It has nothing to do with Marxism. Honestly, can’t you morons come up with something better than the same old same old?
...Critical race theory has not been around for 100 years...
It seems that
Western Civilization just wouldn't buy into the beautiful Utopia that 20th Century Marxists had been desperately trying to sell them.
So
"Critical Theory" was created by Frankfurt School ideologues and specifically designed to convince Western Capitalists to join in their Marxist Utopia.
It all began in Frankfurt Germany in 1923. Caution; reading the links below will scare any sane, rational, freedom loving person to death...
It's pure Orwellian.
Herbert Marcuse (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
The Frankfurt School has had an enormous impact on philosophy as well as social and political theory in the United States and around the world. In the 1960s Marcuse ascended to prominence and became one of the best known philosophers and social theorists in the world.
Frankfurt School and Critical Theory | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The Frankfurt School, known more appropriately as Critical Theory, is a philosophical and sociological movement spread across many universities around the world. It was originally located at the Institute for Social Research (Institut für Sozialforschung), an attached institute at the Goethe University in Frankfurt, Germany. The Institute was founded in 1923 thanks to a donation by Felix Weil with the aim of developing Marxist studies in Germany. After 1933, the Nazis forced its closure, and the Institute was moved to the United States where it found hospitality at Columbia University in New York City.
You people need to stop being so damn gullible and start researching the ideo-political propaganda and indoctrination that you're being spoon fed by radical ideologues, universities and the MSM...This aint rocket surgery boys and girls.
There is a difference between Critical Theory and critical theory.
A critical theory (lower-case) is a way of examining society by reassessing its institutions and baked-in ways of doing things, in order to allow its people more freedom from the parts of society that are keeping them down. It's a broad term that can apply to lots of different aspects of society, so lots of different groups of people use critical theories to develop their ideologies, and get their message across.
Critical Theory, in initial caps, refers specifically to the thinkers of the Frankfurt School, who were using those methods to combine politics with psychology and reassess the whole world along the lines of Marx and Freud. They were not the only ones who used critical theory to develop their Critical Theory. Get it?
I know it's somewhat stupid and confusing, but historians do this a lot. You come across it also when you're discussing fascists and Fascists, or democratic and republican compared to Democratic and Republican.
So, yeah.
[Critical Theory] and [Critical Race Theory]
- both use -
(critical theory)
as a template to form their own ideas,
but they're not the same thing.
If you want to get super-nerdy, here's some more about it.
Semantics. Critical Race theory is correct. I mean we can look at the 3/5th's compromise to start with to prove the correctness of this theory. I suggest people study the theory and stop listening to right wing whites with an agenda.
Chattel slavery is an ineffecienct system
Racism is not important to society. Without black america, the rest of us would be better off
The south would be better off if they never had slaves
Low wage workers are always more effecient, irrelevant of their color.
The narcissm required to believe that you as descendants of illiterate slaves are key to this country is just absurd.
THe founding sin is the genocide of the native americans. Black slavery is just a quirk of our histroy. And whites do not think about you nearly as much as you imagiine. THey do not give a **** about you. Which makes critical race theory absrud. Most of the shit they do, you never entered their mind. Especially in the north, where all the power is.
Sure, yeah, right. Tell that lie to one of your stormfront buddies because:
ALL RISE!
This mornings lesson:
If Slavery was so Unimportant Why Was This Done?
The major problem with the excuses is that America had every chance not to implement slavery. We are told how the so-called founders of this country created the way to end slavery when they wrote the constitution. Many will cite the fact they made the importation of slaves illegal by 1808 as evidence. But refusing to stop importing slaves did not end the slaving business in the United States. What it produced was an original American industry-slave breeding.
"During the fifty-three years from the prohibition of the African slave trade by federal law in 1808 to the debacle of the Confederate States of America in 1861, the Southern economy depended on the functioning of a slave-breeding industry, of which Virginia was the number-one supplier."
Ned & Constance Sublette, "The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry"
You see, if America had continued to import slaves, it would have diluted the market thereby driving down the costs of slaves. Slave sellers could not have this. So instead of the truth, we are told that “our nearer to God than thee” founders in all their benevolent glory, looked towards a future whereby slavery would be no more. According to some, the so-called founders had a dream whereby little black boys and little black girls would no longer be enslaved because of the color of their skin. This is the story we are supposed to believe. However, reality does not show that.
“In fact, most American slaves were not kidnapped on another continent. Though over 12.7 million Africans were forced onto ships to the Western hemisphere, estimates only have 400,000-500,000 landing in present-day America. How then to account for the four million black slaves who were tilling fields in 1860? “The South,” the Sublettes write, “did not only produce tobacco, rice, sugar, and cotton as commodities for sale; it produced people.” Slavers called slave-breeding “natural increase,” but there was nothing natural about producing slaves; it took scientific management. Thomas Jefferson bragged to George Washington that the birth of black children was increasing Virginia’s capital stock by four percent annually.”
Ned & Constance Sublette, "The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry"
To be blunt, America had slave breeding “factories” where slaves were forced to breed. I call them factories but in most cases they are described as farms. These “farms” generally had at least a 2:1 female to male ratio. In some states, slave production was the number 1 industry. Virginia led the nation in slave production and PRESIDENT Thomas Jefferson was one of the main producers.
This industry included perhaps the first employer-based health care program. Female slaves were the first people in America to get free health care. I do not say this to be funny because the reason why that happened was both sad and simple; after the importation of slaves was made illegal, white dependence on slave labor hinged on the continued births of healthy children. After importation was made illegal, the only way left to maintain the system was by increasing the number of slaves through births. Due to this, a black women’s ability to reproduce was of the utmost economic importance to southern planters and to the slave breeders.
“By a conservative estimate, in 1860 the total value of American slaves was $4 billion, far more than the gold and silver then circulating nationally ($228.3 million, “most of it in the North,” the authors add), total currency ($435.4 million), and even the value of the South’s total farmland ($1.92 billion). Slaves were, to slavers, worth more than everything else they could imagine combined.”
Ned & Constance Sublette, "The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry"
In today’s money slaves in 1860 were worth over 127 billion dollars. According to the Sublettes that is a conservative estimate, meaning the amount could be even more. In 1860 the total value of slaves was 17- and one-half times more than the money circulating in the United States economy. Slaves were worth more than the gold, silver, total U.S. currency, plus all the farmland in the South combined in 1860 yet did not receive a dime. Remember that slaves were considered property. Because they were, wealthy slaveowners looking for a way to get additional capital to buy more slaves came up with an idea- slave backed securities. Your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Slaveowners securitized slavery. Cornell professors Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman detailed how it was done in an article published by the Chicago Sun-Times on its website dated March 7, 2014. This is from the article:
In the 1830s, powerful Southern slaveowners wanted to import capital into their states so they could buy more slaves. They came up with a new, two-part idea: mortgaging slaves; and then turning the mortgages into bonds that could be marketed all over the world.
First, American planters organized new banks, usually in new states like Mississippi and Louisiana. Drawing up lists of slaves for collateral, the planters then mortgaged them to the banks they had created, enabling themselves to buy additional slaves to expand cotton production. To provide capital for those loans, the banks sold bonds to investors from around the globe — London, New York, Amsterdam, Paris. The bond buyers, many of whom lived in countries where slavery was illegal, didn’t own individual slaves — just bonds backed by their value. Planters’ mortgage payments paid the interest and the principle on these bond payments. Enslaved human beings had been, in modern financial lingo, “securitized.”
As slave-backed mortgages became paper bonds, everybody profited — except, obviously, enslaved African Americans whose forced labor repaid owners’ mortgages. But investors owed a piece of slave-earned income. Older slave states such as Maryland and Virginia sold slaves to the new cotton states, at securitization-inflated prices, resulting in slave asset bubble. Cotton factor firms like the now-defunct Lehman Brothers — founded in Alabama — became wildly successful. Lehman moved to Wall Street, and for all these firms, every transaction in slave-earned money flowing in and out of the U.S. earned Wall Street firms a fee.
The infant American financial industry nourished itself on profits taken from financing slave traders, cotton brokers and underwriting slave-backed bonds. But though slavery ended in 1865, in the years after the Civil War, black entrepreneurs would find themselves excluded from a financial system originally built on their bodies.
Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, "American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves"
Now shut your mouth racist. We did build this country and for people who don't think about us, there sure are a lot of threads from whites here bitching moaning and whining about blacks.
