Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Who is Professor Derrick Bell and what is Critical Race Theory?

The newly released video of a young, blossoming Marxist Barak Hussein Obama shows the future president praising Professor Derrick Bell at Harvard. Like I posted earlier, The Conservative Lady has already done a superb job of jumping on this.

So who is Derrick Bell?

The founder of Critical Race Theory. We will get to that in a moment.

First, I'll let you read for yourself...

(from Wikipedia)

Protests over faculty diversity
In 1980 Bell became the dean of the University of Oregon School of Law, becoming one of the first African-Americans to ever head a non-black law school. He resigned in 1985 over a dispute about faculty diversity.[1] Bell then taught at Stanford University for a year.

Returning to Harvard in 1986, Bell staged a five-day sit-in in his office to protest the school's failure to grant tenure to two legal scholars on staff, both of whom adhered to a movement in legal philosophy that claims legal institutions play a role in the maintenance of the ruling class' position. The administration, not giving an inch, claimed substandard scholarship and teaching on the part of the professors as the reason for the denial of tenure, but Bell called it an unambiguous attack on ideology. Bell's sit-in galvanized student support but sharply divided the faculty.[3]

Bell reentered the debate over hiring practices at Harvard in 1990, when he vowed to take an unpaid leave of absence until the school appointed a female of color to its tenured faculty.[4] At the time, of the law school's 60 tenured professors, only three were black and five were women. The school had never had a black woman on the tenured staff.[3]

Students held vigils and protests in solidarity with Bell with the support of some faculty. One of these students was future U.S. president Barack Obama, who spoke at a protest at Harvard Law School on behalf of Bell.[5] Critics, including some faculty members, called Bell's methods counterproductive, and Harvard administration officials insisted they had already made enormous advances in hiring.[3] The story of his protest is detailed in his book Confronting Authority.

Academic contributions
Bell continued writing about critical race theory after accepting a teaching position at Harvard University. Much of his legal scholarship was influenced by his experience both as a black man and as a civil rights attorney. Writing in a narrative style, Bell contributed to the intellectual discussions on race. According to Bell, his purpose in writing was to examine the racial issues within the context of their economic and social and political dimensions from a legal standpoint.

For instance, in The Constitutional Contradiction, Bell argued that the framers of the Constitution chose the rewards of property over justice. With regard to the interest convergence, he maintains that "whites will promote racial advances for blacks only when they also promote white self-interest." Finally, in The Price of Racial Remedies, Bell argues that whites will not support civil rights policies that may threaten white social status, like the affirmative action hiring through which he acquired his status.

Get this:
In the mid-1960s Bell was appointed to the law faculty of the University of Southern California as executive director of the Western Center on Law and Poverty. In 1969, with the help of protests from black Harvard Law School students for a minority faculty member, Bell was hired to teach there. At Harvard, Bell established a new course in civil rights law, published a celebrated case book, Race, Racism and American Law, and produced a steady stream of law review articles. As a teacher, Bell became a mentor and role model to a generation of students of color, but he played a delicate balancing act at the university. Bell became the first black tenured professor in Harvard Law School's history and called on the university to improve its minority hiring record. But shortly after his tenure in 1971, a white university vice-president tried to purchase a house that Bell had been previously offered through the university; Bell saw this as a case of discrimination. This was the first case in which Bell's charges of racism would mobilize his supporters, who championed his efforts to stand up for principle, and anger his detractors, who accused him of being too quick with his allegations of bigotry.[3]

On Critical Race Theory:
Overall Theory
Although no set of canonical doctrines or methodologies defines CRT, the movement is loosely unified by two common areas of inquiry. First, CRT has analyzed the way in which white supremacy and racial power are reproduced over time, and in particular, the role that law plays in this process. Second, CRT work has investigated the possibility of transforming the relationship between law and racial power, and more broadly, the possibility of achieving racial emancipation and anti-subordination.

Key theoretical elements
-A critique of liberalism: CRT scholars favor a more aggressive approach to social transformation as opposed to liberalism's more cautious approach, favor a race conscious approach to transformation rather than liberalism's embrace of color blindness, and favor an approach that relies more on political organizing, in contrast to liberalism's reliance on rights-based remedies.
-Storytelling/counterstorytelling and "naming one's own reality"--using narrative to illuminate and explore experiences of racial oppression.
-Revisionist interpretations of American civil rights law and progress—criticizing civil rights scholarship and anti-discrimination law.
-Applying insights from social science writing on race and racism to legal problems.
-Structural determinism, or how "the structure of legal thought or culture influences its content."
-The intersections of race, sex, and class--e.g., how poor Latinas' experience of domestic violence needs distinctive remedies.
-Essentialism and anti-essentialism—reducing the experience of a category (like gender or race) to the experience of one sub-group (like white women or African-Americans).
-Cultural nationalism/separatism, Black nationalism--exploring more radical views arguing for separation and reparations as a form of foreign aid.
-Legal institutions, critical pedagogy, and minority lawyers in the bar.

Many mainstream legal scholars have criticized CRT on a number of grounds, including some scholars' use of narrative and storytelling, as well as the critique of objectivity adopted by critical race theorists in connection with the critique of merit. Daniel Farber and Suzanna Sherry have argued that critical race theory, along with critical feminism and critical legal studies, has anti-Semitic and anti-Asian implications, has worked to undermine notions of democratic community and has impeded dialogue.[7] 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.’”[8] He writes,

What is most arresting about critical race theory is 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.[8]

Judge Alex Kozinski, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, writes that 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 1960s. 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.[9]

So what is Critical Race Theory in a nutshell? Heck, I didn't even have to do any work but copy and paste. This is utter hatred for anyone with fair skin. And there is our president standing there, praising the movement's founder.

At the left wing this was said of Bell:

It is standard practice of scholars to honor their intellectual fore-parents who have been caste into the shadows of history, we eulogize their memories and praise their life’s work as a goal to which we should all aspire, but Derrick Bell’s life is the stuff “Black thought” is made of and resists such “fluffy-ization.” Derrick’s courage rang with the testament of Black thinkers from beginning to end. When I dared to suggest back in October of 2007 that philosophers were trying to make sense of his work next to Marx and Nietzsche, he told me that he considered himself-

"...the academic counterpart of Errol Garner, the late jazz pianist from my hometown, Pittsburgh, who never learned to read music fearing, as I understand it, that it would ruin his style. I think there must be value in Marxist and other writings, but I did not really read them in college and have had little time since. I am writing this in Pittsburgh where I have been celebrating my 50th law school reunion from Pitt Law School. I do care more about the thought and writings and actions of Du Bois, Robeson, Douglass, et al. I think during my talk at UCLA, I read from the 1935 essay by Ralph Bunche about the futility of using law to overcome racism. It made more sense than so much of the theoretical writings on law, past and present, that I can barely understand and have great difficulty connecting with my experience. And you are right. At almost 77, I do not care to write in ways that whites can vindicate."

Bell even wrote a short story (mentioned above in the critique section) called "The Space Traders". The preface is as follows:

In “The Space Traders,“ aliens arrive and offer the United States ”enough gold to retire the national debt, a magic chemical that will cleanse America’s polluted skies and waters, and a limitless source of safe energy to replace our dwindling reserves.” The U.S. just has to give the aliens one thing in return: all of our black people. (Guess what white Americans decide?)
In the story, aliens visit the United States in the future and offer America eternal peace, prosperity, and health in exchange for all black people in America. The story ends with 70% of Americans voting to send the blacks off, as they are marched, naked and under supervision of white men with weapons, to the alien slave ships.

In fact, a short movie was released called 'Cosmic Slop' which featured Ronald Reagan as an evil alien slave trader.

...and here is more Bell spewing more diarrhea straight out of his mouth:

This is the guy President Obama tells us to "open up our hearts and minds to". I have a feeling this is just the tip of the iceberg.

But, do you know what is most appalling about all of this? Liberals will see this video of Barack Obama embracing Derrick Bell and they will not think a second thought about it. Why? They simply don't care. Likewise, the left wing media, in a continual effort to surround Barack Obama with entrenched fortifications of protection, will not investigate this for a second. For Barack Obama to say we must "open up our hearts and minds" to a man who's entire life, study, and theory is predicated on the belief that all white people are inherently evil and racist is a complete outrage worthy of widespread news coverage. Though, like I said, liberals will not understand, nor will they care, to think on their own or imagine the very implications of this.

In fact, I am thoroughly convinced that a video could be released of Obama murdering a litter of golden retriever puppies with a bloody axe and the left would still respond with the usual, "So, what's so controversial about that?"

No worries. There will be plenty more videos to come. Plenty more ammunition spread by the army of Breitbarts out there. Enough to finally make a complete nationwide mockery of the mainstream media, Barack Obama, and every person supporting him.


The Conservative Lady said...

Glad I stopped over to say thanks for the nice comment. You found a lot of information here and I'll link to it over at TCL FB. Think I'll add a link at the bottom of my blog post, too.
I am looking forward to the entire video tonight.
Thanks, Hack.

Anonymous said...

Can you say, "Smoking gun"? I knew you could.

No amount of spin is going to save Mr. Obama now. The truth is out. He is, indeed, the Racist-in-Chief.

I smell impeachment. Or, actually, at the very least, I smell vindication.

Hack said...

Thanks TCL!

And TwoGuys, I do believe you are right!

Fuzzy Slippers said...

Fantastic piece, tweeted far and wide.

The Conservative Lady said...

The additional videos and commentary really help to tell the story. Great job.

lynb362002 said...

I am very grateful for this information. You have an excellent site!

lynb362002 said...

Thank you very much for this informative piece. You have an excellent site as well. :)

Anonymous said...

A black guy who's racist is called Derrick Bell, and applauded by the leftists.

A white guy who's racist is called David Duke, and vilified by the rightists.

Now then, who're the racists in this scenario?

Fredd said...

I have my doubts about any impact Derrick Bell will have on the upcoming election.

I surely thought the Jeremiah Wright stuff would swamp Barry the first time around: nope, not a peep mentioned about it on the 2008 campaign trail. Not one.

And Prof. Bell will not come up, either. Remember, our current mainstream media is deaf, dumb and blind when it comes to negative stuff on Obama.

Impeachment? Not a chance.

Anonymous said...

If Barrack Obama could be portrayed as a reverse racist by Breitbart and his cohorts by his association with his law professor, Breibart has to be racist for portraying only part of a larger video stream to destroy the lives of Blacks in power. He was disgraced when he tried it with the black agricultural offical woman from Georgia, He will be disgraced again for this taapes against Oboama though postmortemly.

Anonymous said...

So this just says, again, that Obama is a recist. We already knew that. This is not a smoking gun. We have harder dirt on him than this and nothing is being done. No one pays attention to anything negative about Obama. This will be do different. If Andrew is going to come up with a smoking gun....Its gonna have to be better than this.

Anonymous said...

With everything going on in the world today, are the majority of you really wasting your time considering the racial preferences of the President? How many racists were elected to office before Obama? How manu US presidents were slave holders or held personal affiliations with latter racist institutions? One black president who may or MAY NOT be racist is an outrage? I find it sad that there are so many of you who feel threatend. How sad that equality and color blindness only became a personal issue when the idea of a black president became reality. I will pray for you all.

Hack said...

Anonymous, are you trying to be dumb on purpose? If you want to have a rational discussion on the issues, by all means I am willing. Your comment above illustrates a complete lack of critical thinking on your part.

Anonymous said...

so everyone has to outraged because you are?

typical conservative.

Anonymous said...

another typical response from hack.

only a conservative's opinion can be rational and critical.

Anonymous said...

Bell a racist?

Does he state emphatically that Blacks are superior in some way?

Hack said...

No, not only a conservative. A person with common sense. Bell's entire life, study, and theory revolves around the inherent racism and bad nature of the white man. There is nothing more to it. For you to come on here and try to justify his theories as acceptable says a lot about you. It's not just me condemning Bell. What do you think about Bell saying the Civil Rights Movement was pointless? What do you think about his fictional story where all white people sell all black people to aliens? Do you really want to go down this path defending a man like this? By all means, be my guest.

Anonymous said...

Suppose the alien trader was protrayed as a black man making an offer to a black politician to fix the problems in exchange for all the white people. What would the black politician's decision be? What would Bell's decsion be? What would Obama's decision be?

EndBigGovt said...

Suppose the alien trader was black man making a similar offer to a black politician in exchange for all the white people. What would be the decision of the black politician? What would be Obama's decision?

Red Zilis said...

OK, the tapes are out. How do we get the main media to cover them. They do us no good if we can't get the normal American to see them. Does anyone have that answer?

Anonymous said...

"Breibart has to be racist for portraying only part of a larger video stream to destroy the lives of Blacks in power"

Destroy Blacks in power? This video illuminates Communist/Marxist views of certain people (many of whom happen to be black). If these words "harm blacks in power" then you have to cite Obama who owns the words. Further, these words do nothing to harm Justice Clarence Thomas, Hermain Cain, Alan Keyes, Lt. Governor Jennifer Carroll, Thomas Sowell, Tim Scott, U.S. Rep Allen West, Michael Williams, Sec. Condoleeza Rice, and a multitude of othe blacks in power.

The focus must be on the WORDS, the MESSAGE, and the CORE BELIEFS - only a racist brings up race . . .

Anonymous said...

As a Liberal I fully appreciate this page, and found it refreshingly honest. I am constantly engaged in battles with my fellow Liberals over these issues and am increasingly disheartened by the well-intended but often just plain stupid support it is given. Racism has to be racism, always. We can't make exceptions for any "race". In fact any group trying to exempt itself from even the possibility would seem to me to most suspect. The idea that race and privilege are one in the same is fundamentally flawed. Further that this racist notion that there is a separation between "white" and "people of color" is being upheld and used politically as a means of moving "whites" out of the way. It is dangerous and dirty and it is my hope that we continue to call it out for what it is - more racism.