Their racist attacks on white people

A couple of newspaper columns today (here and here) repeat the liberal/progressive/Democratic blarney that critical race theory is merely an innocent and compassionate plea for racial understanding.

Critical race theory enthusiasts, however conveniently, ignore the part about how whites, by the fact that they are white, are haters–consciously or unconsciously–of black people and brown people.

One cites the faultless, nay, the virtuous definition of the theory provided by PolitiFact:

In plain terms, critical race theory holds that racism is part of a broader pattern in America: It is woven into laws, and it shows up in who gets a job interview, the sort of home loans people are offered, how they are treated by police, and other facets of daily life large and small.

The other postulates that all that’s being taught is how:

…Black Americans have suffered through subjugation and violence and the ways in which that legacy is still relevant today in the realms of government, criminal justice, real estate and so on. This really isn’t controversial, or some high-stakes battle over high concepts: It’s plain reality versus people who wish to ignore it.

Who can argue with that? America is guilty of the sins of slavery, Jim Crow and various forms of racism. But the theory also postulates a lot, lot more. “White privilege” and “white racism” are omnipresent and its promoters are omniscient, they claim. But as its name makes clear, it is a theory. The theory is universal, and like many universal statements, it is riddled with exceptions, contradictions and contraries. Is the theory sound enough to formulate sound public policy that allows for no dissent?

The” proof” of the theory relies on statistical differences between the “races”–itself a term that likewise defies accurate definition. For example: A disproportionate number of black men are in jail compared to white men. A disproportionate number of black children score lower on standard tests than whites. A disproportionate number of black drivers are stopped by police than white drivers. And so forth.

But that is a long, long leap from proving that inbred, intrinsic, uncured or whatever racism is the only or even a major variable that explains those disparities. The logic that undergirds the theory violates one of sociology’s major warnings: correlation is not causation.

The theory’s boosters will have to do better than that is they want to persuade everyone or demand complete agreement that the theory is fact.

Maybe they can start by accurately describing what critical race theory is.