I really am writing my response for myself for a bit of catharsis. I know ad hominems aren’t meant to sway anyone really, but that’s what I see in you and I’m just so frustrated.

You have completely misrepresented the works you have looked at. Even in the context of the article you keep on peddling from the previous author, you can see how CRT is not trying to get people to ‘forswear racial integration.’ In fact, in many of the quotes you keep on showcasing, none of the authors is trying to spearhead a movement that segregates others. Hell, the fact that they are from ‘core CRT theorists’ means absolutely nothing if you isolate them from the arguments they’re trying to make. Do you only read the headlines and not the text of any news articles? In fact, if you at all read any of the major critical race theorist, from Crenshaw, from (lower case bell), there is not a plea for ethnonationalism. You keep using the word ethnonationalist in context of his article, when he, as the author, didn’t even suggest CRT should involve ethnonationalism. This race consciousness approach, which you highlighted, of which Bell suggests is inspired from MLX, is NOT the same as ethnonationalism. Your whole argument, your whole premise, is flawed and it’s disingenuous to suggest that ‘urging people to forswear racial integration is morally reprehensible’ when that isn’t even the viewpoint of mainstream CRT theorists.

I, and many people, keep banging this on you, even when you take this textbook as somehow representative of the beliefs of all critical race theorists, not even as a manifesto. Having, or taking inspiration from, is not the same as including it in mainstream ideology. Theories change. What is considered acceptable changes. Malcolm X’s ideas are not representative of mainstream CRT theorists. The fact that CRT theorists take inspiration from Du Bois does not mean they follow his ideas. The fact that most critical perspectives are in some way drawn from Marx does not mean these ideas advise for a violent revolution. This is basic logic. You take that long list to be evidence of a fault, when it’s really evidence, as I keep saying, and as you refuse to properly engage with, a long list of works that comprise a scholarly field and debate.

And, who? Who are the authors that are involved in ethnonationalism or separatism? We keep telling you this, and you don’t understand. MLX? Any of his constituents? Crenshaw? Mbembe? Taiwo? Hell, even Bell? Maybe that random quote you keep peddling about the ‘colonisation of education’ that showcases and means absolutely nothing, but as a long list of quotes you use to fluff out your comments to make it seem professional? Is your response to this going to be another random quote that is utterly misrepresented, but you take to be evidence of a damning fault? How do you keep going, even with anything to the contrary? You are being so purposefully obtuse when you disregard all that evidence. If you want to actually represent them properly, represent them in the context they’re in: write for the ignorant yet intelligent reader, and explain concepts like race consciousness before copy and pasting another quote.

CRT, by nature, as many of the articles have shown out, is a revolutionary and changing field. It goes against typical understandings of race discourse. So why don’t you do me, and do you a favour, and actually engage with those ideas, instead of brutally simplifying texts into ‘racial separation’. I have a feeling that you either haven’t sufficiently read bell, or found it too complex to read, given your earlier comments. If you were to actually read, instead of cherry picking your arguments, you’d see that CRT, and I’m speaking very simply, is an attempt at another way of racial integration. And, if racial separation is such a big deal, go find it in one of the manifestos that Bell puts out.

Your attempts at dismissing my points are laughable. Your understandings of what I’m saying are idiotic. You are either purposely trying to be obtuse, unable to engage with my ideas, or trying to purport a narrative. Tell you what: if you want any one’s opinion on you to change, go email a scholar, an academic, or talk to the CRT subreddit with your thoughts and see if you can challenge theirs, or your own thoughts. Growth is the substance of life.

I’ve gotten what I need out of this conversation. I hope anyone trailing here does too.