When Something Actually IS Marxist, It Is OK to Call It That

By Rob Meyne

  • March 16, 2022
  • 4-min read

Opponents of CRT don’t need to mislead people or misrepresent it. When the truth is this damaging, you don’t need to make things up.

The accurate history of Critical Race Theory is so controversial that its supporters often aren’t even aware of it. Many others are aware but try to hide it. If the tenets of CRT sound suspiciously Marxist, it’s for a good reason: it is. We don’t mean Marxist in a general sense; we mean Marxist in that, literally, CRT is an outgrowth of Marxist teachings.

When you say a policy is Marxist, some people immediately disregard the comment. They’ve heard the charge so often they assume it’s false or hyperbole. That is kind of a problem since some of the policies promoted by the Democratic Party and its apparatchiks actually are Marxist. CRT is an example.

Forgive a bit of fairly dry, but hugely important, history. CRT was developed by Marxist activists well-versed in their preferred political theory. So are some other movements.

Black Lives Matter was founded by self-described “trained Marxists.” BLM is a great phrase and a terrible organization. And, yes, it is committed to eliminating capitalism, undermining the family, and destroying many of our institutions. The woke corporations who have thrown money at BLM mostly don’t even have a clue who they are supporting, where the money goes, or who BLM leaders are. See here: Black Lives Matter co-founder describes herself as ‘trained Marxist’

CRT is an outgrowth of Marxist Critical Theory, a product of the Frankfurt School of Marxism. CRT was developed as a strategy to change the economic systems of nations, ensure economic equality, and replace class structures. There is a good piece in the American Spectator that discusses the Marxist origins of Critical Theory. It also notes that many contemporary online entries on CRT have been completely scrubbed of any references to Marxism. Wikipedia, for example, doesn’t mention Marxism except in a few footnotes. See here: Marxism and Critical Race Theory – The American Spectator | USA News and Politics

With Marxist Critical Theory as its progenitor, Critical Race Theory views society through the lens of race. Everything about America is assumed to be driven by people obsessed with race and who use it to build their own power. It argues for the destruction of capitalism; it condemns America’s economic, governmental, and legal institutions; and it maintains that all white people, and the country’s government and institutions, are inherently and irredeemably racist. Again, CRT does not suggest these are possibilities worthy of discussion; it simply asserts it is all true. So, if you don’t think America is irredeemably racist, all whites are suppressors, all blacks are victims, or that we need to throw capitalism overboard, you will find there is common ground with CRT.

CRT has become an important issue largely because it is being used widely, in whole or in part, in public schools as well as corporate and governmental venues. It was a central issue in the Virginia governor’s race, where Republican Glenn Youngkin won an unexpected victory over former governor, and Clinton intimate, Democrat Terry McAuliffe. Youngkin, appropriately, maintained that parents have a right to be involved in the education of their children, to have a voice in it, and to know what they are being taught. McAuliffe said, essentially, that parents didn’t have a right to be involved.

All of this took part against a backdrop of sexual assaults, controversy over transgender rights in schools, and cover-ups in Loudon County. The mendacious responses from that school district on those issues didn’t give voters confidence in them. There is a good piece that summarizes Critical Race Theory, and the effect it had on Youngkin’s campaign. See https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/future-schools-and-critical-race-theory-after-youngkins-victory

It is notable that McAuliffe, and his enablers in the media and Democratic leadership, embraced a clever strategy in defending their state from objections to Critical Race Theory: they lied. Pure and simple. McAuliffe had previously promoted CRT. During the campaign, McAuliffe said, publicly and repeatedly, that CRT was not present in Virginia schools. But the concept was still being promoted on the Commonwealth of Virginia website for the Department of Education. Again, they just lied. No problem.

One of the more important things to understand about CRT is that it is a strategy to effect change in our communities, states, and nation, rather than being a body of knowledge. It is about persuasion more than facts. A piece from Slate includes this statement about CRT: “It’s about righting wrongs, not just questing after knowledge.” See Derrick Bell controversy: What’s “critical race theory,” and is it radical? (slate.com).

CRT is also essential to the Biden agenda. If the parts of it that deal with race relations, gender issues, and victimhood suddenly disappeared, what would be left? Anything? It isn’t much of an exaggeration to say that is nearly ALL they are about.

For those who claim CRT is not present in schools, consider the largest teacher’s union, the National Education Association, has explicitly endorsed CRT. See here: National Educator’s Association approves of critical race theory (msn.com) In their comments, the leaders of the NEA conflate CRT with discussions of race. You can be for the latter and against the former. Saying CRT is essential to candid talk about racial issues is like saying you can’t talk about gun control without endorsing the agenda of the NRA. The two are related, but one does not necessitate the other.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.