My pov is that CRT (critical race theory) and related policies, like DEI, put an undue emphasis on race instead of on poverty, and the resulting effect is that policies which are aimed at helping minorities seem like “favoritism” (and called as such by political opponents), which makes a growing population of poor whites (due to the adverse effects of wealth inequality) polarized against minorities.

Separately, the polarization is used by others who want to weaken a democratic nation. For democracies, a growing immigrant population of more poor people will cause further polarization because the growing poor white population believes that “they’re taking our jobs”. This happened during Brexit, this happened with Trump, and this is happening now in Germany and other western democracies.

I know that there are racist groups who have an agenda of their own, and what I am saying is that instead of focusing on what are painted as culture war issues, leftists are better off focusing on alleviating systemic poverty. Like, bringing the Nordic model to the U.S. should be their agenda.

So, maybe I am wrong about CRT and DEI and how it’s well-meaning intentions are being abused by people who have other goals, but I want to hear from others about why they think CRT and DEI help. I want to listen, so I am not going to respond at all.

— Added definitions —

CRT: an academic field used to understand how systems and processes favor white people despite anti-discrimination policies. Analysis coming out of CRT is often used to make public policy.

DEI: a framework for increasing diversity, equity and inclusion; DEI isn’t focused on race or gender only, but also includes disability and other factors (pregnancy for example) which affect a person.

— —

Okay , so end note: I appreciate the people who commented. I questioned the relevancy of CRT/DEI previously out of an alarmed perspective of how aspects that highlight group differences can be used by others to create divisions and increase polarization. But I get the point everyone is making about the historical significance of these tools.

https://archive.is/HlInJ

These people lose any credibility when they say nonsense like this. Overworked and overloaded personnel created this issue, but someone cutting budgets isn’t going to admit that. Might be the start of America’s brain drain if this kind of race-baiting politics continue.

https://archive.is/WyhBb

I just want to say that I feel bad for creating an environment where people are maybe getting distracted from processing stuff that’s happening around them, and maybe to people they know. I can sometimes dig into the wrong thing at inappropriate times, that’s a me problem. Here’s a meme, and sorry if you’re going through something awful right now.

Recent evidence has revealed a need for balanced evaluations of potential symmetries and asymmetries related to political ideology (e.g., Duarte et al., 2015; Jussim et al., 2015, 2016; Crawford, 2017; Frimer et al., 2017; Proch et al., 2018; Ditto et al., 2019; Eadeh and Chang, 2019; Fiagbenu et al., 2019; Clark and Winegard, 2020; Honeycutt and Jussim, 2020). Using a multi-method approach spanning multiple content areas, validity types, statistical controls, and scale types, the present results consistently show that, just as right-wing persons are sometimes authoritarian, left-wing persons may also be similarly authoritarian. Taken together, this large array of evidence suggests that left-wing authoritarianism is more of a reality than a myth.

Study here: https://news.emory.edu/stories/2021/09/esc_left_wing_authoritarians_psychology/campus.html