"Critical Race" Professors: Numbers are Constructs; Statistics are Racist

Scholars claim that statistics 'serve white racial interests'

Three British professors recently promulgated the theory that statistics "serve white racial interests" because "numbers are neither objective nor color-blind."

The "QuantCrit" approach has since attracted adherents among professors in the United States, several of whom have written their own articles suggesting ways of "disrupting racism in research."

Here's a taste:

These ‘QuantCrit’ ideas concern (1) the centrality of racism as a complex and deeply rooted aspect of society that is not readily amenable to quantification; (2) numbers are not neutral and should be interrogated for their role in promoting deficit analyses that serve White racial interests; (3) categories are neither ‘natural’ nor given and so the units and forms of analysis must be critically evaluated; (4) voice and insight are vital: data cannot ‘speak for itself’ and critical analyses should be informed by the experiential knowledge of marginalized groups; (5) statistical analyses have no inherent value but can play a role in struggles for social justice.

In other words, according to #5 the useless data can be shaped, formed, gerrymandered into use for SJWs.

The three authors are these:

Paul WarmingtonThe University of Warwick · Centre for Education Studies
· BA (English Lit), PGCE, PhD (Education)

Sean Demack, Sheffield Hallam University | SHU
Department of Psychology, Sociology and Politics
Sheffield [UK]

David Gillborn
School of Education
University of Birmingham
Edgbaston, Birmingham
Professor of Critical Race Studies
Director of Research, Director of the Centre for Research in Race & Education (CRRE) and Editor-in-Chief, Race Ethnicity and Education

Let's see. Education; Psychology; Sociology; Politics; English Lit.; Critical Race Studies. Well. At least one of them has a background in statistics (Demack) although his focus is in "QuantCrit" and Critical Race Theory for Statistics.

If you first define everything - EVERYTHIING - as racist, you will with perfect certainty find racism in EVERYTHING, even poor li'l ol' defenseless numbers. I think that the number four (4) is especially racist, but I do know that the number 42 explains everything.

One might suspect that using their "secondary" analysis of large public data bases, they might, just possibly, find a measurable difference between races: hence, "NUMBER RAAACISM!" On the other hand it might just be possible that there actually exists a genetic reason for the racial differential, rather than a devilish plot of Race B to suppress Race K.

But genetics is not their game. Nope, not at all. I suspect that statistics also is not. Critical Theory is.