I see. You think their use of stories is a “reliance on anecdotes”. This is incorrect and seems more like an effort on your part to cast aspersions. This is an overly simplistic look at the way they also incorporate anecdotal information. CRAt advocates do this because of methodological limitations on studying lived experiences of racism through a traditional scientific lens.
And then you go further and assume this imaginary “reliance on anecdotes” means that they think their personal experience must be the absolute best way to do things. This is a ridiculous assumption.
On the contrary; narrative and storytelling are key parts of CRT. How could it be otherwise ? Rational Science is a racist white tool, as are mathematics, statistics, cars, houses, rocks and oxygen. CRT cannot exist in an environment defined by the scientific method and rationality.
Do you mean that it is an unsupported hypothesis? The difference n
between a hypothesis and a theory is that a theory is supported by evidence, while a hypothesis is logically possible but still untested.
So if you are calling it a theory, you are saying it has been empirically tested and the evidence supports the claim that the theory is true.
That is very interesting. I wasn't really aware of that difference; thank you for pointing it out.
On that basis, I think that CRT should be more accurately known as CRH (critical race hypothesis), as absolutely none of it, including specifically its core belief, has any objective evidence supporting it.
Actually, it starts with the supported and factual claim that racism is a significant part of the history of the USA, and that this historical racism has caused racism to continue into the present day in many ways.
No. That claim is neither supported or factual. Racism is most certainly NOT a 'significant part of the history of the USA'. AT least, not a 'significant part' that is distinguished from every country on the Planet, including black-majority and black-controlled countries.
Racism is a common factor of all human societies. What distinguishes countries is their response to it. The USA is almost certainly the most egalitarian, and LEAST racist, of all multiracial nations on the planet.
No. Similar to @wat0n’s incorrect assumption that anecdotes are essential, you are assuming that anecdotes are the only important evidence.
This makes no sense. Instead, what CRT scholars seem to do is use anecdotes and narratives as additional information that clarifies or inspires knowledge gleaned in more traditional manners.
I disagree. Can you give me any part of the core CRH theology that is based on 'traditional manners' ?
The raison de'tre of CRH lies in statistics on the average earnings, education, and status etc of black people in the USA. It assumes these differences from White people must be down to racism. However, here is the thing. That is an article of faith. It has ZERO proof whatsoever.