Replies

I just saw a column by Bill Press today which highlights how old-school, orthodox liberals like him have no clue about the radicals with whom they have allied. Press, of course, follows his fellow liberals into the motte with his contention that CRT is a "pretty narrow field of intellectual study for law school students and professionals." (Which is nonsense: I am a lawyer, and my only exposure to critical race theory pre-BLM was as an undergrad, not in law school.)

But then there's this from Press:

And there are intelligent ways to improve the document as well as self-defeating ways. CRT scholars tend to call attention to those historical flaws to undermine other American values that I would just as soon leave alone.
For example, leading CRT scholars such as Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic in their book, "Must We Defend Nazis? Why the First Amendment Should Not Protect Hate Speech and White Supremacy," argue for curtailment of "dangerous" speech. I don't have to be a legal scholar to believe that's a very dangerous idea.

What Press fails (or refuses) to grasp is that the "tendency" he describes is in fact the entire point of critical race theory: like the Frankfurt School critical theory that spawned it, critical race theory is a post-Marxist doctrine aimed at undermining, through criticism, liberal Western institutions that, in the mind of its proponents, stand in the way of revolutionary socialism.

The great irony is that the real targets of critical race theorists are not conservatives, but liberals like Press and the liberal values they used to champion, like pluralism, freedom of expression, and equality before the law. But those liberals, like many of the liberals who answered the YouGov poll, have no clue of this.