[.uk] Beyond All Reason: The Radical Assault on Truth in ... (ISBN 0195107179)

Amazon.com Review:
There is a school of legal scholarship that blends some of the most radical theories extant in legal circles today, christened "radical multiculturalism" by Daniel A. Farber and Suzanna Sherry, law professors at the University of Minnesota; in their book, Beyond All Reason, they give us plenty of reasons to worry about it. According to Farber and Sherry, both long-standing liberals, radical multiculturalism gives liberalism a bad name. It is a system of thought that admits no objective reality, no truth, no hope of a just or equal society. Its proponents--everyone from critical race theorist Richard Delgado to feminist Catharine MacKinnon--posit that such values are merely tools of the dominant society (white males) used to keep everyone else subservient. In such a world, then, it doesn't matter whether or not O.J. Simpson killed his ex-wife; the objective truth in that case is less important than the fact that a black man was put on trial in a white-dominated society, making him at least as much a victim as Nicole Simpson. Farber and Sherry write with restraint and patience, but there's no doubt that they're seriously alarmed by what they see as the disproportionate power that radical multiculturalists wield in the legal world. Though their numbers are small, proponents of this kind of legal thinking are vocal and aggressive; their influence is being reflected more and more by the choices of law school professors and deans, the slant of curriculums, and eventually in the thinking of the students they teach. To Farber and Sherry, such a turn of events is cause for deep concern, for what hope can there be for real justice--real peace--in a legal system that rejects the existence of truth--or worse, denies that it matters.

HALF TRUTHS AND MISSING FACTS.....:
While well written and easy to follow, Farber and Sherry's book fails to provide their audience with an accurate picture of Critical Race Theory (CRT or "radical multiculturalism," as coined by the authors). They begin by only citing short conclusory statements made by CRT scholars and the authors never explore the reasoning behind the CRT scholars' conclusions. After curiously leaving this information out of their book, the authors then attack CRT, claiming it is based on story telling, as opposed to legal reasoning. CRT is based on logical premises and reasoning, Farber and Sherry just fail to acknowledge it. Instead of critically engaging and challenging the authenticity of CRT- they merely dismiss it as anti-Semitic, irrational, and emotionally charged. The authors also neglect to explore other plausible explanations for the success of Asians or Jews, that is not anti-Semitic or anti-Asian in nature. For anyone interested in the topic, it is crucial that you consult with Professor Deborah Malamud's response to the assertion that CRT is inherently anti-Semitic (Please see "The Jew Taboo," 59 Ohio St.L.J. 915). Another review of Farber and Sherry worth reading is by Professor Beverly Horsburgh (Please see "The Myth of a Model Minority: The Transformation of Knowledge into Power," 10 UCLA Women's L.J. 165).

Clear, carefully argued and sober.:
With a clarity and unpretentious use of language, with thoughtful supply of definitions, and the presentation of a methodical and structured argument Farber and Sherry take on the obscurantism and pretentious polemics of post-modern "scholarship". While their arguments and marshalling of facts are impressive, their style and form is also exemplary of the best in Western enlightened tradition. Very strongly recommended.

Reasonable Doubt:
While this book provided a valuable insight to the psychology and motives of the multiculturalist left, a good deal of its content was tied up in polemics. It gives a clear image of the effects and sources of the current attack on reality that has emerged from university philosophy departments and proceeds to infiltrate our legal system like a subtle swamp monster. For the reader who is not familiar with the origins of multiculturalism, it provides a sound history and family tree for the movement. Much of the book is involved in critiquing the ideas of racial and feminist activists and the implications multiculturalism has for American individualism. Particular attention is paid to its implications regarding racism towards minorities who have been successful in America, such as Asians and Jews. On the whole, a good criticism of a dangerous trend, but lacking in real cohesiveness and counterargument.

Impressive and Important:
Amazing there are only two reviews of this book here. I finally read this and liked it a great deal. The central idea is that "radical multiculturalism" is distinguishable from what is known as critical legal studies, and that an inherently racist set of assumptions forms the core of radical multiculturalism. Since the radical multiculturalist rejects appeals to the concept of merit (or just dessert), he or she cannot use that concept in an explanation of the disproportional success of Jews and Asians in the alleged white gentile male conspiracy that is the Western world in the eyes of all the alleged kulturexperts on kampus. Jews are overrepresented on law faculties, in the sciences, in the arts and so on, including hollywood and broadway. Asians are far more likely than whites to attend college, as are Jews, and so on. (The numbers involved here are well known and uncontroversial for the most part.) Since the radical multiculturalist holds that it is not merit that gets people where they are in the world, they seem to believe that Jews and Asians, like whites, do not deserve the success that they have enjoyed. In order to explain that unearned (unmerited) success, the multicultie critic can appeal either to: A) Jews and Asians are highly successful manipulators of an unethical system (of the white male conspiracy), or B) Jews and Asians are successful due to their own unethical systems (conspiracies) to promote themselves and their own power. Both explanations open to the radical multicultie are prima facie racist, prima facie anti-Semitic, prima-facie slanderous of Asian people. This is the heart of the book, the main charge against radical multicultie. The authors are interested in a larger point of view, however, including the rejection of truth and the rejection of objectivity in radical legal scholarship. Most interesting and weird of the highlights of this work are the authors' reports and commentaries on the new law review fashion of publishing stories. These first person narratives are alleged to teach a great deal more about the law than abstract legal reasoning 'ever could'--so plea the race romantics. Farber and Sherry have a field day with this nonsense. I found the final chapter, anatomy of an ideology, very valuable. It is surely the most succinct statement of the way that American radicalism works that I have ever seen. All by itself, this chapter is worth the cost of the book. The fact that you get the long and extensive analysis of the racism inherent in multicultie makes this book money very well spent on a sizable amount of material that, due to its rational (not merely fashionable) nature, will never lose value. The arguments discussed vis a vis education in law, transfer immediately to other fields, that is, the point of view that Farber and Sherry have taken, and the tactics they use to undermine their opponents' views, are in no way limited to legal studies or legal practice. The entire book is transferable almost verbatim to disputes in English departments, in Business and so on. Radical multicultie is racism, and there should be no surprise in that, since it is the result of the caving in of the intellect to pity and moral tyrrany--that is to say, the american doctrine of identity politics developed in the wake of the general university policy of accomodating and making concessions to ignorance, envy, vanity, and even racist sentiments, as long as they were 'authentic' sentiments from "authetically pityable" classes. It is the result of these concessions, and as doctrine, amounts to special pleading for the allowableness of some forms of vileness, but not others. Ultimately, it is a policy sculpted to not demand non-racist attitudes from race baiters and other 'good racists'--. That kind of racism is good, and we need more of it, thinks the official radicalism on campus today.

If you think some Supreme Court decisions are a little crazy, read this book!:
This is an ultra-patient examination of such recent "theories" as Critical Legal Theory and Critical Race Theory and their (unsupported) claims that such bourgeois concepts as reality, knowledge, reason and merit are merely masks for the power interests of white people. If this seems too ridiculous to bother reading about, consider the fact that these people now control most or all of the major law schools in America, and that many judges on the benches of courtrooms throughout the United States have been taught to think this way. And as time goes on, even more judges will be from these law schools. "Legal multiculturalists want to change the law immediately--to censor some forms of speech, to expand legal protections for minority groups, and to revamp affirmative action." (p. 35) And remember that today's judges no longer recognize the outmoded distinction between judicial and legislative functions. They won't need a vote of the people or an act of Congress to impose their will on you. This book should be read by every American, whether interested in the law or not. Of course, you'll want to find out what other areas of American society this brand of sophisticated insanity has infected. The best place to start is the new book While America Sleeps: How ... and Indoctrination are Destroying America From Within. While America Sleeps: How Islam, Immigration and Indoctrination Are Destroying America From Within. Why? Because these ideas, which most sensible people would dismiss as crackpot, have actually been the ideas guiding social policy in the United States for the last thirty years. The results have been catastrophic, and they're getting worse all the time. Most readers will grow impatient with the thorough, methodical examination and refutation of some of the apparently cocaine-induced "theories", but since they are taken as a basis for law, the case has to be made.