Most discussions of Critical Theory (CT) and its many permutations are usually met with a blank stare. When I attempt to include any number of philosophical tangents that have been coopted into Critical Theory, a look of bewilderment soon follows. Why is there such widespread unawareness concerning Critical Theory and how this ideology and philosophy is shipwrecking America?
One reason among many that Americans in general, and middle-aged and older Americans specifically, are unfamiliar with Critical Theory is because they were not subjected to it in their education at any level. Young people, however, are quite familiar with it. Today’s Gen Z and Millennials have been immersed in Critical Theory and its many manifestations for most of their lives.
Older Americans have lived long enough to know when they are being played. By played, I mean snookered. Ok, for you younger readers, older Americans know when they are being conned. Critical Theory is a con game. Not only is it a con game, but it is seriously and purposely misaligned with the Bible and in no sense represents Christian Orthodoxy. On this basis, Americans must take the time to understand Critical Theory and how it is changing everything in America. I’m sure I have your attention now.
Critical Theory presents a serious problem for all Americans. In our ignorance of what Critical Theory is and what it asserts (a better word would be what it agitates for or foments political insurrection in order to accomplish), we are allowing ourselves to be divided. When division reaches a critical point then manipulation and propaganda may be successfully applied to derive a predetermined outcome. That predetermined outcome always includes the grouping of people into oppressors and oppressed. This is effectively the Hegelian Dialectic Reasoning in action.
A brief explanation of Hegelian Dialectic Reasoning is necessary. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (b. 1770 – d. 1831) was a German philosopher who sought to understand and explain the development of human freedom through conflict and struggle that marked history. Hegel’s “The Philosophy of History” was his attempt to review and critique history as a whole in order to offer explanations for what transpired.
Hegel did not believe that blind chance was responsible for events that comprise history. Instead, Hegel saw events as moving toward a climatic end, which he believed was human freedom.
Hegel used a three-part process to interpret history. His starting point was a Thesis. The Thesis for Hegel was the current understanding of an event or of a perspective of an event. To the Thesis Hegel applied an Antithesis. This Antithesis represented a new understanding of an event, a new idea advanced as interpretation of an event or of a series of events leading to a historically important event. Finally, Hegel’s Synthesis, the third step in his Dialectic Reasoning process, was the result of an altered or new historical interpretation. The new Synthesis then became the starting Thesis for further examination and inquiry.
This all seems rather innocuous. In some sense it is. Historians and philosophers generally investigate all known resources related to a historical event and allow those resources to shape their interpretation. However, readers will see in Hegel’s process an open door to rewrite history in the sense that anyone capable of doing historical research may arrive at vastly different conclusions concerning the variables that resulted in accepted history.
It matters not how thin or questionable the interpretation of the evidence or the evidence itself is. When this happens, ideas and perspectives foreign to the historical record may be applied and a totally different conclusion advanced about history.
We see this clearly today. One example among many is the breathtaking speed at which historical monuments are being destroyed, removed, or stored because a new narrative has arisen about the “history” of key figures. This turn of events that is destroying American history exacerbates most Americans. It seems irrational and illogical, and it is unless you happen to accept a revised history that sees two categories of people – the oppressed and the oppressors. If the oppressed are able to seize power, then wrongs must be righted.
Hegel used his Dialectic Reasoning process to better understand the movement of man across time in his quest for freedom. In other words, it was a tool to clarify what happened in the past in order to better understand today.
There was another man born before Hegel’s death who saw in Hegel’s dialectic an opportunity to project the future, or more precisely, to create the future; to take from history and rewrite it to comply with his own philosophy of the struggle for human freedom, and what elements of society held man’s progress back. His name was Karl Marx.
Karl Marx (b. 1818 – d. 1883) took Hegel’s Dialectic Reasoning and merged it with his own Dialectic Materialism, which is the theoretical foundation of Marxism.
Here is one author’s definition:
Dialectic Materialism, in very simple understanding, argues that History is a never-ending class struggle or a struggle over material resources: The “haves” vs. the “have nots.” So, first, Marx applies dialectical reasoning to ensure confirmation of his interpretation of history, but instead of simply using it as an interpretative tool to confirm his own interpretation of history, he goes one step further and uses it as a strategy for the future, a plan to get to a future he desires. And this is the key to the entire argument.
For Marx, the future he desired was free of Christianity and capitalism. Marx believed that capitalism was the great force that held man back from experiencing true freedom and he saw Christianity as its chief proponent. Some people benefited from capitalism, but far more suffered because of it, according to Marx.
Marx’s solution was to abolish capitalism, therefore abolishing the wealthy class who benefitted most. Marx’s use of the Dialectical Reasoning thus produced his Thesis – Capitalism enslaves the masses. Therefore, his Antithesis was that Capitalism must be destroyed in favor of centralization of all means of production. This is another way of suggesting that the State should own all material things, including abolishing all private property. His Synthesis then became that once the capitalists did not control the labor of others, the masses would gain control of their own freedom. Marx provided the philosophical foundation for what has become Critical Theory.
Critical Theory emerged in its infancy from the Frankfurt School, originally a part of the Institute for Social Research at Goethe University in Frankfurt, Germany, in the 1920s. Since then, Critical Theory has spawned many offspring. Among them are the now familiar critical social theories of “feminist theory, postcolonialism, critical pedagogy, queer theory, and critical race theory, among others.”
What readers must understand from this brief overview of Critical Theory is that it is a power dialectic. Said in another way, Critical Theory has become the means by which power can be taken from one group and given to another by deception, force, or by lawfare.
Who decides from whom and to whom power is taken and given? That is the role of the new American priesthood. We see it across the US Federal Government and every major corporation. Sometimes, these new priests go by the title of Chief Diversity Officer or Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI).
An entirely new industry has risen around Critical Theory to ensure its belief system continues to be implemented among generally unsuspecting people. I do not want to go into the depths of this masquerade, other than to say that you need look no further than Critical Theory and its many children to understand the constant barrage of sloganeering such as “white supremacy,” “systemic racism,” “white privilege,” “white male patriarchy,” and multitudinous other diatribes against the perceived oppressors who must be destroyed according to Critical Theory devotees.
Let us now consider the implications of all of this. October 7, 2023, is a day of infamy in Israel. As you know, that was the day that Hamas successfully invaded Israel through the aid of a multination strategy (Iran and Russia were heavily involved). Hundreds of Israeli hostages were taken back to the Gaza Strip and hundreds more were murdered where they stood. The horror and outcry within Israel and across the world were nearly unanimous against such barbaric bloodshed perpetrated by Hamas terrorists.
Sadly, and predictably, some refused to denounce Hamas and call for their international sanction. In the US House of Representatives, the “Squad” not only refused to denounce Hamas but, after quietly strategizing about their response, announced that Israel was to blame for this act of war because of their continued “occupation” of Palestinian land. This is Critical Theory applied.
Students across dozens of college campuses soon followed suit by staging protests on behalf of the allegedly oppressed Palestinian people, blaming Israel for the murderous invasion of Hamas.
Congress called several college presidents to testify before a House committee seeking answers to why they didn’t do more to quell Pro-Hamas protests and the Antisemitism these protests incited. Harvard President Claudine Gay (since removed from that post), University of Pennsylvania’s Liz Magill, and MIT’s Sally Kornbluth refused to give any clear responses other than the laughable “we support free speech,” which Americans know is simply not true when it comes to conservative speech, Christian speech, or single, white, heterosexual speech—which brings me to my point.
How can such blatant Antisemitism be allowed to flourish in America? In a time when people are canceled and their livelihoods destroyed by merely using the wrong pronoun, we have elected officials of the US Government defending a terror organization’s invasion of a sovereign nation and their bloody rape, torture, and murder of innocent people. We have college presidents supporting and defending abhorrent acts of violent threats to Jewish people and Israel as a nation.
This Orwellian condition did not appear overnight. It has been fomenting for decades and is now out in the open. It has been utilized as rationale by the US Department of State in their recent dealings with both parties of the current war in Gaza, and current US President Joe Biden is showing his support for it in his foreign policy decisions.
You might be thinking, “How can this be?” Where is your evidence of this? My evidence is in the things I’ve already written and in the ever-changing world of geo-political intrigue.
A recent article drew my attention to this dynamic relationship between Critical Theory, one of its key components, intersectionality, and US foreign policy. Titled, “How Intersectional Myths Killed the Black-Jewish Alliance,” the article details how a group of one thousand black pastors have joined a movement to pressure President Biden to force a ceasefire in the war between Israel and Hamas. How would a group of American pastors see a connection between their black experience and the terrorist group Hamas? Their connection is found in intersectionality.
Briefly, intersectionality teaches that:
…different facets of our identity interact in distinct and complex ways based upon the particular intersection of social categories we occupy, yielding a life and existence that can be generally characterized by either privilege, oppression, or both…The combination of our social categories formulates our identity and establishes our relationship to power, yielding the assertion, “Intersectionality recognizes that power, privilege, disadvantage, and discrimination are functions of interlocking spectrums of identity. Intersectionality attempts to offer insight into the relationship between purported systems of oppression, how they intersect, and the net effect they have on individual lives.
In the article mentioned above, its author Jonathan S. Tobin, editor-in-chief of JNS, asks an important question: “[How could] so many African-Americans, especially church leaders who have real influence among their congregants as well as the general black community, could believe that the cause of the Palestinians is somehow linked to their own interests and beliefs?”
Tobin answers his own question.
The answer to this puzzle is clear. Intersectional myths in which the Palestinian war to destroy the one Jewish state on the planet is somehow analogous to the struggle for civil rights in the United States are no longer merely a talking point of academic fashion. These toxic ideas have now been embraced by the African-American community. The teaching of critical race theory and the woke catechism of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) divides the world into two immutable groups locked in a never-ending struggle: white oppressors and people of color, who are always the victims. Black pastors have swallowed the neo-Marxist lies that Jews are “white” oppressors and that Palestinian Arabs are victimized people of color—and are sharing that with their congregants.
The truth is always inconvenient to those who want to use lies to force their desires on other people. The many conflicts in the Middle East have never been about race. Israel and most of her neighbors are of the same ethnicity. Most Israelis would be classified by Critical Theorists as people of color due to the region from which they descend.
Also, completely ignored is the fact that Gaza hasn’t been occupied since 2005. Who started this current conflict? It certainly wasn’t the revelers at the music festival that suffered the brunt of Hamas’ barbarity, nor the Jewish infants shot in their cribs, nor the Jewish adolescents shot down in the streets of their towns.
Concerning the claim of occupation, the Jewish people ARE THE indigenous people of the land.
Who can Israel trust today? She sure can’t trust the current US Administration, their fickle policies, and clear subterfuge of Israel’s best interests.
Israel cannot trust the United Nations either. It has been revealed that several of the Hamas terrorists who took part in the invasion and crimes against Israeli citizens were part of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).
When the entire world aligns itself against Israel, Bible-believing Christians know the time is drawing near to the return of Jesus. But that doesn’t mean that we are to sit around and do nothing. Now more than ever, it is time for the true church of Jesus Christ to speak boldly for Israel and against the raging Antisemitism, hatred, and violence being perpetrated and cheered by Israel’s enemies.
God is certainly watching us in this hour. Will you be found faithful to stand up for His people, Israel, and against the Marxist “Critical Theory” used to attack and distort their Biblically established history?
