Critical Race Theory is similar to what Norman Finklestein called the Holocaust Industry. Terms like racism and antisemetism are being used as smear tactic to silence criticism of bad behavior. Murray engages in similar behavior himself while hypocritically lecturing woke sorts for doing the same. Many that claim to speak for western civilization follow middle eastern religion Christianity . They peddle myths that the west is based on the myths of the Bible and ignore Christians oppressed the brilliant ideas of ancient pagan Rome and Greece that western civilization was actually founded on (see dark age... aka a 1000 years of Christians behaving like Taliban)
Marxists in the 1920s were trying to explain why the worker revolutions predicted by Marx didn't happen. After the Russian Revolution Marxists expected other dominoes, including Germany and Italy, to fall. But they didn't. So the question became why not? An Italian, Antonio Gramsci, came up with the idea of a Cultural Hegemony whereby the ruling classes used cultural institutions to maintain power rather then force. In the 1930s Marxist academics and intellectuals in Frankfurt Germany began to consider how the ideas of Marx applied in societies of increasing affluence. They developed the idea that the primary obstruction to human liberation were societal structures and cultural assumptions. In other words, the "oppressors" convince the "oppressed" that the way things were are they way they're supposed to be. These ideas influenced the development of Critical Legal Theory in the United States which hypothesized that the law is intertwined with social issues and must have inherent social biases. Subgroups that sprung from Critical Legal Theory include Critical Feminist Theory and Critical Race Theory. Critical Race Theory (CRT) was developed in the 1970s by several legal scholars including Derrick Bell, Kimberle Crenshaw, Richard Delgado and Patricia Williams.
good historical context, critical theory exposes structures of oppresion. these schemas were abused into agenda and identity politics for the sake of agressive cultural upheavel
CRITICAL THEORY ( CT) is the predecessor to CRITICAL RACE THEORY (CRT) CT used class warfare to usher in socialism Marxism and communism. CRT uses demographic strife to usher in socialism Marxism and communism.
I remember when I studied history and wanted to do my dissertation on Hegel, I was told I would never get a first writing about that topic. I did it anyway because I wanted to. The person who got the highest mark did their dissertation on the lesbian feminist movement's involved in the anti-nuclear movement. It's not that you shouldn't be able to do that, but it goes to show academics really do reward those who answer narrow questions over more universal ones.
At 1:09 you’ve inserted the wrong picture. Douglas Murray is referencing Niall Ferguson the historian, not Neil Ferguson the epidemiologist. Niall and Neil are pronounced the same.
Paul Reilly, they are usually pronounced the same. Individuals may choose to pronounce their names differently course. It's the spelling that differs from English to Gaelic.
The danger of academics who are also activists trying to ‘improve the world’ is that you can’t rely on their findings, and they poison the debate amongst the straight dealing academics.
@@jacksonkisling1684I think he's just saying a subset of academia are guilty of confirmation bias. My problem is that the whole project of postmodernism being deconstruction of grand narratives and focus on minority voices is a good thing as long as it remains grounded in knowing the difference between the exception and the rule. Too often it feels like all flavors of postmodernist activists' opinion boils down to trying to make the exception the rule. Examples include making a national news story of officer shooting of a certain racial minority when the data says it happens no more commonly for them than any other race. Or standards of care fast-tracking gender confused kids to transitioning and then the Cass report comes out. Minority voices should be heard and considered, but not if it means science and data takes a back seat to whatever the popular social project of the day is.
There is plenty of evidence if you research it. A good start is the article The Crisis of from the Americsn Scholastic Society that gives numerous documented examples.
-Richard Delgado, Jean Stefancic (2011). "So we gathered at that convent for two and a half days, around a table in an austere room with stained glass windows and crucifixes here and there - an odd place for a bunch of Marxists- and worked out a set of principles." "Then we went our separate ways. Most of us who were there have gone one to become prominent critical race theorists , including Kim Crenshaw, who spoke at the Iowa conference, as well as Mari Matsuda and Charles Lawrence, who are both here in spirit. Derrick Bell, who was doing critical race theory long before it had a name, was at the Madison workshop and has been something of an intellectual godfather of the movement. So we were off and running."
I've watched this interview before, and I rather like the young guy's laid back way of speaking. And I always love Douglas. But I notice by the other comments that obviously this interviewer must normally attract highly intellectual cynics. Nothing down below that I can click a like to. Don't care, I like this conversation, between these two.
To explain to an engineer; AS an engineer; take natural sciences / disciplines taught at universities and engineering schools. Yes, but their job is to find, analyse, synthesise, and pass on the general and deep knowledge onto the students. You don't want your university professors barging into actual engineering companies force-implementing their new findings and assaulting anyone daring to challenge their new production / automation / calculation ideas. That level of implementation is up to the industry themselves. Imagine if they bred engineering students to run around naked unless FEM structural analysis is implemented at their workplace?! The CEO: "but we're a tiny heating company; all we do is measure your heat losses and suggest how to improve insulation and heating/cooling systems in buildings!" The new employees: WE MUST STRUCTURAL FEM!!! WE MUST STRUCTURAL FEM!
@timpayne7676 it was chosen as the default approach to not just race but also logic, scholarship and the role of citizen, student, employee patient etc from protected individual civil rights to an assigned collective status.based on inherited traits. I am outraged because it presented itself as benign and bottom up while being applied top down through suddenly exploding beurocracies. It was applied so aggressively in my own field that the mission of our programs
CRT has worsened race relations and unfortunately that's on purpose. . CRT like CT is the Trojan horse to usher in socialism Marxism and communism. It's devastatingly effective because it's predecessor CT was devastatingly effective.
Muarry is an unprincipled/ He's just a secular version of Ben Shaprio. Talks about the absolutelness of free speech, opposes woke types that smear huge numbers of people as "racist", and je opposes cancel culture. Tthen if someone criticizes Israel, supports crackdowns on free speech, smears huge numbers of people as antisemetic, and supports cancel culture.
My favorite guaranteed laugh was always to browse the LARGE critical theory and commodity aesthetics SECTIONS in the city lights bookstore basement when I "lived" in San Francisco.
and what would expedite the popularity of a fringe group like the kkk ? theories / movements promoting the organising of people based on race. and who's doing that now ???
One has to be careful that the antiracism that is alleged to be the point of Critical Race Theory does not itself become simply a different take on KKK-like inhumane attitudes toward people, just a different group of them.
There is an idea that Whiteness studies (and Critical Race theory) also is a form of Post-Marxism born out of the position in which White Working Men helped Reaganism in 1980... (it could be a political issue in which because of ideology Working men lost the position on the narrative of Marxist ideologues (and probably a reason why they are so despised in academia)) This is a basis... Before this issues, Marxists romantize the Working Class (in Which the vast majority were white in the USA)... This is the type of people for whom ideologies (and dogmatic doctrines) are more important than reality... Marxism couldn't resolve this in ideology (althought it can) but not for radical ideologues
It should go mainstream Julius Evola's conception about race which is very interesting : The Myth of Blood, Racial Education, Synthesis of Race etc. He had critized fascist and national socialist (nazi) conception of race : Fascism from the Right, Notes on the Third Reich.
Reminds me of a John Mulaney joke. Where his friend asked him, "If you saw Hitler walking down the street wouldn't you kill him?" and John was like "You mean if I saw a guy dressed like Hitler? No, because that's an actor. Or do you mean if I saw a really old guy that looked like Hitler? I'm not going to kill him either, because I am often wrong."
The very end is spot on. Just look at Hamas and those like them. Read their charter -- Himmler wouldn't write it any different. Their origins in Muslim Brotherhood go straight to the N..is. But they don't wear jackboots, their clothes is different, they live in a different place, and their skin is somewhat darker. Which is why few see them for what they really are.
1:09 I suspect that's the wrong picture. That's Neal Ferguson the epidemiologist. I would guess Douglas Murray is talking about Niall Ferguson the historian.
Loved listening to this BUT the american interviewer has a passing resemblance to Douglas Murray that I would occasionally get a little confused whenever the angle switched between whoever was speaking 😅😅😅
No. Streets are the natural home of activism. "Activism" is something people without power or authority undertake in order to be heard. This is why majority of activists are between ages 14 and 20, or, if they're not, people belonging to a small marginal interest group (typically a group of residents of some rural area opposing some industrial project). But once you are in possession of your full faculties, once you've established yourself in a position of authority and / or power (those two don't always come together) it's time to pull on your Big Boy pants (or... Big Girl skirt...) and start doing serious work while regarding consequences for your actions. A bunch of kids protesting that poor poor immigrants aren't being let in, is one level of responsibility. Politicians sitting while their Chief of Police tells them "we're outnumbered" (London), is a WHOLE DIFFERENT BALL GAME.
@@codinghusky5196 what on earth do you think parliaments actually are. activism has many forms. the most common understanding being grass roots demonstration. however, in its most productive and purist form it takes place in parliaments. anyway, this is all besides the point. in a properly functioning society, activism should not take place in universities (a place of truth seeking). nor, the media (objective information distribution), nor the judiciary for that matter (enforcement of the letter of the law) unfortunately, they are all now hotbeds of activism, and our societies are staring to pay the price.
Critical Race Theory is the Critical Theory of Race. In other words, it is Marxism. Marxism is inherently activist. "The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Marxism is not only fundamentally activist, it teaches that there is no such thing as neutrality, in other words, in Marxism we are all activists. As a result Marxism projects its activist tendencies onto its opposition. A perfect example of this is the example from clubhouse. Bret Weinstein says he's an evolutionary biologist. The Marxists respond that he's a eugenicist. Why? Because they are projecting their activism onto Bret. If Bret were in fact an activist in the field of Evolutionary Biology that would make him a eugenicist. The problem with Critical Race Theory is the same. They are acting in an activist manner to root out racism which is fine up until they point they succeed. When they push beyond equal rights before the law people begin to push back but remember there is no such thing as neutrality is Marxism. When you push back against the excesses of Critical Race Theory they interpret that, not as an attempt to establish neutrality but as an activist push for white supremacy. This holds true with LGBTQ and women's rights as well. Any attempt to establish neutrality will be interpreted by Marxists as straight, cis, Christian, white, male activism because Marxists fundamentally rejects any and all notions of neutrality.
I don't disagree with your thoughts on marxist projection, but I'm not sure why you think the opposition Bret faced in that clubhouse discussion was marxist in nature, or that the opposing individuals were themselves marxists. I listened to the entire thing - which was like 3 or 4 hours long - and while it's been a while, I don't remember getting the impression that this was the case. The woman in question was a special kind of awful. Entitled, rude, arrogant, dishonest, and intellectually speaking, a particularly stupid bitch. She bullied her way onto the stage, where she proceeded to bully everyone else she could. And when she somehow got control of the stage, she booted everyone off, including the dude who started the room. It was appalling--she was an absolute tyrant. Anyone with a functional sense of fairness would have a visceral detest to what occurred. After she forcedd her way into absolute control and brought her friends up to fill the stage, I could only listen for a little while longer. They were just endlessly proud of themselves for disrupting the conversation. Such disruptions are indeed a weapon in the woke arsenal, and if it was intentionally deployed as such, I think it would be something like a low-level soldier just following orders. I seriously doubt she had any understanding of the higher-level stuff going on. She was an entitled bitch, and disrupting the conversation satisfied her entitlement. I don't think there's really any more to it than that. But of course, if you have further insights I'd be happy to hear you out..
"Looking for the narrative of the forgotten and oppressed" the point here is from what time you have to look at this?... What age?... and were is not visible if the age is closer? (For example for women and blacks)... Since the first 19th century there DuBois spoke... Also other blacks corresponded with Whites (for example Thomas Jefferson) (Benjamin Banneker (November 9, 1731 - October 19, 1806) was an African-American naturalist, mathematician, astronomer and almanac author. A landowner, he also worked as a surveyor and farmer.)... Actually, Who are the opressed? also... Blacks and Women... But before were Working class (mostly White in England) in marxist terms: Now not?
"Anyone who has been in a Philosophy department in the last decades..." Not so fast there buddy! The top Philosophy departments are still devoted to analytic Philosophy, which wants nothing to do with Post-Modernism.
10:30 Give it up, Lex. The Snak, Krackle, Pok resurgence in nowhere in sight at this stage of modernity. Seriously, white bed linen with badly formed eye holes aren't even good cosplay at this historical epoch.
Lex is a computer scientist who did his PhD on using AI for identity authentication. He is an empathic, very mild mannered personality who greatly annoys some people. Although be aware that he has a black belt in Brazilian jiu-jitsu and is a big fan of Mixed Martial Arts (MMA)! But seriously, he's well known for his belief that love conquers all. After the twentieth century, that's an astonishingly optimistic opinion to say the least. But I do enjoy and learn from his podcasts because he almost never injects his own opinions into an interview, seeking only to clarify what his guest is saying. And he can be extremely tenacious (but always polite) in forcing his guests to clarify anything unclear. So he is not a pushover.
One reason is that when he asks a question, he allows the person to answer. He doesn't interrupt or try to yell over him and then dismiss them by abruptly ending the interview. You can actually learn something about the person's ideas when you watch his interviews.
Right there with universally agreed that segregation but equal was unconstitutional and we thank the supreme Court for overturning that law. But for some reason post Jim Crow post civil Rights movement it seems a new liberal wing of left-wing people want to go more further than that. Now we all agree and have sympathy for the notion of a color blind society. Just like we don't excuse the ku Klux Klan or other white supremacist groups for their rhetoric we should not excuse black people who want to use the same rhetoric and call white people racist 24/7 just because one white guy disagrees with another black guy on the more common issues.
@@attiepollard7847 Douglas Murray is an apologist for western civilization, excusing the racism of the west since 1492, by saying every civilization had slaves, every country invaded other countries, I am saying the extent of evil perpetrated by the white man exceeds the evil done by other races. There can be differences of opinion on this. Douglas keeps saying poc are playing games. It is not, it is ppl want to be free. For example, the intellectuals of the west have written about the iq of the races and ranking them. The east had no such developed race theory like this. There is something inherently evil in the west. I don't know if it's because of christianity or basic anglo saxon culture. That makes me an eternal enemy of Douglas. I have read 2 of his books. i detest him
Douglas Murray is an apologist for western civilization, excusing the racism of the west since 1492, by saying every civilization had slaves, every country invaded other countries, I am saying the extent of evil perpetrated by the white man exceeds the evil done by other races. There can be differences of opinion on this. Douglas keeps saying poc are playing games. It is not, it is ppl want to be free. For example, the intellectuals of the west have written about the iq of the races and ranking them. The east had no such developed race theory like this. There is something inherently evil in the west. I don't know if it's because of christianity or basic anglo saxon culture. That makes me an eternal enemy of Douglas. I have read 2 of his books. i detest him
I think you are missing the critical link in this comparison between Marxism and CRT. You are correct that one stratifies society by social class and the other by race, but once that slight of hand has been made, the arguments become the same. CRT is reconstituted Marxism which makes it difficult to refute because of the obvious long history of oppression along a racial divide. What CRT conveniently ignores is the even longer history of oppression among competing tribes irrespective of race. What Marx got wrong was he developed his theory within the context of social classes within the Industrial Revolution. CRT makes these same erroneous claims based on race as the defining feature of corrosive human interaction. They are both wrong; not in their observations, but in their conclusions. Yes, humans have been oppressive toward each other for 40,000 years, but it is tribal in nature not racial nor social classes even though at times it can appear to be both.
@@elderhiker7787 I think you are missing the main point, namely that Marx never claimed that all human societies have always been divided by class. Only those based on private property were so defined, specifically in his Communist Manifesto, as classic slave societies, feudalism and capitalism. Indeed, his extensive writings on ancient oriental despotisms stress that they were founded on an absence of private property and social classes, where the state owned all the factors of production. Engels, in his 'Origins of the Family', uses the terms 'primitive communism' to define and describe classless tribal societies that were based on collective ownership of property. CRT arose as a reaction against 'classic' Marxism, replacing class with a politics of 'identity' - race, gender, life style and what have have you, these being seen as an alternative means of destabilising western liberal capitalism, while leaving intact the class privileges of those who advocate it. The result is what we have seen on the campuses of western elite universities...a mass mobilisation of the most privileged young people on our planet in support of a movement - Hamas - that in its Covenant, articles 17, 22, 32 cites, as did Hitler in his Mein Kampf, the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, as proof a world Jewish communist conspiracy, and in Article 7, again as did Hitler, calls for the extermination of the world's Jews.
Big miss by Douglas, who neglected to go back far enough in philosophy and thought - the mid 1800s and the early 1900s - where the foundations were laid. Douglas seems to think the origin of the phrase is the important thing, but it's not. The genesis of the thought foundations on which defined CRT , and which allowed critical mass to bloom, occurred much earlier than the 70s. I'd probably hate to hear when he thinks the foundations for the Industrial Revolution began.
Douglas Murray founded the Centre for Social Cohesion in 2007, which became part of the Henry Jackson Society, The Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC) was a British think tank with its headquarters in London. Founded in 2007 as part of another London think tank, Civitas, it became independent in 2008 and was eventually subsumed into a separate London think tank, the Henry Jackson Society. Here is a man who sees what is needful and has confidence to get it done without whining. Some Scots are always prompted to whine about the English, it's part of their upbringing.
Is critical race theory an existential threat to the West?
For more liberty clips, subscribe to my channel and click the bell!
Critical Race Theory is similar to what Norman Finklestein called the Holocaust Industry. Terms like racism and antisemetism are being used as smear tactic to silence criticism of bad behavior. Murray engages in similar behavior himself while hypocritically lecturing woke sorts for doing the same.
Many that claim to speak for western civilization follow middle eastern religion Christianity . They peddle myths that the west is based on the myths of the Bible and ignore Christians oppressed the brilliant ideas of ancient pagan Rome and Greece that western civilization was actually founded on (see dark age... aka a 1000 years of Christians behaving like Taliban)
Marxists in the 1920s were trying to explain why the worker revolutions predicted by Marx didn't happen. After the Russian Revolution Marxists expected other dominoes, including Germany and Italy, to fall. But they didn't. So the question became why not?
An Italian, Antonio Gramsci, came up with the idea of a Cultural Hegemony whereby the ruling classes used cultural institutions to maintain power rather then force.
In the 1930s Marxist academics and intellectuals in Frankfurt Germany began to consider how the ideas of Marx applied in societies of increasing affluence. They developed the idea that the primary obstruction to human liberation were societal structures and cultural assumptions.
In other words, the "oppressors" convince the "oppressed" that the way things were are they way they're supposed to be.
These ideas influenced the development of Critical Legal Theory in the United States which hypothesized that the law is intertwined with social issues and must have inherent social biases. Subgroups that sprung from Critical Legal Theory include Critical Feminist Theory and Critical Race Theory.
Critical Race Theory (CRT) was developed in the 1970s by several legal scholars including Derrick Bell, Kimberle Crenshaw, Richard Delgado and Patricia Williams.
good historical context, critical theory exposes structures of oppresion. these schemas were abused into agenda and identity politics for the sake of agressive cultural upheavel
Wow what a great summary! Thank you!
Critical theories only try to destroy the existing order.
I was disappointed with Douglas’s answer. People need to connect CRT to DEI programs.
Existing order...so you admit there is such thing as white privilege?
Yep
Absolutely.
CRITICAL THEORY ( CT) is the predecessor to CRITICAL RACE THEORY (CRT)
CT used class warfare to usher in socialism Marxism and communism.
CRT uses demographic strife to usher in socialism Marxism and communism.
You're forgetting that it finds its origin in the Critical Theory of the Frankfurt School.
Herbert Marcuse was such a delight
I remember when I studied history and wanted to do my dissertation on Hegel, I was told I would never get a first writing about that topic. I did it anyway because I wanted to. The person who got the highest mark did their dissertation on the lesbian feminist movement's involved in the anti-nuclear movement. It's not that you shouldn't be able to do that, but it goes to show academics really do reward those who answer narrow questions over more universal ones.
At 1:09 you’ve inserted the wrong picture. Douglas Murray is referencing Niall Ferguson the historian, not Neil Ferguson the epidemiologist. Niall and Neil are pronounced the same.
Not usually pronounced the same. But in this case?
@@paulreilly3904 they're pronounced the same. Neil is English and Niall is Gaelic
They are not usually pronounced the same, but they can be. Niall is usually pronounced Ny-all. I have a close relative with this name.
Paul Reilly, they are usually pronounced the same. Individuals may choose to pronounce their names differently course. It's the spelling that differs from English to Gaelic.
CRT is to race relations what communism is to a thriving economy.
Communism came about watching Englishmen slaving under Imperialism…Engels owned textile mills in Germany and England.
The danger of academics who are also activists trying to ‘improve the world’ is that you can’t rely on their findings, and they poison the debate amongst the straight dealing academics.
If you're going to accuse people of dishonesty in academia then you need evidence.
@@jacksonkisling1684I think he's just saying a subset of academia are guilty of confirmation bias.
My problem is that the whole project of postmodernism being deconstruction of grand narratives and focus on minority voices is a good thing as long as it remains grounded in knowing the difference between the exception and the rule.
Too often it feels like all flavors of postmodernist activists' opinion boils down to trying to make the exception the rule.
Examples include making a national news story of officer shooting of a certain racial minority when the data says it happens no more commonly for them than any other race. Or standards of care fast-tracking gender confused kids to transitioning and then the Cass report comes out.
Minority voices should be heard and considered, but not if it means science and data takes a back seat to whatever the popular social project of the day is.
There is plenty of evidence if you research it. A good start is the article The Crisis of from the Americsn Scholastic Society that gives numerous documented examples.
@@athurmathews8767 just saying "do your own research" is not adequate. If you are the one making the accusation, the burden of proof is on you.
I think most of the legit somewhat politically neutral social studies have been driven out of academia.
-Richard Delgado, Jean Stefancic (2011).
"So we gathered at that convent for two and a half days, around a table in an austere room with stained glass windows and crucifixes here and there
- an odd place for a bunch of Marxists-
and worked out a set of principles."
"Then we went our separate ways. Most of us who were there have gone one to become prominent
critical race theorists
, including Kim Crenshaw, who spoke at the Iowa conference, as well as Mari Matsuda and Charles Lawrence, who are both here in spirit. Derrick Bell, who was doing
critical race theory
long before it had a name, was at the Madison workshop and has been something of an intellectual godfather of the movement.
So we were off and running."
I've watched this interview before, and I rather like the young guy's laid back way of speaking. And I always love Douglas.
But I notice by the other comments that obviously this interviewer must normally attract highly intellectual cynics. Nothing down below that I can click a like to.
Don't care, I like this conversation, between these two.
To explain to an engineer; AS an engineer; take natural sciences / disciplines taught at universities and engineering schools.
Yes, but their job is to find, analyse, synthesise, and pass on the general and deep knowledge onto the students.
You don't want your university professors barging into actual engineering companies force-implementing their new findings and assaulting anyone daring to challenge their new production / automation / calculation ideas. That level of implementation is up to the industry themselves. Imagine if they bred engineering students to run around naked unless FEM structural analysis is implemented at their workplace?!
The CEO: "but we're a tiny heating company; all we do is measure your heat losses and suggest how to improve insulation and heating/cooling systems in buildings!"
The new employees: WE MUST STRUCTURAL FEM!!! WE MUST STRUCTURAL FEM!
By what metric has the imposition of CRT lessen̈ed racism, or improved anything at all?
Can you tell me by what metric CRT has been imposed? Why are you outraged?
@timpayne7676 it was chosen as the default approach to not just race but also logic, scholarship and the role of citizen, student, employee patient etc from protected individual civil rights to an assigned collective status.based on inherited traits. I am outraged because it presented itself as benign and bottom up while being applied top down through suddenly exploding beurocracies. It was applied so aggressively in my own field that the mission of our programs
Was flipped upside down.
@@margaretcadogan5199 how was CRT applied in your field? “It was chosen as the default approach” How? What does that mean?
CRT has worsened race relations and unfortunately that's on purpose. . CRT like CT is the Trojan horse to usher in socialism Marxism and communism. It's devastatingly effective because it's predecessor CT was devastatingly effective.
The photo insert was wrong Ferguson!
Murray is always worth listening to, especially when at his best. Also, none of my best friends are activists
Muarry is an unprincipled/ He's just a secular version of Ben Shaprio. Talks about the absolutelness of free speech, opposes woke types that smear huge numbers of people as "racist", and je opposes cancel culture. Tthen if someone criticizes Israel, supports crackdowns on free speech, smears huge numbers of people as antisemetic, and supports cancel culture.
My favorite guaranteed laugh was always to browse the LARGE critical theory and commodity aesthetics SECTIONS in the city lights bookstore basement when I "lived" in San Francisco.
and what would expedite the popularity of a fringe group like the kkk ? theories / movements promoting the organising of people based on race. and who's doing that now ???
You are the best. Great conversation and always illuminating...
One has to be careful that the antiracism that is alleged to be the point of Critical Race Theory does not itself become simply a different take on KKK-like inhumane attitudes toward people, just a different group of them.
CRT = MARXIST IDEOLOGY
It already has
That what it is exactly.
There is an idea that Whiteness studies (and Critical Race theory) also is a form of Post-Marxism born out of the position in which White Working Men helped Reaganism in 1980... (it could be a political issue in which because of ideology Working men lost the position on the narrative of Marxist ideologues (and probably a reason why they are so despised in academia)) This is a basis... Before this issues, Marxists romantize the Working Class (in Which the vast majority were white in the USA)... This is the type of people for whom ideologies (and dogmatic doctrines) are more important than reality... Marxism couldn't resolve this in ideology (althought it can) but not for radical ideologues
It should go mainstream Julius Evola's conception about race which is very interesting : The Myth of Blood, Racial Education, Synthesis of Race etc. He had critized fascist and national socialist (nazi) conception of race : Fascism from the Right, Notes on the Third Reich.
I like the sentiment at the end of the clip. It is called a blind spot for a reason.
Whoever that photo was he isn’t Niall Ferguson.
Reminds me of a John Mulaney joke. Where his friend asked him, "If you saw Hitler walking down the street wouldn't you kill him?" and John was like "You mean if I saw a guy dressed like Hitler? No, because that's an actor. Or do you mean if I saw a really old guy that looked like Hitler? I'm not going to kill him either, because I am often wrong."
The very end is spot on. Just look at Hamas and those like them. Read their charter -- Himmler wouldn't write it any different. Their origins in Muslim Brotherhood go straight to the N..is.
But they don't wear jackboots, their clothes is different, they live in a different place, and their skin is somewhat darker. Which is why few see them for what they really are.
1:09 I suspect that's the wrong picture. That's Neal Ferguson the epidemiologist. I would guess Douglas Murray is talking about Niall Ferguson the historian.
I have never thought we need another conference after a conference... just saying
Loved listening to this BUT the american interviewer has a passing resemblance to Douglas Murray that I would occasionally get a little confused whenever the angle switched between whoever was speaking 😅😅😅
Shut EDI down!
If only all these "non-whites" would stop looking at cause and effect, the past, history and reality...we'd all get along. 🙄
'What Can Be, Unburdened By What Has Been' according to Kamala Harris.
It started in at least 1920s Frankfurt School.
The interviewer seems kind of slow.
parliaments are the natural home of activism - not universities !
No. Streets are the natural home of activism. "Activism" is something people without power or authority undertake in order to be heard. This is why majority of activists are between ages 14 and 20, or, if they're not, people belonging to a small marginal interest group (typically a group of residents of some rural area opposing some industrial project).
But once you are in possession of your full faculties, once you've established yourself in a position of authority and / or power (those two don't always come together) it's time to pull on your Big Boy pants (or... Big Girl skirt...) and start doing serious work while regarding consequences for your actions. A bunch of kids protesting that poor poor immigrants aren't being let in, is one level of responsibility. Politicians sitting while their Chief of Police tells them "we're outnumbered" (London), is a WHOLE DIFFERENT BALL GAME.
@@codinghusky5196 what on earth do you think parliaments actually are.
activism has many forms. the most common understanding being grass roots demonstration. however, in its most productive and purist form it takes place in parliaments.
anyway, this is all besides the point.
in a properly functioning society, activism should not take place in universities (a place of truth seeking).
nor, the media (objective information distribution), nor the judiciary for that matter (enforcement of the letter of the law)
unfortunately, they are all now hotbeds of activism, and our societies are staring to pay the price.
Thats not a picture of niall ferguson
Critical Race Theory is the Critical Theory of Race. In other words, it is Marxism. Marxism is inherently activist. "The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Marxism is not only fundamentally activist, it teaches that there is no such thing as neutrality, in other words, in Marxism we are all activists. As a result Marxism projects its activist tendencies onto its opposition. A perfect example of this is the example from clubhouse. Bret Weinstein says he's an evolutionary biologist. The Marxists respond that he's a eugenicist. Why? Because they are projecting their activism onto Bret. If Bret were in fact an activist in the field of Evolutionary Biology that would make him a eugenicist. The problem with Critical Race Theory is the same. They are acting in an activist manner to root out racism which is fine up until they point they succeed. When they push beyond equal rights before the law people begin to push back but remember there is no such thing as neutrality is Marxism. When you push back against the excesses of Critical Race Theory they interpret that, not as an attempt to establish neutrality but as an activist push for white supremacy. This holds true with LGBTQ and women's rights as well. Any attempt to establish neutrality will be interpreted by Marxists as straight, cis, Christian, white, male activism because Marxists fundamentally rejects any and all notions of neutrality.
I don't disagree with your thoughts on marxist projection, but I'm not sure why you think the opposition Bret faced in that clubhouse discussion was marxist in nature, or that the opposing individuals were themselves marxists. I listened to the entire thing - which was like 3 or 4 hours long - and while it's been a while, I don't remember getting the impression that this was the case. The woman in question was a special kind of awful. Entitled, rude, arrogant, dishonest, and intellectually speaking, a particularly stupid bitch. She bullied her way onto the stage, where she proceeded to bully everyone else she could. And when she somehow got control of the stage, she booted everyone off, including the dude who started the room. It was appalling--she was an absolute tyrant. Anyone with a functional sense of fairness would have a visceral detest to what occurred.
After she forcedd her way into absolute control and brought her friends up to fill the stage, I could only listen for a little while longer. They were just endlessly proud of themselves for disrupting the conversation. Such disruptions are indeed a weapon in the woke arsenal, and if it was intentionally deployed as such, I think it would be something like a low-level soldier just following orders. I seriously doubt she had any understanding of the higher-level stuff going on. She was an entitled bitch, and disrupting the conversation satisfied her entitlement. I don't think there's really any more to it than that. But of course, if you have further insights I'd be happy to hear you out..
"Looking for the narrative of the forgotten and oppressed" the point here is from what time you have to look at this?... What age?... and were is not visible if the age is closer? (For example for women and blacks)... Since the first 19th century there DuBois spoke... Also other blacks corresponded with Whites (for example Thomas Jefferson) (Benjamin Banneker (November 9, 1731 - October 19, 1806) was an African-American naturalist, mathematician, astronomer and almanac author. A landowner, he also worked as a surveyor and farmer.)... Actually, Who are the opressed? also... Blacks and Women... But before were Working class (mostly White in England) in marxist terms: Now not?
It's an antiwhite theory not an activist theory.
Lex is dumbest smart guy i know.
I think he is pretending to be dumb.
"Anyone who has been in a Philosophy department in the last decades..." Not so fast there buddy! The top Philosophy departments are still devoted to analytic Philosophy, which wants nothing to do with Post-Modernism.
10:30 Give it up, Lex. The Snak, Krackle, Pok resurgence in nowhere in sight at this stage of modernity. Seriously, white bed linen with badly formed eye holes aren't even good cosplay at this historical epoch.
Beware the ectivist.
Murray is also an activist but one for different causes than the activists he doesn't like.
👍
Excuse me, but Lex Fridman really isn't the sharpest tool in the box, is he. How the hell did he get so big?
Lex is a computer scientist who did his PhD on using AI for identity authentication. He is an empathic, very mild mannered personality who greatly annoys some people. Although be aware that he has a black belt in Brazilian jiu-jitsu and is a big fan of Mixed Martial Arts (MMA)! But seriously, he's well known for his belief that love conquers all. After the twentieth century, that's an astonishingly optimistic opinion to say the least. But I do enjoy and learn from his podcasts because he almost never injects his own opinions into an interview, seeking only to clarify what his guest is saying. And he can be extremely tenacious (but always polite) in forcing his guests to clarify anything unclear. So he is not a pushover.
One reason is that when he asks a question, he allows the person to answer. He doesn't interrupt or try to yell over him and then dismiss them by abruptly ending the interview. You can actually learn something about the person's ideas when you watch his interviews.
how race was used to enact laws to uphold white supremacy. plessy v ferguson. to setup separate but equal, i.e. segregation , jim crow.
Right there with universally agreed that segregation but equal was unconstitutional and we thank the supreme Court for overturning that law. But for some reason post Jim Crow post civil Rights movement it seems a new liberal wing of left-wing people want to go more further than that. Now we all agree and have sympathy for the notion of a color blind society. Just like we don't excuse the ku Klux Klan or other white supremacist groups for their rhetoric we should not excuse black people who want to use the same rhetoric and call white people racist 24/7 just because one white guy disagrees with another black guy on the more common issues.
@@attiepollard7847 Douglas Murray is an apologist for western civilization, excusing the racism of the west since 1492, by saying every civilization had slaves, every country invaded other countries, I am saying the extent of evil perpetrated by the white man exceeds the evil done by other races. There can be differences of opinion on this. Douglas keeps saying poc are playing games. It is not, it is ppl want to be free. For example, the intellectuals of the west have written about the iq of the races and ranking them. The east had no such developed race theory like this. There is
something inherently evil in the west. I don't know if it's because of christianity or basic anglo saxon culture. That makes me an eternal enemy of Douglas. I have read 2 of his books. i detest him
.
Douglas Murray is an apologist for western civilization, excusing the racism of the west since 1492, by saying every civilization had slaves, every country invaded other countries, I am saying the extent of evil perpetrated by the white man exceeds the evil done by other races. There can be differences of opinion on this. Douglas keeps saying poc are playing games. It is not, it is ppl want to be free. For example, the intellectuals of the west have written about the iq of the races and ranking them. The east had no such developed race theory like this. There is
something inherently evil in the west. I don't know if it's because of christianity or basic anglo saxon culture. That makes me an eternal enemy of Douglas. I have read 2 of his books. i detest him
@@attiepollard7847 see my reply
a
Marx was all about class, CRT is all about race, as indeed was Nazism. . Thus, nothing in common.
I think you are missing the critical link in this comparison between Marxism and CRT. You are correct that one stratifies society by social class and the other by race, but once that slight of hand has been made, the arguments become the same. CRT is reconstituted Marxism which makes it difficult to refute because of the obvious long history of oppression along a racial divide. What CRT conveniently ignores is the even longer history of oppression among competing tribes irrespective of race. What Marx got wrong was he developed his theory within the context of social classes within the Industrial Revolution. CRT makes these same erroneous claims based on race as the defining feature of corrosive human interaction. They are both wrong; not in their observations, but in their conclusions. Yes, humans have been oppressive toward each other for 40,000 years, but it is tribal in nature not racial nor social classes even though at times it can appear to be both.
@@elderhiker7787 I think you are missing the main point, namely that Marx never claimed that all human societies have always been divided by class. Only those based on private property were so defined, specifically in his Communist Manifesto, as classic slave societies, feudalism and capitalism. Indeed, his extensive writings on ancient oriental despotisms stress that they were founded on an absence of private property and social classes, where the state owned all the factors of production. Engels, in his 'Origins of the Family', uses the terms 'primitive communism' to define and describe classless tribal societies that were based on collective ownership of property. CRT arose as a reaction against 'classic' Marxism, replacing class with a politics of 'identity' - race, gender, life style and what have have you, these being seen as an alternative means of destabilising western liberal capitalism, while leaving intact the class privileges of those who advocate it.
The result is what we have seen on the campuses of western elite universities...a mass mobilisation of the most privileged young people on our planet in support of a movement - Hamas - that in its Covenant, articles 17, 22, 32 cites, as did Hitler in his Mein Kampf, the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, as proof a world Jewish communist conspiracy, and in Article 7, again as did Hitler, calls for the extermination of the world's Jews.
No one cares, Douglas.
Big miss by Douglas, who neglected to go back far enough in philosophy and thought - the mid 1800s and the early 1900s - where the foundations were laid. Douglas seems to think the origin of the phrase is the important thing, but it's not. The genesis of the thought foundations on which defined CRT , and which allowed critical mass to bloom, occurred much earlier than the 70s. I'd probably hate to hear when he thinks the foundations for the Industrial Revolution began.
Elaborate with details, please.
He's not decribing the HISTORY of philosophy.. he goes back&forth enough to explain the origin of the present malaise..
Is Douglas Murray a Fabian , he's done much damage through the Henry Jackson Society in Scotland.
Douglas Murray founded the Centre for Social Cohesion in 2007, which became part of the Henry Jackson Society, The Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC) was a British think tank with its headquarters in London. Founded in 2007 as part of another London think tank, Civitas, it became independent in 2008 and was eventually subsumed into a separate London think tank, the Henry Jackson Society.
Here is a man who sees what is needful and has confidence to get it done without whining. Some Scots are always prompted to whine about the English, it's part of their upbringing.
06:50 literally out from the Soviet Union time (Lysenko)
The interviewer is a sad joke 😢😅 a total clown 🤡
Very good from Lex Fridman , Douglas Murray is part of the British Club , i find him boring
Thankfully Douglas has been beautifully Anglicised, So much better than Scottish!
Well, if *you* find him boring then he *must* stop, right?