The Australian Senate admitted that the newly proposed curriculum “prioritizes teaching indigenous Australian culture, perspectives and history across all subjects, including mathematics,” and then puts the National Critical Race Theory (CRT) I have decided to exclude it from the curriculum.
Not surprisingly, those who voted against the motion blamed the majority for accepting the “far-right hatred” agenda.
CRT proponents always use euphemisms to explain this theory.
They use terms such as “diversity,” “inclusion,” and “fairness” to promote possible beneficial qualities. However, these apparently non-threatening words cannot hide the true purpose of the proponents of the theory and its widespread use throughout academia.
A glance at today’s educational and political circles reveals the infringing effects of critical race theory (CRT).
CRTs have been taught in college since the 1990s. But in the last few years, theory has spread throughout the education system, seducing progressive politicians and threatening to consume our institutions and lifestyles.
We also appeal to progressive scholars, policy makers and trendsetters because we believe in the ability to reshape society.
A theory formulated from the Marxist idea that the world exploits unfortunate groups and is divided into a set of established classes that hinder individual movements between them, CRT uses race instead of classes. , All racism claims to come from European hegemony and white privileges is a climate illness in today’s society.
A review of the CRT literature reveals the existence of numerous articles that explain and facilitate this theory.
The term that represents the approach adopted by CRT promoters is “decolonization.” An example is ” Possibility of critical racial theory in decolonization of university curriculum, It was published in the Asia Pacific Journal of Education.
Ideally, academic freedom and freedom of speech should not be restricted, and certainly they should not be limited to the examination of mainstream ideas. But here the term “decolonization” refers to the assumption that Western knowledge and values are inherently discriminatory. Therefore, the university curriculum needs to be wiped out of these perhaps intense Western influences.
This treatise states that “CRTs are interdisciplinary, revealing the hegemonic and appropriate capabilities of the’Western’field, and criticizing the current dissonance between indigenous peoples and the methods of’Western’knowledge.” I can do it, “he said non-apology.
Second, the CRT as an academic approach seems to be in a different category because it superficially manipulates the concept of academic freedom to eliminate disciplines that contradict theory.
Therefore, we must ask whether the concept of academic freedom should include research that is intolerant of conservative views and ideas, support this research, and perhaps attempt to reshape a funding society. not.
Moreover, the use of the word “decolonization” in academic discourse is awkward because it confuses the concepts of research and scholarship with activism and politics.
Therefore, scholarly research aims to provide tools for the restructuring of society, rather than focusing on the objective and unbiased dissemination of knowledge and the discussion of ideas.
Those who teach and promote CRTs assume that non-whites are entitled to compensation for past discrimination, slavery, and disfranchisement. In the past, it is true that humanity routinely violated the principle of equal treatment, contributed to the interests of favorable members of society, and promoted a flawed theory of racial superiority, but the CRT has been repaired. It is not a good tool to promote legal justice.
Instead, compensation should be limited to correcting cases of identifiable discrimination.
Otherwise, the current society, which itself did not contribute to discrimination and may have used their abilities and influences to promote harmonious relationships between different racial groups in society. The members will be penalized.
Indeed, if it is argued that living people should be held liable for discriminatory acts committed by their ancestors, the time of the discriminatory acts is irrelevant: of discriminatory acts. Violators say it is no longer necessary to create a causal relationship between them.
The most important issue raised by the CRT is that the theory refutes the assumption that “race” is irrelevant to profit sharing and burden imposition.
Christopher F. Rufo gives an example.recently Published paper, He said, “In the name of fairness, UCLA law professor and critical racial theorist Cheryl Harris has suspended private property rights, robbed land and wealth, and along their races. Proposed to redistribute. “
He also created a permanent federal anti-racist bureau where US CRT supporters “have the power to invalidate, reject, or abolish all levels of government law and reduce political remarks. I’m looking for. ” Leaders and other people who are considered inadequate anti-racists. “
In the world of CRTs, society should accept the idea that race is a distinguishing feature and gives priority to races that are not available to others.
But in Australia, does this restoration of racial relevance certainly have the ability to stereotype people and constitute a violation of Australia’s 1975 Racism Act (Cth)?
If race is considered in the sharing of profits and the imposition of burdens, it will promote racism and lead to the abolition of freedom of speech.
Perhaps ethnically European Australians may rely on the controversial Section 18C of Racism Act 1975 (Cth). This makes it illegal to “anger, insult, humiliate, or intimidate” someone for race. relief?
CRTs have the ability to promote “racism” in society. This may be one of the reasons why former High Court Judge Ian Callinan confidently claimed that there were attempts to justify the adoption of different laws by different groups. There is. Need to resist..
CRTs destroy the proper functioning of a cohesive society and undermine the functioning of the university. According to wise words It should be Cardinal John Henry Newman’s “education of intelligence.”
Gabriël A. Moens is an emeritus professor at the University of Queensland. He is Vice President and Dean of Law at Murdoch University and has taught extensively in Europe, the United States, Asia and Australia. He wrote a short story and published Twisted Choice, a novel about the origin of COVID-19 (Boolarong Press, 2020).
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.