them … all because they think the silver service, long cast aside, is responsible for them being crap pans to begin with.
“To them, there are no indisputable facts, no universal truth, no universal language, no universal construct of any kind, whether abstract or real.” “Ideas” and “morality” arise from physical conditions, and thus meaningless and idiosyncratic.
Isn’t it fascinating that in practical application, CRT artists select a set of “facts” (while telling us that facts are malleable) to draw moral conclusions (oops, morality is situational and an illusion) to justify holding targeted people collectively responsible for the deeds of others, on a purely racial basis, while pointing out that “race” is an artificial construction of 19th white scientists and social theorists, used to oppress targeted groups.
CRT is a tactic for shaking down them whats got. Shouldn’t CRT proponents have the most interest in “critiquing” groups with the most serious “pathologies”? Oh, those groups don’t have anything to steal.
It’s the unholy confluence of Marxism and Nihilism.
The two “great gifts” of German thought.
Worse, as a bastard child it compels action and remedy.
The new stream is pure Relativism, and drives toward the most inhuman of actions.
It allows any human behavior, both individual and the state.
And while CRT is all the rage now, Critical Theory covers the broadest range of human existence.
Their perceptions and feelings are just as good as your facts any day.
Good and informative post, Mariner. I learned a lot from all the comments. Thank you all.
Heh … but OUR perceptions and feelings are not legitimate to base any conversation on.
Indeed, over at Hannity I’ve tried to point out on numerable occasions that even agreeing to use their terminology is toxic in and of itself.
I’ve also used a version of lyrics from The Wall to highlight the folly of trying to ignore the bias inherent in the ideology, essentially saying:
“You cannot discuss race unless you agree to use our Marxist comprehension of race! How can you discuss race unless you reference our Marxist comprehension?!?”
Systemic Racism is all the rage.
Do you know the entire construct of Western Civilization IS racism? Western Civilization itself is not “racist”, it’s the social construct itself that IS racism.
Even pushing for rational dialog IS racism.
Effin’ everything is racism.
It makes you want to buy more ammo...
Yes, that became obvious when he began describing the background and development of critical theory.
It is nothing more than a subjective narrative in which the feelings of the aggrieved and downtrodden individual or class becomes the only valid framework for the evaluation of reality. The objective of this “evaluation” is to create revulsion at the existing societal order and the necessary zeal to accomplish the goal of revolutionary overthrow of existing economic, political and societal structures and radical societal reorganization.
Historically, it is ironic what happens after the revolution succeeds and the new order of things takes hold. For every policy or decision the party makes, persons like our author and his fellow academics will churn out the necessary revolutionary theory justifying it.
Years…no, several decades actually, I took an undergraduate political science course introducing various theories of political and economic organization. The instructor was head of the Political Science Department and referred to himself as a “reformed liberal.” (He was quite a character and used the descriptor sarcastically as when a conservative is defined as a “liberal who has been mugged.”)
Anyway, these classes took place during the last years or the Vietnam War on a liberal university campus. So naturally the subject of status of conscientious objection (CO) under Communism came up. The professor answered that, under communism, CO was not allowed because the perfection of the state and of society had been achieved and that its decisions perfectly reflected the will of the collective (workers). So the right of an individual to object to its actions on the basis of individual belief was not only impermissible, it was positively illogical. The properly educated citizen not only understood that the perfected state must be defended but was actually expected to eagerly do whatever work the collective needed to be done. Religious objection was disallowed because religious belief itself was irrational and also forbidden.
You can see a straight line from that to the late 1980s, when the more humane Soviet Union under Gorbachev choose to commit its political dissidents indefinitely to mental hospitals rather that have the KGB/FSB deal with them. “Your objections to state policies are a sure sign of mental illness! You will be here until you feel better, comrade.”
But the people they are the enemy of have to get to a place where they understand that as a GROUP they are in danger of no-longer existing.
You don't get there by using the term CRT, racism, etc. That is just more of the same that got white people where they are.
You use the term anti-white and you put the emphasis on their children's future. To start with, anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.