During the 20th century, a number of regimes underwent Marxist-style revolutions, and each ended in disaster. Socialist governments in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, Cuba, and elsewhere racked up a body count of nearly 100 million of their own people. They are remembered for their gulags, show trials, executions, and mass starvations. In practice, Marx’s ideas unleashed man’s darkest brutalities.
Abandoning Marx’s economic dialectic of capitalists and workers, they substituted race for class and sought to create a revolutionary coalition of the dispossessed based on racial and ethnic categories.
There are a series of euphemisms deployed by its supporters to describe critical race theory, including “equity,” “social justice,” “diversity and inclusion,” and “culturally responsive teaching.” Critical race theorists, masters of language construction, realize that “neo-Marxism” would be a hard sell. Equity, on the other hand, sounds non-threatening and is easily confused with the American principle of equality. But the distinction is vast and important. Indeed, equality—the principle proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, defended in the Civil War, and codified into law with the 14th and 15th Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965—is explicitly rejected by critical race theorists. To them, equality represents “mere nondiscrimination” and provides “camouflage” for white supremacy, patriarchy, and oppression.
n contrast to equality, equity as defined and promoted by critical race theorists is little more than reformulated Marxism. In the name of equity, UCLA Law Professor and critical race theorist Cheryl Harris has proposed suspending private property rights, seizing land and wealth and redistributing them along racial lines.
An equity-based form of government would mean the end not only of private property, but also of individual rights, equality under the law, federalism, and freedom of speech. These would be replaced by race-based redistribution of wealth, group-based rights, active discrimination, and omnipotent bureaucratic authority. Historically, the accusation of “anti-Americanism” has been overused. But in this case, it’s not a matter of interpretation—critical race theory prescribes a revolutionary program that would overturn the principles of the Declaration and destroy the remaining structure of the Constitution.
Worried about getting mobbed on social media, fired from their jobs, or worse, they remain quiet, largely ceding the public debate to those pushing these anti-American ideologies. Consequently, the institutions themselves become monocultures: dogmatic, suspicious, and hostile to a diversity of opinion. Conservatives in both the federal government and public school systems have told me that their “equity and inclusion” departments serve as political offices, searching for and stamping out any dissent from the official orthodoxy.
Diversity trainers will make an outrageous claim—such as “all whites are intrinsically oppressors” or “white teachers are guilty of spirit murdering black children”—and then when confronted with disagreement, they adopt a patronizing tone and explain that participants who feel “defensiveness” or “anger” are reacting out of guilt and shame. Dissenters are instructed to remain silent, “lean into the discomfort,” and accept their “complicity in white supremacy.”
What is Critical Race Theory? It’s a theory that suggests that some people are mean and oppressive to society because of biology and personal choices, and that others are destined to be victims forever because of their biology and personal choices. Victims are not required to be responsible for their choices or biology, but oppressors are. This teaching leads to judgments of others by declaring certain words, questions, and behaviors as ‘aggressions’ or ‘micro-aggressions.’ CRT’s constant need for judgment has already proven to create depression and social division with stories like Chris’s and reports of increased hostility on college campuses in recent years. Social/relationship conflict ultimately promotes poor health, broken relationships, and aggressive social behavior.
Yes, there are only victims in CRT. Even the people who are labeled as ‘oppressors’ are victims. They are forced to self-loath in order to be socially acceptable. And the ‘oppressed’ are forever victims too because of their in-born disadvantages. And, if a person chooses to better their situation, that would hurt them in the end because then they would have to hate themselves as an ‘oppressor’ and practice self-loathing. However, according to CRT theology, most oppressive situations cannot be recovered from because they are biological. If our children are taught CRT mindset in schools and through the media, then each person will have unchangeable, socially perceived value and all people will end up at war to see who is the most ‘oppressed.’
Equity and equality sound similar, but they are complete opposites. When a society has equality, that means that they have the same freedoms and dignity. If a society embraces equity, that means that no one’s effort is rewarded, and that freedoms are taken from some people and given to others, and that personal dignity is disregarded. Equity promotes laziness and entitlement, while equality acknowledges each person’s personal journey, their value, and their successes. Equality promotes hard work and taking personal responsibility.
The underlying assumption is that racial diversity translates into diversity of experience or perspective, and that all people of the same race share common interests or cultural traits. This assumption is questionable at best, and can cement crude racial stereotypes at worst.
But today, many people no longer consider a colorblind society a worthy goal. Aspiring to colorblindness is racist, they tell us, as it uses the guise of neutrality to reinforce the white supremacy that underpins our institutions. Instead, we need to go in the opposite direction by instilling in everyone a strong awareness of their racial identity and associated cultural heritage, and by explicitly considering race in hiring and admissions.
During the 20th century, a number of regimes underwent Marxist-style revolutions, and each ended in disaster. Socialist governments in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, Cuba, and elsewhere racked up a body count of nearly 100 million of their own people. They are remembered for their gulags, show trials, executions, and mass starvations. In practice, Marx’s ideas unleashed man’s darkest brutalities.
