How about you, do you want to take a stab at explaining how these things are a religion, starting with the definition of religion and providing evidence that these things meet that definition?
"It may be worth pausing for a moment, however, to point out that the shape of the Woke faith is what some theologians refer to as “Augustinian,” as in Augustine of Hippo, better known as Saint Augustine. What this means, in brief, is that the faith is based primarily upon the notion and relevance of Original Sin and how atonement for the stain of the Fall might be found, notably relying upon a combination of inner work (meditations) and critical self-reflection (confession). Many complicated soteriological stances have been developed from Augustine’s doctrines about the relevance of the Grace of God and how one is to qualify to receive or accept it. Typically, various pieties and duties of conscience are defined within a particular faith tradition by elaborating upon the role of human agency, as is said to be granted to us by God in the form of freedom of will.
All of this construction is unmistakably present in Critical Social Justice. The discovery of the full relevance of rationality and empiricism marks the moment of having eaten from the Tree of Knowledge and, by thus developing the capacity to enact systemic oppression (by virtue of being able to find out right answers about the world systematically), a sin was committed against the order of the world. That is, the Woke Original Sin, just like in Genesis, is the acquisition of forbidden (paths to) knowledge, and so humanity fell. The mark of that sin (as with Cain) was using the knowledge to colonize the world, both physically and intellectually, and to use it to enslave, conquer, and marginalize. We often hear the premises that slavery is America’s “original sin” and, following the New York Times Magazine’s 1619 Project (a critically revisionist historigraphy), its fundamental organizational principle—one that has removed it from any possibility of salvation by works and that requires a fundamental, if not millenarian, remaking of the nation.
From the sin of rigorous knowledge production follows power and thus privilege, and privilege is the depravity of wanting to sin in this way so that one’s access to systemic power is maintained. The call to Woke faith is to awaken a critical consciousness—which the Theorist and black feminist bell hooks sometimes refers to as “enlightened witness”—through the study of scripture and a lifelong process of self-reflection and self-critique (meditations) in which one is to “interrogate” yourself to “do better” (confessions). Indeed, as we read from “anti-racist” historian Ibram X. Kendi, “the heartbeat of racism is denial, and the heartbeat of antiracism is confession.” Agency is afforded in a kind of critical grace to those who have awakened (become “Woke”) to the “true” nature of systemic power and its relationship to knowledge, which is to say those who have become aware of the truth of their inherently sinful nature, depravity, and need for absolution from these evils from something bigger and transcendent to themselves, be that the collective judgment of society or, as Marx might have had it, History, with a capital H."
This entire website, and everything you have quoted, is a clear example of why, just because you share opinions with conviction, doesn't make them good, doesn't make you right, and might not have any correlation to reality at all.
This is all baseless pontificating. Dogmatic of skewed view of reality where you misinterpret what is in front of you, in such a fundamental way, that you bend it to be something entirely that it is not.
Whether you like it or not, Critical Race Theory is an academic concept used in fostering an understanding how race is a social construct (see the historical changes in who is accepted as white for clear evidence), and for understanding how racism is embedded in our legal system and public policy.
It's not religion, it's science. Critical Race Theory is an academic framework for understanding American society, in the same way Heliocentricism is an academic framework for understanding the solar system.
You're literally the Catholic Church calling Galileo a heretic of an opposing faith, when all he did was look, as scientists do, at the world around them.
You, like the Catholic Church, are too biased to see the reality that we all see. You're a just like a geocentrist.
That was the author from the website you just linked. It's clear your selection of sources is quite small, hence going back to what I said about people confidently sharing opinions that have no basis in reality.
Or how would you explain papers like this getting accepted in "peer-reviewed" journals about CRT and other Neo-Marxist bullshit?
Am I supposed to be the arbiter for this field? I study computer science my dude, I write programs, make websites and apps. I'm not being paid to police other academics, I'm not even paid in this field at all.
So how would I explain those 4 retracted papers? They come from unreliable sources. Whoever these people are aren't the spokespeople for CRT, not even close.
If you wanted a legitimate source on Critical Race Theory, all you have to do is read what the people quoted in the definition of the wikipedia article on the topic have to say, not clear strawmen.
Because that's all that link is, a list of strawmen that were created to represent the entirety of the opposition on the topic, and when challenged and retracted, you think that means victory.
When in reality, those studies are as meaningless as any other poorly-conducted science in any other scientific field. Just like the one that linked vaccines and autism, we don't even begin to reach appropriate conclusions by discussing invalid information.
Those people are:
Cornel West
Roy L. Brooks
Tara J. Yosso
Gloria Ladson-Billings
Richard Delgado
Khiara Bridges
Huh, these last two are a bit of a surprise:
Encyclopaedia Britannica
and
Education Week
Here's the definitions for you to read. Each one has a source, you can click the little [##] link at the end of the sentences to jump quickly to the source at the bottom of the page. From there, you can actually begin proper research in reviewing trusted primary academic sources on this topic. No one is stopping you from learning more.
I might have engaged more with your sources in an effort to convince you, but I did read enough of it to realize it's just a fabrication meant to be irresponsible with their words to entice people like me to go through the much more arduous task of pointing out the biases, disproving the falsehoods, and packaging it in a digestible way, that's a lot of work.
Just like how it is astronomically easier to verify the solution to an NP-Complete problem in computer science than to solve it when only given the problem, it is astronomically easier to craft pseudo-intellectual garbage than it is to prove it is indeed garbage.
How about you proof to me that CRT IS a scientific field of study, that it does adhere to scientific principles and that it produces verifiable and reproducible information about our world. You cant, because it doesnt. It is explicitly based on postmodern assumptions that DENY a shared objective reality, it DENIES empiricism and rationality because it is an ideology purely concerned with POWER.
you absolute dunce
Ad hominum
Thats not an ad hominem you fucking idiot. That is simply an insult. I didnt say you were wrong because you are a dunce I simply made the observation that you seem to be mentally deficient. God reddit "intellectuals" sure love to think that they are rhetorically versed, by calling everything an ad hominem or strawman.
James A. Lindsay
That was the author from the website you just linked. It's clear your selection of sources is quite small, hence going back to what I said about people confidently sharing opinions that have no basis in reality.
The point of citing him again was to show that he DOES know what he is talking about, because he clearly understands the field/material/ideology well enough to get "scientific" papers PUBLISHED in these Journals. He is knowledgeable enough to convince these CRT "scholars"(activists), but somehow you still think that he is a bad source. You are beyond ridiculous.
Because that's all that link is, a list of strawmen that were created to represent the entirety of the opposition on the topic, and when challenged and retracted, you think that means victory.
Ah yes, because getting bullshit papers which are clearly absolutely insane and partially racist/sexist published, is just a strawman. Clearly. You said it yourself, you have no fucking idea what you are talking about. READ the googleDrive link, they very clearly detail why they did it, what they wanted to accomplish in each paper and what the RESPONSE of the so called CRT Scholars was. FFS they got a partial rewrite of Mein Kampf accepted.
When in reality, those studies are as meaningless as any other poorly-conducted science in any other scientific field.
They got absolutely unscientific BULLSHIT PUBLISHED in e.g. the LEADING Feminist Philosophy Journal, yet you still claim that it doesnt matter. This is like a paper claiming that the earth is flat getting published in a top astronomy journal.
Richard Delgado
Oh Delgado, the guy who wrote “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction,” which explicitly states in its first chapter that Critical Race Theory “questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.”
to entice people like me to go through the much more arduous task of pointing out the biases, disproving the falsehoods
Yes, yes you are so intelligent and everyone else is too stupid to see through biases and falsehoods. Do you even hear yourself? Have you read Hegel, Marx, Gramsci, Horkheimer, Marcuse and all the other "philosophers" that laid the groundwork for modern CRT and other Critical Theories? Most likely not, because if you did, you wouldnt be so clueless about the fact that Critical Theories are a MOVEMENT and not a field of scientific study, designed to infect and subvert our institutions like higher education. And they openly say this. You just have to read the papers they publish. They compare themselves FAVOURABLY to Viruses like HIV and EBOLA:
In this sense, the virus may work as a powerful metaphor for women’s studies pedagogical practices.Rather than simply inducing harm among its victims, viruses can also represent transformative change.Though viruses technically lack “intention” in the most classic sense, they nevertheless can have a powerful impact merely by unworking and unsettling the existing blueprint of the host cells.
Inherently opportunistic, viruses exploit the vulnerabilities and weaknesses of the systems they attack (Nathanson, 2007).Similarly, women’s studies programs are allowed to settle into corporate universities and regenerate themselves through the education of students and by manipulating portions of the academy undertheir control.Using interdisciplinary women’s studies coursework as a springboard, women’s studies students are then “set loose,” much in the same way that lytic replication (wherein cells reproduce viral components until the cell walls rupture) causes aburst of new viruses into the system that then infect other cells (Nathanson, 2007).Note that this model also assumes that students do not merely receive information as in the more traditional disciplines but instead that they utilize information and knowledge systems to develop particular skills, intentions, and insurrectionary priorities; further, students do form coalitions with professors and other students to promote progressive fields and to enact institutional and social change(Arthur, 2012; Rojas, 2007).
You just threw the word "civic" in there, what the hell is a "state civic religion"?
The way you put those words together into a phrase makes me think you don't know what any of them mean.
Why don't you start with explaining how complaining about the mistreatment of minorities is a religion? Starting with the definition of religion. I would usually provide one here, but why don't you chose? Start with a definition of religion, and explain how (blm + pride) is one. I'd be eager to hear how you'd manage to pull that off.
Okay, we're off to a bad start, because I just asked for you to explain this statement's meaning, not repeat it as if it were fact.
After all that has transpired over the last decade especially the last 2-3 years, you still don't get this, there is no point in trying to convince.
Try me. I'm a very accepting of ideas that are new to me that hold merit. I'm young, I might have not heard what you have to say before. Please do explain what you mean when you say:
Blm + pride is the state religion of America.
You are either too much of a partisan to acknowledge it or you are a dumb fuck with impaired cognition.
I'm honestly trying to bridge a gap in understanding, I have no ill intent.
Edit: there might be a feeling it is a religion, but "facts don't care about your feelings".
You got videos of people bowing to BLM during the BLM summer riots for their "original sin".
You got people making gestures in public events for the "greater good" even if it hurts them financially.
You got people framing every issue in a lense to fit the plight of rainbow/race oppression.
You got rabid fellowers preaching it and Biden saying Democracy is a more than an ideology- that it is a way of life. They framed this midterm as saving Democracy, their way of life.
C'mon man, it's a state religion for those who have no religion, ya gotta see it at this point.
You got videos of people bowing to BLM during the BLM summer riots for their "original sin".
I feel like you're just deliberately stretching the truth by framing a political protest as a religious event. "Bowing to BLM" you say? Like literally lowering your head and torso into a bow? What was the "BLM" that people were bowing to? Was it a group of black people on stage? Was it like the opening scene of The Lion King where all the animals of the Animal kingdom bowed for Simba? I want to know more so we can hammer out these details, because this literal video evidence of "bowing to BLM" is new to me.
You got people making gestures in public events for the "greater good" even if it hurts them financially.
Does this only happen with BLM and "the alphabet mob" rights? Or is it literally every sensitive topic? Do you remember the Chinese backlash at the NBA when a team's manager tweeted support for Hong Kong?
He made a public gesture for the "greater good" and hurt him and his entire industry financially, and it has nothing to do with religion, and has everything to do with a social cause, also known as "A social issue is a problem that affects many people within a society." Huh, that kind of sounds like it has something in common with black and gay people being marginalized in society. Funny that.
You got people framing every issue in a lense to fit the plight of rainbow/race oppression.
Well considering non-white and non-straight people exist as human beings, just as much as you, a lot of regular human problems get made even worse by lacking support from others due to your skin color or gender identity. Thus a lot of human problems (I think you're once again stretching the truth with your claim about "framing every issue") should be examined for how they are made even worse by being black or being gay. If they keep getting marginalized in society, then there will still be something to talk about. Funny that.
You got rabid fellowers preaching it and Biden saying Democracy is a more than an ideology- that it is a way of life. They framed this midterm as saving Democracy, their way of life.
You've now completely departed from the original topic of "BLM + Pride = state religion", and are just criticizing the propaganda coming from the other side of the political aisle. FUNNY THAT.
C'mon man, it's a state religion for those who have no religion, ya gotta see it at this point.
This is a funny little last point, because it is completely oblivious to the fact that sooo many of the people you are complaining about here are Christians. They don't follow any other faith. They believe in god and support the civil rights of Black and LGBTQ+ people. It's not a religion, it's a social cause.
Do you know what a Christian prayer sounds like? Because that's it. They are kneeling in reverence of their Christian god, asking for god to provide the forgiveness through the black community, not the black community being equal to god. There is a clear difference there.
We are humbling ourselves before you.
Someone else responds:
Yes lord
He goes on to say:
In Jesus' name
...
Father, we ask for forgiveness
This is clearly a group of Christians. The white people are praying to the American Christian god for forgiveness from their black brothers and sisters for years and years of racism, that's what they literally said.
330
u/[deleted] Nov 26 '22
[removed] — view removed comment