Second-year medical student, Kieran Bhattacharya, was expelled from the University of Virginia after he repeatedly asked questions about apparent contradictions within a presentation about Critical Race Theory (CRT) from administrators and faculty. Bhattacharya’s lawsuit over the expulsion is moving forward in federal court. For details see:
National Socialists in Germany developed a similar racial theory, Aryanism. Aryanism taught that Germanic peoples were the master race, and virtually everyone else was genetically inferior. Slavs and Jews were inherently evil, but curiously Japanese were treated as honorary Aryans.
Is CRT just a modern example of a race-based pseudoscience used to justify a political ideology?
Is the real message not to question authorities about CRT’s inconsistencies and contradictions?
The presentation in question was about micro aggressions.
This is one of those times where it seems the entire story isn’t being told. It’s quite possible this student was unfairly removed from the university. It’s also possible the school had good reason to have him removed. It’s hard to say.
One paragraph that seems important that the Post seems to glaze over …
The group voted to suspend Bhattacharya for “aggressive and inappropriate interactions in multiple situations” and about a month later, UVA police demanded he leave the campus for allegedly making threatening comments on social media platforms.
Seems important context as to why he was ultimately kicked out of school.
That’s what I was wondering while I read the article. How does microaggression equal critical race theory? Based on information given in the article I’d say the school was wrong in their actions. Would need to know the full story though.
I remember hearing lecture in college from someone who grew up in pre-war Germany. He described a visit at his school by a scholar from Japan who explained how the Germans and Japanese shared a common Aryan history that makes them inherently racially superior.
I suspect a student who asked critical questions about Aryanism would have been expelled or worse based on similar logic to that used by the University of Virginia.
Yes, the court case is based on First Amendment arguments.
On the other hand, the specific issue is whether students are free to question the definition of microaggression and other elements of Critical Race Theory without fear of retaliation by university administrators.
My experience is that people in authority are fine with free speech so long as they agree with it. Speech that expresses opposing opinions is frequently the target.
Some institutions are deciding to present their versions of CRT as something else then. My training at a college is designed to make anyone who isn’t a minority feel uncomfortable according to the presenters. The sessions are ongoing with bi-weekly mandatory virtual meetings. We’re told this is our foundation learning. I get a feeling things are being created as they go along