"Dr. Bell did not share MLK's dream and neither do his ideological children."
Well, you're right about that. But let's be very clear, I'll bet he was a lot closer to MLK's vision than Rufo or, to be fair, most conservatives today. Yes, MLK believed in race blindness at the individual level. But he also believed in affirmative action and r…
"Dr. Bell did not share MLK's dream and neither do his ideological children."
Well, you're right about that. But let's be very clear, I'll bet he was a lot closer to MLK's vision than Rufo or, to be fair, most conservatives today. Yes, MLK believed in race blindness at the individual level. But he also believed in affirmative action and reparation for slavery. He also believed in Universal Basic Income for the poor (regardless of skin colour).
So let's be very clear about his too, if King were alive today, plenty of the people who just looove repeating his "content of their character" quote would treat him with just as much disdain as they treat Kendi. If not more.
Whiteness studies is not a "child" of CRT (Wikipedia is wonderful for many things, but not for use was an authoritative source on academic literature). It is a separate field of academia, devised by one of the people who contributed to the original body of work known as CRT.
CRT uses a racial lens because it was designed to look at how the legal system produced and sustained racial inequality. It was focused specifically on this narrow field. Again, I'm not arguing that CRT got all of its conclusions correct. But broadening that philosophy to encompass everything (I don't deny that some people have done this) isn't what the original work of CRT was about.
Finally, whether white flight and the closing of certain black schools led to a more tolerant society depends very much on where you live and what colour your skin is, no? It's easy to look at desegregation with 8- years of hindsight and say what was best. But at the time, it's easy to understand why some black people saw it as a failure. Again, depending on where you live, you could argue that it's been a failure today.
"Dr. Bell did not share MLK's dream and neither do his ideological children."
Well, you're right about that. But let's be very clear, I'll bet he was a lot closer to MLK's vision than Rufo or, to be fair, most conservatives today. Yes, MLK believed in race blindness at the individual level. But he also believed in affirmative action and reparation for slavery. He also believed in Universal Basic Income for the poor (regardless of skin colour).
So let's be very clear about his too, if King were alive today, plenty of the people who just looove repeating his "content of their character" quote would treat him with just as much disdain as they treat Kendi. If not more.
Whiteness studies is not a "child" of CRT (Wikipedia is wonderful for many things, but not for use was an authoritative source on academic literature). It is a separate field of academia, devised by one of the people who contributed to the original body of work known as CRT.
CRT uses a racial lens because it was designed to look at how the legal system produced and sustained racial inequality. It was focused specifically on this narrow field. Again, I'm not arguing that CRT got all of its conclusions correct. But broadening that philosophy to encompass everything (I don't deny that some people have done this) isn't what the original work of CRT was about.
Finally, whether white flight and the closing of certain black schools led to a more tolerant society depends very much on where you live and what colour your skin is, no? It's easy to look at desegregation with 8- years of hindsight and say what was best. But at the time, it's easy to understand why some black people saw it as a failure. Again, depending on where you live, you could argue that it's been a failure today.