The linkage between failed Marxism and
Social Justice is the Critical Theory illogic
With the failure of Marxism to explain why workers supported nationalism in World War I and peasants supported international socialism {Communism} in the formations of Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Communist China several schools of thought arose. My post, Social Justice is Socialism Embraced, touched on some of these issues as have various other posts. By using the word theory, such as Critical Theory, the reader presupposes that a rational, methodical approach is implied when the exact opposite it true. Social Justice and the various Critical Theory movements reject rationality while embracing irrationality as its methodology.
Feminism and its attendant theories paved
the way for socialism’s Critical Theories
The Feminist Movement(s) were coopted by the methodologies of Antonio Gramsci and the Frankfurt School relocated to Columbia University by the 1950s. The focus changed from equal political rights for women to equality of outcomes for women and eventually for those who identified as women which made biological women all but obsolete except as baby making machines; one of the major concepts the original feminist movement sought to negate. This revealed the underlying nihilism of the new direction of this movement and all subsequent movements. While espousing outcome equality for a given subset of people, associated movements actually sought to remove any political voice from these movements. This was lost in the clamor of irrational demands; in fact, irrationality came to mark these movements along with its nihilistic demands for economic destruction.
Critical is the key element as there is no
Theory, rationality; only irrationality
For all its high sounding but meaningless rhetoric, Critical Theory has but one single-minded goal: criticize everything that impedes the implementation of international socialism. Borrowing from Antonio Gramsci, Italian socialist, all socialistic movements would work through educational, entertainment and eventually political elements of a society to achieve its goals. This is illustrated in the first graphic of this post. This methodology gained traction in the universities which trained the teachers of future generations. Thus, today’s college students are the result of several generations of socialistic atheistic teaching. Notice that Critical Theory uses big words which are either not defined or redefined violating the Law of Identity of Logic. Those who object are subjected to kafkatrapping {the appearance of guilt by rejecting the hypothesis}. Example: denying racism is guilt of racism so that one is demonized simply by denying a practice of racism. Critical Theory became the modus operandi of all subsequent cultural and social movements.
Race was the hot movement of the 1950s
And became the major socialistic weapon
Race and racism is a term of Darwinian evolution, a scientism that actual rejects the scientific method to force an atheistic worldview. In fact, there is only one race of people as indicated by DNA. There are multiple ethnic and cultural societies but these are self-imposed differences begun at Babel (Ge 11:1-9). This 19th century anachronism continues to be used to create artificial divisions within a society which are then set against each other; divide and conquer strategy. This strategy is used to ignore true causes of strife between different ethnicities that could be solvable. Critical Theory applied to ethnicities becomes Critical Race Theory to continue to promote irrational scientism between the perceived majority power group and perceived minority groups which are automatically assumed to be oppressed. This promotes covetousness in the perceived minority groups who demand their fair share; i.e., outcome equality rather than equal opportunity to better themselves through education and free market forces.
Critical Legal Theory seeks to achieve
Goals of Critical Race Theory via Politics
The above methodology of pitting differing groups against each other is a bottom up approach. Critical Legal Theory is a top down approach to use the organs of government against the majority in power via the democratic demands of the majority even when such demands are detrimental and thus nihilistic. Democracy, rule of the majority, is a weak governmental form relying on force rather than on logic and education; rule of the republic. Today these terms are used interchangeably when in fact they are quite different. The world’s cultures underwent their most profound elevation in economic and educational advances under republic governments that relied on free market enterprise during the early stages of the Industrial Revolution. Marx and later Socialists decried the abuses of the free enterprise system as insurmountable except through revolution; i.e., violence: always a hallmark of sin (Ja 4:1-4). Socialism was rejected during much of the 19th century though free enterprise came increasingly under government control; i.e., basically national socialism. Both forms of socialism sought to use government force against each other and against republic governmental forms. This defines the conflicts of both the 19th and 20th centuries more than any other factors.
The problem with socialistic governments is the equality of outcomes; an impossible and impractical goal. Since people are inherently different there will be difference in outcomes. This stimulates people to strive harder to better themselves via education, retraining and skill changeability. These differences cannot be reduced to simple ethnic terms of oppression but are multifactorial and ever changing. Reducing such factors to simplistic terms of oppression plays upon and exploits the very groups Critical Theorists claim to help. However, rather than help the disadvantage to attain true equality of opportunity, they prey like ravenous sharks upon the helpless depriving them of hope driving them into violence in order to achieve their own goals of power. These vultures see themselves as the elites and everyone else as serfs or slaves. They have no love for nor care about the supposed disadvantaged except for their personal gain. Thus, covetousness is the underlying sin at work and as a weapon which always incites violence.
In the Bible these people are described as scoffers and it has much to say about them. A scoffer is the name of the arrogant, haughty man who acts with arrogant pride (Pr 21:24). The scoffer does not like to be reproved and he rejects the wise (Pr 15:12). The scoffer does not listen to rebuke and will hate those who try to teach him, her, wisdom (Pr 9:8; 13:1). If one could drive out scoffers then strife, quarreling and abuse would abate (Pr 22:10). Why do societies listen to such people whose goals are obvious and self-destructive? Sin! In these latter days people do not want instruction in wisdom but gather to themselves those that promote the myths they believe, and to their own destruction (2Th 2:9-12; 2Ti 4:3-4). Now such fools have entered the churches seeking to destroy the gospel of Christ and those sitting in the pews are allowing this to happen. They are becoming captivated to the lie of the devil rather than to the truth of Christ. As the world is being plunged into this new dark age the truth of Christ’s gospel will not be suppressed but shine out into the darkness as a beacon of hope for all who will come.