Critical Race Theory is all over the news right now, particularly how terrible it is that Republicans want to ban it from being taught in school, with many people saying Republicans can’t even define it.
Critical Race Theory is just the racial branch of Critical Theory.
Critical Theory is a field of study that comes straight from the teachings of Karl Marx.
This is the simplest way to explain it:
Marx wanted a socialist revolution, where the lower classes would rise up against the upper class and take their stuff.
Marxists needed to foment enough class division to kick off that revolution.
Critical Theory is the academic application of Marxism where students are taught to be critical of everything in society by teaching them only the bad parts about it.
The thesis is everything that society is made up of two groups, oppressors and the oppressed. Everything that is “good” is good because the oppressors say it’s so, and everything that is “bad” is bad only because the oppressors say it’s so.
Traditional Marxism focused on socioeconomic class.
Modern Critical Theory breaks it up into every possible division, socioeconomic class, race, gender, sexuality, etc.
Critical Literary Theory says the great works of literature are only great because they were written by the oppressor class, i.e., white men, and teaches only to be critical of the books because of who the writers are.
The idea of “decolonize your bookshelf” means to read only works by authors who are not white men, entirely because they are not white men.
Queer Theory pits LGBT people against straight people.
Feminist Theory pits women against men.
Critical Race Theory pits BIPOC (black, indigenous, and people of color) against white people.
It invokes only the worst stereotypes and caricatures and teaches hate and division.
This is absolutely the core of Critical Theory.
Critical Race Theory is so effective today because America is on the cusp of being, and is in its larger cities, a majority-minority country, i.e., the majority of the population is made up of minorities.
Hence why BIPOC is a buzzword in Critical Race Theory. There is no unifying BIPOC identity. What does a black person descended from slaves have in common with a Chinese-America whose family came to California in the 1800s, or a Japenese-American whose family came here in the 1980s, or a Mexican-American whose family has been in Texas since Texas joined the Union, or a Cuban-American who came here after the Cuban Revolution, and I could go on like this all day.
Nothing, except that Critical Race Theory wants to lump all these people together and teach them they are oppressed because all put together they outnumber white people.
We saw this during the Russian Revolution where the poorer peasants were taught to hate the slightly wealthier peasants, calling them Kulaks, and engaged in the systematic destruction of the Kulaks, sending them to Gulags and then murdering them.
While the AP Stylebook announced it will “capitalize Black in a racial, ethnic or cultural sense, conveying an essential and shared sense of history, identity and community among people who identify as Black, including those in the African diaspora and within Africa.”
Social Media has reduced white for white people down to “yt” which is even more dehumanizing.
Dehumanizing a group and encouraging hatred of that group is the goal.
And what is the first manifestation of rampant dehumanization?
Casual violence against that group.
https://twitter.com/NKrankie/status/1404119908145942532
History shows us where this goes.
Small acts of violence metastasize into big acts of violence.
Pogroms agasint the Jews.
Mobs of Turks beating, raping, and destroying the homes of Armenian Christians.
The massacre of the Tutis by the Hutus.
What needs to be remembered is that most genocides didn’t occur like the Holocaust. That was unique in that it was carried out in a highly organized and mechanized way by a uniformed military. That is very German.
Most genocides, like the Armenian genocide, the Tutsi genocide, Jews at the hands of the Arabs, the partition of Inida, the Rape of Nanjing, were much more of a murderous free-for-all.
We have already seen groups like Antifa go into mostly white suburban neighborhoods and harass people.
The next stage of evolution is an angry mob going into a neighborhood to commit arson, beatings, and murder.
America used to be an exceptional place where we had racial and ethnic divisions that, while imperfect, were still largely better than anywhere else in the world which routinely broke out into sectarian, ethic, and tribal violence with death tolls in the tens of thousands to millions.
With the deliberate injection of Marxism into America, that exceptionalism is coming to an end, and pogroms and Tusi-massacre-like mobs are on the horizon.
Perhaps nothing quite says “get off my lawn” like something in a 30 caliber, and a belt feed.
Only problem is that the neighbors might not have their sandbag wall high enough.
Hmmm. Needs more thought.
Which is why they need to disarm you first, either by flat out banning or just making it so hard to own them that most people give up (making the flat out banning much easier, later. See also: 1986 MG Ban)
Like, you know, telling people that braces were okay for 10 years and then suddenly making almost all braced firearms illegal overnight.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CQECoiqHuCl/
It’s not as far of a stretch as you’d like to think to go from “AR pistols are actually short barrel rifles because you need two hands to use them effectively” to “Glocks are short barrel rifles because the marketing materials all show two-handed operation.”
If a stock can turn into a machine gun by EO, then a service pistol can turn into an SBR by EO.
The stuff jkb is talking about is happening now in cities where effective self-defense has been banned or severely limited for the last 40 years. It will take longer to hit blue enclaves in red states than red enclaves in blue states because of that.
“BIPOC (black, indigenous, and people of color) ”
Why do blacks get their own letter? Aren’t blacks part of “people of color”?
Asking for a friend.
They’re moving the Overton Window. In about five to ten years, the “B” and the “I” will be gone and only the “POC” will matter… and they’ll come up with a new newspeak term to replace it.
This is how they’re going to convince their own base that European-Americans with university degrees and wealthy families are actually from oppressed minority groups too… and therefore should be their leaders.
Consider Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D NY-14) who frequently describes herself as a “first generation child of immigrants.” Despite the very simple fact that everyone in her immediate family were natural-born U.S. citizens and that her family came from Spain to colonize North America more than a century before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock.
She’s a rich “white” woman of privilege, but because the collectivists have somehow convinced so many of us that having grandparents who grew up speaking Spanish somehow alters the human genetic structure, she’s now a “Person of Color.”
@Ish: AOC is a POS (sorry about the ad hominem).
Separating the really stupid from the average stupid?
@EN2 SS: 🤣
“Since we are socialists, we must necessarily also be antisemites because we want to fight against the very opposite: materialism and greed… How can you not be an antisemite, being a socialist?” –Adolf Hitler (Munich Speech; 15 August 1920)
Hitler and the National Socialist German Workers Party did not become collectivists because they hated ethnic minorities. They hated ethnic minorities because they were collectivists.
The march towards authoritarian collectivism always begins by getting a free society of individual people to buy into the notion that those individuals can be divided into distinct groups: “Aryan” and “Juden.” “Hutu” and “Tutsi.” “Proletariat” and “Capital.” “Black” and “White.”
Once you’ve bought into that notion, the next rung up the later is to convince you that those distinctions are significant and that membership in one is a (and eventually THE) defining factor in the identity of the person. There aren’t 46+ million individuals in the United States who happen to all be black. There are 46+ million Blacks, who lead Black Live, within their Black Community, who need to use their Black Voice to speak about the Black Experience.
Once you’re standing on that rung of the ladder, they start teaching you how your group was done wrong by another group… and since you’ve come to believe in collective identity instead of individual agency, it doesn’t matter if it happened to you, your grandfather, or your great-great-great-great-grandmother. Nor does it matter if it was perpetrated by your neighbor, his grandfather, or his great-great-great-great-grandmother. At some point “They” treated “Us” badly. All of “They” are complicit in what happened to “Us.”
A few more rungs up the ladder and you’re walking down the market road in Kigali with a machete in your hand or your driving a locomotive hauling cattle cars out to rural Poland.
The Holocaust was the National Socialist answer to a question posed originally by Marx.
Well said, Ish!
Jkb: spot on!
Blog readers
If you want details of what he so adeptly summarized, I have several books that go to great detail about this danger to the America that we love and want to continue.
What JKB summarized so adeptly is absolutely true.
The Marxists are using race hatred to divide and conquer us.
Sounds and acts like a howler monkey. Not sorry.
That’s because that scrawny little hyena is usually the little b##tch getting slapped around by the alpha dog and rest of the gang on that corner. He just happy it ain’t him that afternoon, even though he will be hit and/or humiliated later on that week. He is the one that gets turned out in prison, and he secretly loves it.
How is that for dehumanizing someone?
“Critical Theory is the academic application of Marxism where students are taught to be critical of everything in society by teaching them only the bad parts about it.”
Short and sweet. Perhaps the best one line description I have read so far. And, it explains so much.
Imagine a white male did that to a black female? He kicks her stomach, punches her face, and listen to his friend howling with laughter on the ground at the end.*
Or, imagine the male youths depicted acting as moral, reasonable human beings and NOT savagely kicking and punching the girl or laughing about it.
This is a disturbing pattern I’ve noticed on social media.
A white male says something kinda-sorta mean about a black person (usually quoted out of context), and the reaction is, “Who is this racist? Get his name, his address, his employer, and publish it far and wide.” (Videos of white people criminally assaulting black people are extremely rare; it doesn’t happen often.)
A black male full-on unprovoked assaults a white person, and the reaction is, “Imagine if a white male did this to a black female.”
Just step back for a second and think about that dichotomy.
We’re no longer allowed to judge an individual’s actions based on the action. Everything — everything — is viewed through the lens of race and racial conflict, to the point that we no longer agree on such fundamental principles that assaulting people is wrong.
A black man kicks and punches a white girl and his black friend rolls on the ground laughing, and instead of condemning the violent act, we’re expected to justify it by acknowledging that if the races were reversed it would be double-plus wrong.
Meanwhile, another criminal walks free because nobody has the spine to call a spade a spade.
In a sane world, absent some legal justification, it would be wrong no matter who was kicking who, and that youth would be in jail for assault and battery.
And it shouldn’t be “racist” to point that out. Just sayin’.
——-
* – I did, and part of that thought experiment involved the black female with a knife or some other dangerous/deadly weapon, coming at a legally-armed white male, thus making the kick-and-punch 100% justified AND the lesser of evils.
Yup, this is all about taking other people’s stuff.
“Marx wanted a socialist revolution, where the lower classes would rise up against the upper class and take their stuff.
Marxists needed to foment enough class division to kick off that revolution.”
This, right here, is what I see underlying all the various culturally destabilizing “movements” that have been going on since the 60s.
True believer Marxists recognized the failure of the USSR, but rather than blame the theory, decided the Soviets did not go far enough. If getting rid of wealth from the Old Culture could not bring about Utopia, they had to destroy EVERYTHING from the Old Culture instead.
America’s external enemies latched on to it, fomented it, as a way to attack our foundations and bring us low.
And Those Who Would Rule latched on, for the power it gave them over others.
Everything from the Free Love movement to the LGTBQBBQPedo advocates to Occupy Wall Street to ELF/ALF to Antifa to drug culture to BLM – they all have common roots in Marxist rhetoric and Marxist support.
It’s public information that the KGB encouraged such movements as destabilizing factors, from documents released after the fall of the Iron Curtain, in much the same fashion as the West supporting freedom movements behind the curtain.
China now is supporting many of the same things via their bought and paid for proxies in govt and tech.
Know our enemies. Only some are foreign.
See my comments on the next post…