Philosophy

The paper discusses the basic principles of Critical Race Theory. CRT is positioned as superior to the rest of legal philosophies. The philosophic superiority of CRT is in that is does not deny racism and uses racism as the starting point of legal analysis. CRT is superior to other theories because it serves the first step in the development of affirmative action approaches it seeks to balance racial realism with the striving to racial equity and it confirms the need for institutionalizing approaches to racial injustice.

Critical Race Theory Introduction
In the context of legal philosophy, Critical Race Theory (CRT) is fairly regarded as one of the critical tools of philosophic analysis. Based on the assumption that American society remains deeply racist and that such racism is fundamentally a matter of the racial inequalities that result from the normal functioning of American institutions (Altman, 2001), CRT stands out as one of the major legal and philosophic criticism to liberalism and one of the major sources of knowledge about racial structures in present day American society. That CRT is superior to other, similar legal philosophic theories is readily justified through the following assumptions CRT does not deny the presence of racism CRT uses the recognition of racism as the starting point of legal analysis CRT serves as the first stage in the development of affirmative action approaches CRT seeks to balance permanence of racism with the societys striving to racial equity and CRT creates conditions necessary to institutionalize approaches to racial injustice.

Critical Race Theory Five Conditions of Philosophic Superiority
That CRT recognizes racism as the fundamental element of social structures in America is the first reason why CRT is superior to other, similar philosophic theories. CRT is probably the only legal philosophy that does not deny the presence or racism in America and implies the need for the society and legal institutions to act against it. CRT supporters believe that it is at least wrong and even inappropriate to believe that the society is colorblind, or that colorblind policies can work for the benefit of racial equality rather, the recognition of racism in America may become a good basis for developing more effective approaches to racial justice (Altman, 2001).

Second, CRT is superior to other philosophic theories because it can serve the starting point in the analysis of present day racial structures and the impact, which they produce on the quality of legal decisions in America. CRT is the form of legal realism and an effective philosophic critique of traditional legal science, which takes legal impartiality for granted and does not seek to trace the problem of impartial judging through the prism of racial relationships in society (Mills, 1999).

Third, CRT is superior to other legal philosophies on the premise that other philosophies like affirmative action are impossible without CRT. Racial realism that distinguishes CRT from other philosophies serves a good ground for developing philosophic approaches similar to affirmative action. CRT views such philosophies as potentially effective tools of combating racial inequality (Altman, 2001), but developing these philosophies and legal approaches is impossible without recognizing the presence of racism (through CRT) and the need for addressing it.

Fourth, CRT is superior to other legal philosophies because it strives to balance the permanence of racism in society with the social striving to racial equity. Racial realism tends to threaten the principles and norms of racial equity, as long as it is limited to the recognition of racial inequality and does not vote for developing effective approaches against it. CRT, however, seeks to improve the conditions of minorities through the combined use of social activism, political mobilization, creative legal interpretation, and disobedience to the rule of law (Altman, 2001).

Fifth, CRT is superior to other philosophic theories because it confirms the need for institutionalizing approaches to racial injustice. The lack of racial recognition leads to the growing inflexibility of law and the lack of legal responsiveness to the emerging and existing social trends (e.g., racism). According to Mills (1999), a fixed homosocial law is inevitably associated with danger, because it fails to respond to affectivity that turns oppression into violence. As a result, extinguishing or at least minimizing racism is impossible without recognizing its permanence in the American society and the system of justice. Here, CRT looks like the starting point in the rational analysis of the social conditions and structures that predetermine the quality of justice and judging in the current system of law.

Conclusion
Critical Race Theory is included into the list of the basic legal philosophies. CRT is based on the premise that American society is racist and racism is the product of the existing racial inequalities. CRT is superior to other theories because it does not deny racism, it serves the starting point of racial legal analysis, it makes the development of affirmative action philosophies possible, it seeks to balance permanence of racism with the striving to equity, and it confirms the need for institutionalizing approaches to racial injustice. CRT creates conditions necessary for addressing racism in the legal system and shows racial realism as the fundamental element of objectivity and impartiality in the current system of law.