Skip to content

Critical Race Theory: The Secret Marxist Indoctrination of the U.S.

Teoría Crítica de la Raza, El American

Leer en Español

[Leer en español]

The latest in a long line of opinion pieces disguised as indoctrination published by the New York Times has been a column signed by Charles M. Blow under the title “Demonizing Critical Race Theory” that seeks to terrorize American society about a supposed new “monster created by the political right.”

The American left has soon forgotten that it was themselves — with Obama as the most recent intellectual author — who encouraged this new ideological Frankenstein.

The columnist worries about an increasing majority sector in American civil society that considers the theory of systemic racism as a dangerous and divisive ideology. Brave imposture. Realizing that they are losing control of the racial strategy, the leftist media have launched a rabid counter-offensive.

This is what characterizes open and democratic societies: that the citizens, fed up with a narrative tainted by hatred and acts of lynching typical of anti-freedom fascism, periodically exercise their right to be heard.

Blow, who makes no mention in his article of the period when Black Lives Matter’s battle of systemic racism became the black democratic remedy against the white exterminator, now victimizes his opinion when numerous American opinion leaders, educators and parents have mobilized against a dangerous narrative — of which he is one of the publicists — that forces children in schools to deconstruct their racial identities, while at the same time requiring teachers to undergo “anti-racist therapy” and encouraging white parents to become “white traitors.”

To assert — as Blow does in his opinion column — that conservatives are using his analyses of Critical Race Theory (CRT) as an alleged fear propaganda ploy to address the displacement of whiteness and secure patriarchy and the dominant white narrative is to make confrontation and social hatred the centerpiece of the journalistic exercise.

“With insistent frequency in recent years, intellectual circles close to the Democratic Party are obsessed with imposing an official version of history that seeks to present Critical Race Theory as a “pious concept” whose sole purpose is to attribute to pre-established social structures, laws and prototypes — read white identity and racial power — the origin of current social problems.” (EFE)

Racial equity versus capitalism

This strategy of cynicism of ascribing to the right and the white race all kinds of racial prejudices despite the fact that many of the leaders especially the Founders — have dedicated a good part of their political trajectory to unconditionally support civil rights, is not exclusive to the New York Times, the Washington Post or CNN. It is prevalent among the ‘intelligentsia’ on the left.

This explains why negative portrayals of systemic racism are not only commonplace in the press but wherever so-called progressives gather, especially active in schools and universities, Hollywood and artistic circles where defense of the segregationist status quo has become a social hallmark.

Its objective: to perfidiously divide American society into two irreconcilable camps between those who seek to maintain oppressive hierarchies and those — like the left, the only legitimized sectors — who demand their overthrow.

With the CRT — a movement clearly inspired by the thought of the Italian neo-Marxist, Antonio Gramsci, but which prioritizes race rather than class differences — the left in the United States has found the best pretext to generate a covert civil war.

Manhattan Institute senior fellow and City Journal editor Christopher F. Rufo has referred to the existence of numerous reports confirming the indoctrination of racial theories in American public schools where “they teach not only about the history of race” but also a series of concepts such as white privilege, white fragility, presumed white supremacy, white guilt and spiritual murder.

A dangerous curriculum that, as Rufo warns, has among its main purposes to generate in white children a sense of guilt in order to stereotype them as oppressors.

Contrary to being an exercise in promoting racial sensitivity and a better understanding of history, CRT has a doctrinal platform with highly ambiguous conceptions. It is called 1619, a dogmatic project engineered by the progressive left to rewrite history and condition the founding of the United States by placing the sufferings and contributions of black Americans as the legitimate backbone of American development.

The orchestrated historical view of intellectuals such as William F. Tate IV, that America is an irredeemably racist nation and that constitutional principles of liberty and equality are mere “camouflage” to justify white hegemony, also finds in activist and director of Boston University’s Anti-Racist Research Center, Ibram X. Kendi, an irrefutable support.

According to Kendi, who is a frequent lecturer at the American Federation of Teachers, undoing centuries of systemic racism requires ending capitalism and installing an all-powerful federal bureaucracy with enough power to override the rule of law and silence all political speech that is not anti-racist.

Totalitarianism of race

The discourse of both intellectuals would be enough to demand greater caution in the approaches to the study of the ideas of the left on historical categories as susceptible to manipulation as nation, freedom, race, law and power.

With insistent frequency in recent years, intellectual circles close to the Democratic Party are obsessed with imposing an official version of history that seeks to present Critical Race Theory as a “pious concept” whose sole purpose is to attribute to pre-established social structures, laws and prototypes — read white identity and racial power — as the origin of current social problems.

The conception of race within a solid legal and constitutional framework, and therefore beneficiary of civil and political rights, defines the corporatist character of this theory.

In the face of this theoretical scaffolding, the first thing one notices is that the fundamental legal subject is race and not the individual. It would seem that, unlike the order of American constitutionalism, for the neo-Marxist left it is not the nation or citizenship, but race that is called upon to establish itself politically. This is nothing but an ambivalence and a juridical perversion.

From a pioneering work such as Hannah Arendt’s “The Origins of Totalitarianism” to Claude Lefort’s recent studies on the fundamentalism of race, a conclusion drawn by the latter is sufficient to demolish these Marxist clichés: “Totalitarianism tends to abolish the autonomy of civil society in the name of the phantom of the same.”

This utopia of the redeemed black race, when embodied in the justiciary left of progressive society, acts as the conceptual truth of the pretended new dominant thought to justify the elimination of social and political differences, whether by means of an institutional adjustment between the Nation-whitewashed and the State-revolutionary or of a racial corporatization of civil society.

The concepts of racial unanimity, the dissolution of the differences of the other in the imposition of a chosen race through victimization, the totalitarian myth of the historical recognition of the martyred in the framework of an “irremediably racist society” are intended to be masked under the principle of a false favored identity.

The rhetoric of the new racial identity conceals the civil totalitarianism of American leftist thought. According to his thesis, antagonistic concepts such as merit-desert, excellence-uncorrectness, associated with a pathological analysis of racial imbalance have historically only served the right wing to establish an equalizing and unifying racism.

Criminalizing history

Terrorismo, blm, estatuas, vandalismo
“The fact that many of those who today call for canceling the legacy and tearing down statues of Jefferson or General Lee are the same people who, decades ago, were enraged by the destruction of statues of Lenin or Saddam Hussein, speaks volumes about this totalitarian ideology.”(Flickr)

Therefore, the aim is to establish a new civil society that transcends the constitutional patterns of the Nation-State identity, on the imposition of a new revolutionary order established on divisive ideas about race and on the generation of collective guilt of the dominant groups.

Behind this righteous and vindicatory theory, dubbed by the left as a unique and exceptional lens for examining the history of racism in the United States, lurks an agenda of radical ideology and vindictiveness that seeks to use race as a means of authoritarian and dogmatic revolution.

An opportunistic narrative, as Thomas Sowell rightly points out, that seeks confrontation rather than analysis. “These kinds of people are not looking for truth, but for opportunities to denigrate their own societies, or grievances with which to cash in at the expense of people who were not even born when those sins of the past for which they cry out were committed.”

According to CRT, the historical stigma of a pre-established social and cultural structure of American society — probably segregationist in some discourses of post-colonial patriotism within the nation’s founding imaginary — becomes three centuries later the best pretext for the leftist intelligentsia to announce the implementation of a new citizenship defined in racial and juridical terms.

This crusade to criminalize the history of Western culture is not new. Socialism, communism and other leftist ideologies use affective memory to replace historical facts. And one of their most frequently used theses — based on a false and propagandistic view of the past — is that slavery was a lucrative maneuver designed by the United States to move from a rural colonial economy to become the world’s second largest industrial power.

So it is not just the history of slavery that is the object of distortion in this specious Marxist race theory. Those who revise the history of the United States to undermine the foundations of American society have little interest in recognizing that their doctrine has an essentially anti-capitalist and communist objective.

The fact that many of those who today call for canceling the legacy and tearing down statues of Jefferson or General Lee are the same people who, decades ago, were enraged by the destruction of statues of Lenin or Saddam Hussein, speaks volumes about this totalitarian ideology.

Critical Race Theory has become the battle center of the culture war planned by sectors of the intellectual left in the United States. And since civil society is not academically literate to discover the threat of a Marxist-Leninist orthodoxy, the leaders of this campaign resort to the popular ideology of race — which always humanizes the discourse of power — to recode national and patriotic emblems that allow it to symbolize the advantages of its theory in its three emblematic pillars: social justice, economic and cultural equity, and racial emancipation.

As the values of race become the only legitimate symbols of the nation, it would seem that a definitive and irreversible transfer or mutation of national identity, obtained on the basis of ideological confrontation and the institutionalization of a biased and exclusionary memory, begins to take place.

The control of the historiography of the radical left in the United States over the Democratic Party — and specifically over the educational system in the hands of officials servants of this political grouping — has been key in inciting society to adopt this program of racist awareness.

Hence, there will be no concrete advances in the process of social coexistence and constitutional loyalty, as long as the system of educational oppression built around Critical Race Theory, whose materials belonging to the Abolitionist Teaching Network are already widely practiced in the country’s Education System, is not rejected and dismantled.

Juan Carlos Sánchez, journalist and writer. His columns are published in different newspapers in Spain and the United States. He is the author of several books and is preparing the essay "Nación y libertad en el pensamiento económico del Conde Pozos Dulces" // Juan Carlos es periodista y escritor. Sus columnas se publican en diferentes diarios de España y EE.UU. Autor de varios libros, tiene en preparación la obra de ensayo “Nación y libertad en el pensamiento económico del Conde Pozos Dulces”

Leave a Reply