Critical Race Theory
Critical Race Theory
Critical Race Theory
Critical Race Theory (CRT) is a movement that studies and attempts to transform the
relationship between race and power by examining the role of race and racism within the
foundations of modern culture, as far back as the principles of Enlightenment thought that form
the basis for many modern views of equality and law; as a movement, it has moved beyond law
and has now become common in the academic disciplines of ethnic studies, political science
and education.[1]
CRT began as a response to interdisciplinary legal studies. The earliest writings on Critical
Race Theory can be traced to the works of Derrick Bell as a rejection of the belief that the legal
reforms of the Civil Rights movement positively affected both the construction and application of
laws. CRT is concerned with the idea of inescapable and inherent racism in the American legal
system, as well as the consistent application of racial subordination and discrimination in the
practice of law, with the exception of "interest-convergence" issues, in which both the white
majority and minorities profit from the expansion of rights (as argued by Bell in “Brown v. Board
of Education and the Interest-Convergence Dilemma”[2]).
CRT rejects interdisciplinary legal studies' belief in the transformative power of society. It
emphasizes the socially constructed nature of race and considers judicial conclusions to be
based on inherently racist social assumptions. Analyses of racial inequity as the social
construction of race and discrimination are present in the scholarship of such established critical
race theorists as Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, Richard Delgado, Neil
Gotanda, Cheryl I. Harris, Charles Lawrence III, Mari Matsuda, and Patricia J. Williams in the
legal field. In the field of education, notable scholars include Gloria Ladson-Billings, Laurence
Parker, Daniel Solórzano and William Tate.
Contents
[hide]
• 1 Definition
• 2 Key theoretical
elements
• 3 Applications
• 4 Criticisms
• 5 Offshoot fields
• 6 References
○ 6.1 Notes
○ 6.2 Bibliogra
phy
[edit]Definition
Critical race theory emerged in part from the milieu of Critical Legal Studies (CLS), a field of
inquiry that argues that preserving the interests of power, rather than the demands of principle
and precedent, is the guiding force behind legal judgments. CLS theorists suggest that the
existing precedents are indeterminate, allowing the judiciary wide freedom to interpret them
according to prevailing balance of power. Both CLS and Critical Race Theory scholars engage
in deconstructing extended arguments to demonstrate that legal precedents are not based on a
consistent application of legal principles. Critical Race Theory shares an overlapping literature
with both CLS and critical theory, feminist jurisprudence, and postcolonial theory.
[edit]Applications
Critical Race Theory has been applied in a variety of contexts where institutionalized oppression
of racial minorities has been litigated in courts (critical race theorists often presentamicus
curiae briefs, or critically examine the rulings of these cases).[3]
One particular application has been to hate crime and hate speech legislation. In response
to Justice Scalia's opinion in a paradigm hate speech case, R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (which
addressed cross burning as an act of hate speech), Mari Matsuda and Charles R. Lawrence III
presented a critical race theory argument against Scalia's opinion. While Scalia posits that
speech is protected independent of content, Matsuda and Lawrence argue that historical and
social context is paramount. When acts of speech are acts of intimidation and threaten violence,
backed up by a historical force, then those words become a mechanism for social control and
domination. Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Rehnquist,
Justice Kennedy, Justice Souter, and Justice Thomas joined. All 9 justices concurred in the
judgment of the Court that city's ordinance was facially invalid under theFirst Amendment.[4]
Delgado also draws on CRT in calling for a tort action for racial insults, looking to the historical
pattern of speech and the serious psychological harm inflicted on its victims as just measures
for evaluating hate speech.
Critical race theory has become especially important in education where the educational
experience and results for both children and adults are often connected to racial background.
Critical race theorists can argue that the possession of "whiteness" and property are correlated
everything from test scores to teacher ethnicity, and these results form the basis for the future
acquisition of income, wealth, health, and longevity.
[edit]Criticisms
CRT and its methodology have not gained acceptance in the mainstream legal world. African-
American attorney and author Winkfield F. Twyman, a graduate of the Harvard Law School,
investigated the impact that CRT has made in law courts by conducting a search of Westlaw to
determine the number of times this theory has been cited in rulings. As of December 2005, he
found that “out of tens of thousands of federal cases at every level — U.S. Supreme Court to
the lowest federal district court — only one judge has ever cited to ‘Critical Race Theory.’ And
that lonely cite was in one obscure case involving a challenge to New York City’s termination of
fire and police employees for participating in a parade. Locurto v. Giuliani, 269 F. Supp. 2d 368,
S.D. N.Y. (2003).” He concluded that “For all intents and purposes, Critical Race Theory is a
non-issue in the real world.”[5]
Many mainstream legal scholars of various ethnicities have criticized CRT for its use of narrative
and storytelling. Judge Richard Posner of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh
Circuit in Chicago has “label[ed] critical race theorists and postmodernists the ‘lunatic core’ of
‘radical legal egalitarianism.’” [6] He writes,
What is most arresting about critical race theory is that...it turns its back on the Western tradition
of rational inquiry, forswearing analysis for narrative. Rather than marshal logical arguments and
empirical data, critical race theorists tell stories — fictional, science-fictional, quasi-fictional,
autobiographical, anecdotal — designed to expose the pervasive and debilitating racism of
America today. By repudiating reasoned argumentation, the storytellers reinforce stereotypes
about the intellectual capacities of nonwhites.[7]
Critical Race Theorists do not dispute this allegation of a-rationality. Gloria Ladson-Billings
writing the foreword for the book Critical Race Theory in Education: All God's Children Got a
Song states that "CRT never makes claims of objectivity or rationality."[8] Derrick Bell writes that
mainstream scholars often reject lines of inquiry that seek to expose what CRT scholars believe
is inherent White supremacy.[9]
Judge Alex Kozinski, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, writes Critical Race
Theorists have constructed a philosophy which makes a valid exchange of ideas between the
various disciplines unattainable.
The radical multiculturalists' views raise insuperable barriers to mutual understanding. Consider
the Space Traders story. How does one have a meaningful dialogue with Derrick Bell? Because
his thesis is utterly untestable, one quickly reaches a dead end after either accepting or
rejecting his assertion that white Americans would cheerfully sell all blacks to the aliens. The
story is also a poke in the eye of American Jews, particularly those who risked life and limb by
actively participating in the civil rights protests of the 1960's. Bell clearly implies that this was
done out of tawdry self-interest. Perhaps most galling is Bell's insensitivity in making the symbol
of Jewish hypocrisy the little girl who perished in the Holocaust — as close to a saint as Jews
have. A Jewish professor who invoked the name of Rosa Parks so derisively would be bitterly
condemned — and rightly so.[10]
[edit]Offshoot fields
Within Critical Race Theory, nuances have emerged that take into consideration gender,
linguistic and immigration oppression. See for example, Critical Race Feminism (CRF), Latino
Critical Race Studies (LatCrit) [11] Asian American Critical Race Studies (AsianCrit) and
American Indian Critical Race Studies (sometimes called TribalCrit).
Critical Race Theory has also begun to spawn research drawing upon its methods to look at
circumstances outside the United States.[12]
[edit]References
[edit]Notes
5. ^ http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article4783.html The
Lightness of Critical Race Theory
12.^ E.g., Levin, Mark, The Wajin’s Whiteness: Law and Race
Privilege in Japan (February 1, 2008). Horitsu Jiho, Vol. 80, No.
2, 2008. Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=1551462
[edit]Bibliography
Parker, Laurence, Donna Deyhle, and Sofia Villenas. eds. Race Is,
Race Ain't: Critical Race Theory and Qualitative Studies in
Education. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999.
Bottom of Form
• Main page
• Contents
• Featured content
• Current events
• Random article
Interaction
• About Wikipedia
• Community portal
• Recent changes
• Contact Wikipedia
• Donate to Wikipedia
• Help
Toolbox
Print/export
Teori Kritis Race (CRT) adalah gerakan yang mempelajari dan cuba untuk mengubah
hubungan antara bangsa dan kekuasaan dengan menyemak peranan bangsa dan
perkauman dalam dasar-dasar budaya moden, sejauh semula sebagai prinsip-prinsip
Pencerahan pemikiran yang membentuk dasar untuk pandangan moden kesetaraan
dan undang-undang; sebagai satu gerakan, itu telah bergerak di luar undang-undang
dan sekarang sudah menjadi biasa dalam disiplin akademik kajian etnik, ilmu politik dan
pendidikan. [1]
CRT bermula sebagai tanggapan terhadap pengajian undang-undang
interdisipliner. Tulisan-tulisan paling awal di Race Teori Kritis boleh ditelusuri terhadap
karya-karya Derrick Bell sebagai penolakan terhadap keyakinan bahawa pembaharuan
undang-undang gerakan Hak-hak Sipil yang terkena dampak positif baik pembinaan
dan pelaksanaan undang-undang. CRT berkaitan dengan idea yang melekat tak
terhindarkan dan perkauman dalam sistem undang-undang Amerika, serta pelaksanaan
secara konsisten subordinasi perkauman dan diskriminasi dalam amalan undang-
undang, dengan pengecualian daripada "bunga-konvergensi" masalah, di mana kedua-
dua putih majoriti dan minoriti keuntungan dari perluasan hak-hak (seperti yang
dikatakan oleh Bell dalam "Brown versus Dewan Pendidikan dan Dilema konvergensi-
bunga" [2] ).
CRT menolak 'kajian undang-undang interdisipliner keyakinan pada kekuatan
transformatif masyarakat. Ini menekankan sifat sosial dibina dari bangsa dan
mempertimbangkan kesimpulan undang-undang harus didasarkan pada andaian sosial
inheren rasis. Analisis ketimpangan perkauman sebagai pembinaan sosial dan
diskriminasi perkauman yang hadir dalam biasiswa seperti bangsa teoretisi kritis
ditubuhkan sebagai Derrick Bell , Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw , Richard Delgado , Neil
Gotanda , Cheryl I. Harris , Charles Lawrence III , Mari Matsuda , dan Patricia J.
Williams dalam bidang undang-undang. Di bidang pendidikan, ulama terkemuka
termasuk Gloria Ladson-Billings , Laurence Parker ,Daniel Solorzano dan William Tate .
Isi
[ hide ]
• 1 Definisi
• 2 unsur kunci
teori
• 3 Aplikasi
• 4 Kritikan
• 5 cabang bidang
• 6 Rujukan
○ 6,1 Nota
○ 6,2
Bibliografi
[ sunting ] Definisi
Artikel ini tidak ada maklumat tentang definisi sebenarnya dari
CRT.Keprihatinan ini telah dirakam di laman perbincangan di mana
mungkin dibicarakan apakah atau tidak untuk memasukkan
maklumat tersebut. (Julai 2010)
• Laman Utama
• Isi
• Ciri-ciri kandungan
• Warung Kopi
• Artikel Rawak
Interaksi
• Perihal Wikipedia
• Community portal
• Perubahan terkini
• Perihal Wikipedia
• Perihal Wikipedia
• Membantu
Tempat peralatan
Cetak / eksport
Laman ini diubah buat kali terakhir pada 03:34 9 2010 pada Julai.
Kandungan disediakan di bawah Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
License ; syarat tambahan mungkin berlaku. Lihat Syarat Penggunaan untuk
butiran.
Wikipedia ® adalah tanda perdagangan berdaftar Wikimedia Foundation, Inc ,
sebuah organisasi non-profit.
Hubungi kami