Critical Theory as Method, Metanarrative, and Mood
This is a phenomenal summary and response to the evangelical debate about CRT. However, one question does come to mind in reading it: At what point does “CRT as mood” become a “trump card” closing debate and inquiry?
A recent example that comes to mind is the Ma’Khiah Bryant incident recently, where the police shot and killed a 16 year old black girl who was attacking another girl with a knife. The initial cries of “racism! police brutality! white supremacy!” deserved to be interrogated, and seemed to many to have been neutralized to the video that showed a very strong justification for the police to take deadly action to protect the girl being assaulted. But to some commentators, even with the video that demonstrates justification for the shooting there’s a claim of grievance. At some point, someone who tells you he is bleeding, but on whom you cannot detect blood, has to be called out for attention seeking or delusional behavior.
A friend of mine gave me a different example a few years ago that has always stuck with me. You’re with a black friend at a bar, and she goes to get a drink. It takes her a little while and she comes back upset because she had to wait so long. “It’s because I’m black,” she observes. “Goddamn white supremacy.” “How do you know?” you ask, looking over at the bar. The bartender seems really busy – there seems to be a backlog of patrons waiting for drinks. “Did he say anything?” “I just know, alright?” your friend replies. Do you:
A) Share your observation that the bartender just seems to be backed up and might even be kind short or abrupt because he’s overwhelmed at the moment, and that race might easily have had nothing to do with this.
or
B) Affirm and empathize with the feeling that your friend’s skin color may have led somebody to treat her unfavorably.
For the record, my friend who posed this question gave me “B” as the “correct” answer. This has never sat well with me, because I know from my own experiences that my “mood” is not always in alignment with reality, I think that it’s to my benefit (and to anyone’s benefit) that alignment is as near as possible. Indeed, it seems somewhat patronizing to just “affirm and empathize” when the evidence to my eyes would say that this response isn’t merited by the facts of the situation.
So, to what degree does CRT as “mood” close off discussion or debate? Certainly, all “moods” cannot be equally merited? But to try to argue somebody out of a mood runs the risk of being accused of “gaslighting”. And maybe it’s not the end of the world to just allow somebody to sit with the mood and try to be compassionate toward them, but when their “mood” demands actions in response, how do you thread the needle of justice and empathy? What if your friend at the bar demands you not tip this bartender? What if she asks for your keys so she can scratch his car?
CRT as mood is very helpful to understand what’s going on, but I would love to see more about how it can be productively engaged.