It is evident that "Critical Race Theory" (CRT) will be one of the great cultural debates of the next few years. This is a reasonable expectation as it is, to a degree, the culmination of the current debate over race in America. What is evident is that Critical Race Theory, or CRT, is no longer, as many of its defenders note, an intellectual examination of state systematized oppression.
Certainly, such oppression has occurred, such as curfews and restrictions of weapon ownership under laws of post-Civil-War paranoia like the Black Codes and Jim Crow, or the internment of citizens of Japanese heritage during the Second World War. The current iteration of Critical Race Theory is more than an examination of abuses of the state and its enforcers, but an indictment of those who would have been more apt to be immune to such oppression during the periods when they occurred.
The underlying assertion of Critical Race Theory is that applied through a broad social lens, with no practical respect given the status of an individual's personal involvement or power to enact their will on others, it can demonstrate applicable guilt, based on race, regarding historic injustices. Put simply, CRT advocates that guilt over historic injustice can be placed, at least partially, on those who bear the arbitrary similarity of skin tone with the historic actors of the state who enacted those past oppressive measures.
The argument fails to engage its own contradictions and essentially engages its justifications for this by establishing underlying assumptions that are simply taken as true. This is with no examination of possible error or disagreement. Given the complexity of this argument and the importance of demonstrating that CRT is not compatible with the individualistic philosophy of Libertarianism, I will address these premises in turn.
The first premise, which is terribly brief and remains entirely unchallenged, is the notion of collective pride. In this case Dr. Brownstein addresses the idea that deriving pride from the accomplishments of countrymen is entirely natural and valid using the current Olympic games in Tokyo as his example (Brownstein. 2021). As Brownstein puts it, "It seems entirely natural and reasonable for Americans to take pride in the achievements of other Americans." (Brownstein. 2021).
The most obvious rebuttal to this is "why would anyone take pride in an accomplishment in which they played no role?" National pride is, like racial pride, simply a shallow vanity. It is indicative of nothing other than a sense of superiority derived from the possession of an arbitrary trait. Ethnic and national pride is not derived from any actual accomplishment but pleasure with an association. As comedian George Carlin so succinctly put it,
pride should be reserved for something you achieve or attain on your own, not something that happens by accident of birth.To many this fallacy might seem obvious and leave one wondering why Brownstein would bother with such a facile argument. This is because it is required to justify his second point, that if the transposition of pride is acceptable than the transposition of guilt is as well (Brownstein. 2021). Again, this assertion is highly questionable and, more importantly, leads to conclusions of persecution and ostracization based on nothing more than skin tone. There is no logical way to justify the association of guilt against an individual who did not exist at the time of an action, because that individual cannot have, in any way, made pertinent decision, or impacted any of the actual actors.
This line of thinking is incredibly dangerous, as not only can associations be made on the flimsiest of pretenses, but the accused has no recourse to defense. One cannot disprove an accusation of historic associative guilt, it is a label simply applied based on circumstances of birth. Brownstein again attempts to justify this thinking with what he views as a comparable example of positive association, in this case that debts are owed, in some cases literally, for the advantages of perceived good decisions on the part of past actors. In this instance that it is reasonable to assume the debt created by previous generations for infrastructure, in this case a bridge, considered useful (Brownstein. 2021).
Again, one should ask why. His hypothetical bridge was constructed for the benefit of those who would use it at that time. Future use by individuals, yet to be born, is entirely hypothetical and conditional not on the past actors' expectations but the real world needs of those existing in the present. To say that such debt is reasonable is assume that the thinking of previous actors, however anachronistic they may prove to be, should always create a burden on the present.
We can see that the argument presented is largely about fashioning parameters that allow for self-justification of forced association, hoping to catch those who indulge in favorable association in an act of hypocrisy, the rejection of shared guilt. This is only one failure however, as Brownstein attempts to sidestep the vilification of white Americans by applying guilt on a national level. The contradiction is made clear in this paragraph:
We can ask and open the issue for discussion whether current generations may be reasonably expected to take into account the harms America has inflicted on minorities, such as Blacks and Native Americans, in deciding public policy issues today. This accountability is not based on the students' race, but rather on their national identity. This is American accountability, applicable to our society because we are - and are privileged to be - Americans. (Brownstein. 2021).
While he emphasizes the idea of national identity and accountability the delineation between victim and victimizer remains rooted in the idea of racial minority and racial majority. How can Americans collectively address exploitation of subgroups in America without casting blame on one and granting the status of victim upon another? The truth is that we can't. If one signals out a group as a minority, and ascribes that minority status as a cause for abuse it means, by definition, that a majority is responsible and its status was a cause.
It should be noted that the implication of equitable blame is as ridiculous as assigning blame to those yet born. To take this stance would imply that the surviving Armenians in Turkey are just as guilty of the Armenian genocide as the Turkish are. His argument might hold more weight if he would address whether black Americans should hold some historic guilt for the actions of those black soldiers who participated in the Indian Wars and the Massacre at Wounded Knee or similar atrocities, but the argument is always defined as white majority against non-white minorities. This return to racial differentiation, however clumsily couched in national collectivism, demonstrates the Brownstein's failure to raise the argument beyond one of racial guilt.
Brownstein's failure to support his own argument of national rather than ethnic guilt in Critical Race Theory is a prime example of its underlying racial bias and demonstrates that the assignment of guilt to the uninvolved for historic injustices is not about justice, but merely a search for associative persecution seemingly justified by historic action. Critical Race Theory and educational experiments like Dr. Brownstein's have little to do with ending racial discrimination and indeed will only perpetuate it, and this is a problem. The perpetuation of intolerance based on arbitrary traits, like skin color, should be of concern to Libertarians and all individualists. It distorts the reality of human existence, in that individual human beings exist concretely while groups such as race are social constructs. This in turn leads to the devaluation and even persecution of individuals without cause.
If we believe, as we say, that the rights of the individual are sacrosanct, and that racism is illogical and repugnant, then we must fully embrace the idea of individual responsibility. When we can accept that race is a construct and racism a mental crutch, we can end a cycle of needless hatred. This only occurs when guilt and victimization are assigned to the actual actors, and not carried fallaciously as some historic social totem.
We must learn from the mistakes of our past and step off the hamster wheel of racial divide; it will only continue to bring us needless strife and division. Libertarianism's emphasis on individuals, their rights, and responsibilities, which defy the trends of associative and anachronistic guilt, distinguishes it as the only philosophy with a rational and compassionate strategy. One to end bigotry, by treating all of us as the individuals we are.
Brownstein, Alan. "Race, History, Guilt and the Olympics: Real-World Experience in the Classroom." The Hill, 2 Aug. 2021, www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/race-history-guilt-and-the-olympics-real-world-experience-in-the-classroom/ar-AAMQswE?rt=0&ocid=Win10NewsApp&referrerID.
By Joshua Jongema, UPLP Secretary
It is with sincere regret that I inform you I will no longer be an Michigan Technical University (MTU) student unless the move to mask students and coerce them into taking an experimental drug is reversed. It is terrifying that a once-great institution representing the scientific method, has decided to boldly denounce that science. Instead, they rely on "Mechanistic Reasoning" and "Mechanistic Studies" which inform the "guidance" of federal "experts", who fail to present strong evidence, for their claims regarding human safety.
To be clear, I understand there is a very weak, yet logically scary, pandemic occurring, but I do hold true to the belief that all human beings have sovereign authority over their bodily integrity. Also my research confirms there is strong evidence to deny the claim of vaccine safety and mask efficacy.
Citizens also have inalienable rights which include Free Assembly, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Therefore I cannot comply in good conscience with the move to what is called, "MTU Flex Level Two" next semester. This move may, in fact, spread the virus more than if MTU offered remote learning.
To clarify, I have been trained in the fundamentals of science. I have spent over six years studying several scientific fields at as many institutions of higher learning. Those fields include Chemistry, Physics, Biology and Botany, Environmental Philosophy and Science, Mathematics and Statistics, Material Science, and Science History.
I've spent three years studying Nanotechnology, which itself is multi-disciplinary and includes Metrology. I did two internships at the Washington Nano-fabrication Facility at the University of Washington. While there I performed materials research in the Semiconductor Industry. This included wet bench chemistry and gas-phase etching with xenon difluoride and hydrogen fluoride gas.
I have over two-hundred hours of science lab, and over one-hundred hours of Class 5 Clean-room experience. I have over forty hours of HAZMAT training, and was an Environmental Officer for my unit in the military, ensuring we complied with all laws and OSHA regulations. Especially with regard to the environment and the handling of chemicals.
I have become an excellent researcher, and know the first step to doing science is to review all of the current, existing literature on a subject of study. That is how I'm quite certain that virus particles cannot be treated like chemicals, as if the concentration in the air matters. This is how I am rather certain, that the Mechanistic Studies accepted by the World Health Organization (WHO) in reversing their once sound guidance on masks, is baseless, dangerous and unethical. The CDC, itself, reveals that "Nothing is 100% safe and effective." They also concede that medical masks do "not block aerosol ejecting events."
Anyone who did not review all scientific literature on a subject, would not be capable of speaking properly on that scientific matter. Neither MTU, the federal health authorities, state health authorities, or political leaders have spoken to that science competently or effectively. They have also spread more disinformation than any other entities, on matters that have been costly to human life, property and freedom. One example is the case of the nursing home deaths that the new Attorney General decided to not investigate. I also contend that while distance may have saved lives at the onset of the pandemic, it is unwarranted after the outbreak occurred.
Furthermore, sending the fearful masses into stores with masks on, with the promise this would help, has evidently had the opposite effect. My research shows this cannot be the result of people who do not mask. These careless actions by the state have benefited big business and the state through taxation, and have closed and destroyed the businesses and lives of the middle and lower classes.
Michigan predicted a deficit for the year of 2020, but instead, pulled in about 3.6 billion more dollars than predicted. The rich have gotten much richer, while small businesses and individuals have gone bankrupt. Lower classes have been shackled to socialist handouts that, have historically, led to breadlines and starvation.
Michigan has about $1.4 billion more to work with than anticipated just a few months ago, in August. And the August estimates - which have now proved too pessimistic - represented a $2.3 billion upward revision from what officials had estimated in May. - Detroit Free Press -
I am living proof that vaccines are not safe, and that to force vaccines is unethical and immoral.
Recently, many leaders, in the news, have sworn that about 99% of people hospitalized were unvaccinated, but the Center for Disease Control (CDC) Director recently admitted this was cherry picked data (from certain states). The data was from January to June of 2020, and that current numbers are unknown. Regardless, she repeated the baseless claim as fact. Source: https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=62442
With health officials and politicians being caught in lie after lie (time and time again), it is unacceptable to continue to hand them the keys to the lives of common citizens, so casually and with disregard for the negative effect on human life.
I understand MTU does not enforce vaccination, but eventually this could change very easily, as student's cases in the Supreme Court involving Indiana University have been denied thus far. As a lawyer in one recent case declared, "An admitted IU student's right to attend IU cannot be conditioned on the student waiving their rights to bodily integrity and autonomy and to consent to medical treatment like IU has done here."
As a soldier of the US Army, I am sworn to serve the US citizenry and protect the Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic. This is why I have begun work as Secretary for the Upper Peninsula Libertarian Party (UPLP.org), and will endorse Libertarian Sheriffs and candidates for office in the Upper Peninsula. I will do this until the people of the Upper Peninsula have liberty. Mainly I worry for the original inhabitants of this land, who should not be told how to manage their bodies, or their lands, or the way they raise their children. The lives, liberties and pursuit of happiness of all citizens of the USA (and the world), have been assaulted heavily, and rapidly, by their respective state and federal governments. These governments are working at the behest of foreign and special interest groups, which have created a new Caste System, with a new untouchable underclass to abuse. All the while those governments' only real job is to protect their lives and liberties by laws, state Constitutions and the federal government.
What is happening, from the top down, by government force and coercion, as well as from the bottom up by big corporations (bent on destroying small businesses and individuals forever), is illegal, immoral, against the Nuremberg Code, and has direct ties to the past Nazi and current Chinese Communist parties. These actions by governments, and corporations together, cannot be allowed to continue. They appear poised to go much farther in their assault on human life and liberty. If you take the time to study, as I have, the truth will set you free.
To sum it up, please review the scientific literature, that I've reviewed, for yourself (if you are interested). If not, please have a wonderful day.