Essay On Critical Race Theory

The article “On Racist Speech” by Charles R. Lawrence III discusses the issue of free speech and its involvement in racism, where the boundaries are not very well established between free speech and hate speech. Lawrence introduces the conflict found on university campuses, where the First Amendment is pushed to its limits with “face-to-face insults, catcalls, or other assaultive speech.” Lawrence also discusses the use of free speech as an outlet for the grievances of minorities, writing that “Freedom of speech is the lifeblood of our democratic system.”

In this paper I will analyze the arguments presented in Caroline West’s article, “Words That Silence? Freedom of Express and Racist Hate Speech.” Here West probes what is meant by free speech and in so doing, identifies three dimensions of speech from which the value of free speech derives. These are production and distribution, comprehension, and consideration. Her major premise is that absent requirements of comprehension or consideration, free speech lacks the value it is generally accorded. West argues that allowing the production and distribution of racist hate speech has a silencing effect on, not only the production and distribution of speech by racial minorities, but the comprehension and consideration of their speech as well. She concludes that this silencing may have a net effect of diminishing free speech.

Despite changes in the landscape for treatment of ethnic minorities in the United States over the past 200 years, issues with racism has never stopped being an issue and continues to tarnish and tatter the very fabric of our nation. There has been a history of violence against Black people that dates back 400 years, to a time when the first slave was forcefully brought here to the USA (Rogers, 2015). From that time on, people of African descent have been dehumanized and treated as second-class citizens and this has become an ongoing community issue (Diversi, 2016). Racial classification was created as a way to condone slavery and maintain the primacy of the white race (Tolliver, Hadden, Snowden, & Manning, 2016). Aymer (2016) explains that the Critical Race Theory (CRT) provides a way to understand that the violence that Blacks face in America originates from the societal belief in White superiority and, when trying to understand the Black reality, centuries of racial oppression must be discussed (Aymer, 2016). CRT acknowledges that racism is primarily a problem in America and has contributed to the social disparities in the U.S. In addition, it notes other forms of oppression that are important to discuss and work through. CRT does not believe in the legal rhetoric that there is an impartial, equal way of dealing with individuals in the community that has nothing to do with color and everything to do with achievement and hard work. It also takes on an interdisciplinary

As hate crimes have risen in number during the past five years; many state governments have attempted to prevent such crimes by passing laws called bias laws. These laws make a crime that is motivated by hatred based on the victim’s race, religion, ethnic background, or sexual orientation a more serious crime than such an act would ordinarily be. Many people believe that these laws violate the criminal’s freedom of speech. Many hate group members say that freedom of speech is the right to say or write or publish one’s thoughts, or to express one’s self, they also say that this right is guaranteed to all Americans. But people and organizations who are against these hate groups ask themselves if the first amendment include and protect all form of expression, even those that ugly or hurtful like the burning crosses. The Supreme Court Justices have decided that some kinds of speech are not protected by the Constitution,

In assessing interpersonal relationships, the concept of race is a powerful factor. The United States upholds a problematic legacy in regard to the power discrepancies between racial minorities and white individuals. The race issues that currently exist in the U.S. are of unacceptable quantities but are also progressing through a path towards larger conflict that can be analyzed through theories of race and ethnicity, specifically critical race theory. After an overview of critical race theory, there will be an analysis of the historical context of the U.S., looking at slavery and segregation. A discussion of the existing systemic issues that reinforce power imbalances will follow. Subsequently, there will be an examination of “white privilege” and the violence that can emerge out of this notion. The stance that is being taken here is not merely that there is severe racism in U.S., but that in using critical race theory, one can see that race issues are so deeply rooted in society to the extent that it reinforces future inequality and violence.

Each time an individual is sentenced, there are purposes or goals behind sentencing the offender to ensure that it is fair to the them and beneficial to society. The Canadian correctional system has three main goals: to deter the offender from committing additional crimes, protect the population, and rehabilitate the offender. In order to do this, a sentence is given in propionate to the crime committed. The sentence must be fair to the offender, send a clear message to other offenders, and reasonable so that it addresses the interest of the public. Due to Aboriginals being overrepresented in Canadian legal institutions, there is a greater need for social context to be considered when a judge is sentencing an Aboriginal offender.

In today 's society, politics has become the uproar of many citizens ' daily lives. Many would ask how has hate become such an issue in the United States. Moreover, how does hate and politics are similar to each other. The article “Vandalized by Speech” states “America 's future depends on how well we learn to manage our diversity. Yet when it comes to hate speech, we pretty much adhere to the advice we give elementary school students to defend themselves against bullies”. However, the author Gregory Rodriguez informs how giving a speech can over turn onto a hate approach. Mr. Rodriguez also quotes Jeremy Waldron a New York University political philosopher that “racist rhetoric is a slow-acting poison”. Additionally this causes those who have a positive outlook on society to become difficult to be good hearted people (Jeremy Waldron). Negative views on certain situations such as judging one of its nationality of being criminals depresses the political participation of citizens. Such cases can trigger signs of those who may have a disorder.

The article displayed an statistic on how the african american male student fall below all of the other subgroups.Also showing that it is an unequal amount of student who dont plan to enroll in college from high school at all leaving the number of african american males scarce in the higher education category. Once enrolled and moving through college these student typically faced hardships that other subgroups may not face in their day to day life. Anumba mentioned the “Critical Race Theory”, which examined african american experience and the their educational outcome. The article finalize with african american student are deserving of assistance completing the the educational process. Obligating society to alter the status quo and beliefs

The argument given by Rae Langton in her podcast on whether hate speech should be outlawed in the USA (the argument strictly speaks in terms of the USA) is rather decent as she presents logical claims, yet ultimately the entire argument in itself could be strengthened to a greater degree. The conclusion she gives is that hate speech should be outlawed in the USA. However, she includes many implicit and dependent premises that can be refuted in some form, as they do not directly support the conclusion. In this essay, I will attempt go through three of the most relevant propositions, evaluate them, and provide ways in which they can be improved.

Critical Race Theory During the 1970s, in the field of law a group of legal scholars sought to uncover the influence of race on legal decisions and legislation. This discipline expanded beyond the field of law into other social spheres. Critical Race theory (CRT) provides a relevant framework for examining the peristent and pervasive negativity experienced by Blacks.

Firstly, when it comes to describing women that are non –white, different terminology is used by different authors or researchers, however in doing so this generally creates inconsistencies and in some form it loses value. For example , the term women of colour can be used to refer to ,African- American women, Asian, Hispanic, Native American and Indian ( generally used in the USA) (Davidson, 1997). Similarly Lee (2014) Refers to African-American women as ‘blacks ‘whereas Duff (2011) refers to south Asian, afro-Caribbean and African groups as Blacks On the other hand. Deakinns et al (1996) cited in Davidson (1997) use the term ethnic minority to incorporate various ethnic minority groups excluding the world black”, Somehow signifying the issue at Hand.

Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic phrase in their introduction to Critical race theory: the cutting edge, what in their opinion is the main essence of critical race theory. The intersection of race and law as well as power structures is a main element discussed in the collection of essays.

Prevalent to current events, victims of racism are repeatedly ignored or vilified when speaking the truth. More often than not, victims have to deal with being arrested, be violated or be battered by higher classes just because they spoke the truth that was not intended to hear by others. According to a Black Muslim woman who was living in Toronto, she “was bombarded by tweets from white men asking me to prove that racism exists” (Khogali, 2). Later on, she was ignored by the men who asked her in the beginning just because they did not believe the truth. This suggests that victims of racial discrimination do not have a freedom of speech because they are constantly being ignored or vilified for telling the truth about their conditions.

Like most democratic nations in the world, the United States has had its own fair share of issues with hate speech. There has been a lot of controversy over whether hate speech should be regulated. In analyzing the concept of free speech, one cannot ignore that it does not occur in a vacuum. There have been all types of debasements ranging from ethnic, religious, racial and gendered stereotyping. Freedom of speech inherently includes all other fundamental human rights. Hence, as acknowledged through natural rights, other rights and personhood should adamantly be included within this scope of this protection. Hate speech is a limit on free speech, as it not only puts the victim under deliberate psychological and physical harm, but also

Speech that attacks a person or group of people on the basis of race, gender, or sexual orientation is regarded as hateful. It has the potential to incite violence or prejudicial action against or by a protected group of people. In Millian Principles, Freedom of Expression, and Hate Speech, Mill makes the claim that essentially all speech, including hate speech, should be allowed. This claim holds its validity as long as no harm is done to an individual. Here, I will show that low value speech fails to engage deliberative views that underlie central first amendment fundamental liberties. Subsequently, I will support these claims by comparing the aspects of hate speech to low value speech. Lastly, I advocate for the prohibition against the use of hate speech in a university setting.