Critical race theory is a subject none of us who regrettably toil in this area prefer to deal with. The very “theory” is as inane as it is incomprehensible, impenetrable, and toxic. Trying to figure it out, and then convey it in an understandable form to others to figure out, is not just difficult, undesirable, but frankly painful.
But alas, some of us have had to step forward to study it and write about it. James Lindsey, a leading authority on the divisive subject of critical race theory, is one such unfortunate person.
Lindsey’s unenviable odyssey into the ugly world of Critical Race Theory (Lindsey’s places it in upper case) is clear in his latest book Race Marxism, a fascinating attempt to understand “CRT,” to define it, and, most of all, to pin down and present to the public its indisputably Marxist roots. That latter endeavor is the great value of the book. It was something that Lindsey himself was surprised to see over time.
“As the author,” confesses Lindsey in his introduction, “I wish to make clear that I did not come to the conclusions of this book easily and, in fact, resisted for many years the central contention of the book—that Critical Race Theory is race Marxism—until the evidence overwhelmed me.”
In arriving at those conclusions, Lindsey did what many of us who study this junk did, namely: he plowed through the works of the CRT founders, practitioners, pioneers, and leading advocates themselves—their texts, their articles, their notes from their meetings and conferences, and more.
Really, that’s what it takes—lots of heavy lifting and way too much of a person’s valuable time. My advice to Catholics: invest your precious reading time in something edifying, spiritually uplifting, and not in this intellectual rubbish and sophistry that does nothing for the soul. Let others suffer through the research. With this book, Lindsey has helped you.
The obvious Marxist roots
If only others would do the same and pick up books like this. They would learn what Lindsey learned, namely: the Marxist roots of CRT are obvious. The evidence is indeed overwhelming.
The problem, sadly, is that most people don’t bother confronting the evidence. They instead—and by “they,” I mean naïvely ignorant progressives, especially those on the Religious Left—turn their guns on the people who dare to expose CRT’s origins. Much like what was done by so many liberals during the Cold War, they shout and scream at those exposing the radicals rather than the radicals themselves. The bad guys are not the ones responsible for the noxious ideas, you see, but those who have bravely ventured to focus the spotlight on those responsible.
To the modern social-justice wokester with the BLM sign in her front yard, the likes of Lindsey are the bad guys.
Nonetheless, what Lindsey does with this book is good. He presents in his pages the evidence of those radical origins. “[I]t is only truly possible to understand Critical Race Theory by understanding that it is neo-Marxist,” notes Lindsey. He notes that this “ugly Theory” is a product of neo-Marxism combined with post-modernism.
That is no match made in heaven.
Lindsey further adds, crucially, that critical race theory derives (this ought to be obvious) from the field of “critical theory” developed by the Frankfurt School and its culture-based Marxists. For the record, we have always called this “cultural Marxism,” though Google and Wikipedia have—quite recklessly—recently and suddenly labeled cultural Marxism an “anti-Semitic conspiracy theory” (click here and here for my extensive analyses of this bizarre phenomenon).
Lindsey’s book goes right to the horse’s mouth, pulling directly from the pens of CRT’s founders. He quotes from the seminal book by Kimberlé Crenshaw, Neil Gotanda, Gary Peller, and Kendall Thomas, eds., Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings that Formed the Movement. Here are several key passages from that book:
[S]o-called racialist accounts of racism and the law grounded the subsequent development of Critical Race Theory in much the same way that Marxism’s introduction of class structure and struggle into classical political economy grounded subsequent critiques of hierarchy and social power.
As we conceive it, Critical Race Theory (CRT) embraces a movement of left scholars…. Organized by a collection of neo-Marxist intellectuals, former New Left activists, ex-counter-culturalists, and other varieties of oppositionists in law schools, the Conference on Critical Legal Studies established itself as a network of openly leftist law teachers, students, and practitioners committed to exposing and challenging the ways American law served to legitimize an oppressive social order…. Critical Race Theory … rejects the prevailing orthodoxy that scholarship should be “neutral” and “objective.”
By the late seventies, Critical Legal Studies existed in a swirl of formative energy, cultural insurgency, and organizing momentum: It had established itself as a politically, philosophically, and methodologically eclectic but intellectually sophisticated and ideologically left movement … that reinterpreted whole doctrinal areas of law from an explicitly ideological motivation.
There is, of course, much more. Kimberlé Crenshaw and her cohorts write of CRT’s founding workshop and grounding in critical theory (i.e., the Frankfurt School):
Principally organized by Kimberlé Crenshaw, Neil Gotanda, and Stephanie Phillips, the workshop drew together thirty-five scholars who responded to a call to synthesize a theory that, while grounded in critical theory, was responsive to the realities of racial politics in America. Indeed, the organizers coined the term “Critical Race Theory” to make it clear that our work locates itself in the intersection of critical theory and race, racism, and the law.
The great service provided by James Lindsey is to simply share for the masses these quotes from CRT’s founders themselves. For those who have convinced themselves that there’s no Marxism there, these quotes should compel to change their minds. If they just read the book.
Activism aimed at transforming society
Lindsey also exposes the pabulum commonly offered by CRT defenders that this is merely some esoteric “legal theory” we need not be concerned about at all—especially those rube parents who object to CRT being taught to their school children. Naïvely ignorant defenders of CRT want to argue that its advocates have no interest in ideological activism or changing society. Lindsey dispenses of this by quoting the opening words and definition of CRT from the first paragraph of the other seminal work on the subject, Critical Race Theory: An Introduction, by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic, who write:
What is Critical Race Theory? The critical race theory (CRT) movement is a collection of activists and scholars interested in studying and transforming the relationship among race, racism, and power…. Unlike traditional civil rights, which embraces incrementalism and step-by-step progress, critical race theory questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including … neutral principles of constitutional law.
Delgado and Stefancic continue: “Unlike some academic disciplines, critical race theory contains an activist dimension. It not only tries to understand our social situation, but to change it; it sets out not only to ascertain how society organizes itself along racial lines and hierarchies, but to transform it.”
Look carefully at those words from these two leading authorities of CRT: the goal of CRT is to change and transform society. Hence, this is not some mere “legal theory” confined to Ivory Tower law-school profs. Not at all. Just ask CRT’s leading theorists.
Delgado and Stefancic themselves assert:
Although CRT began as a movement in the law, it has rapidly spread beyond that discipline. Today, many scholars in the field of education consider themselves critical race theorists who use CRT’s ideas to understand issues of school discipline and hierarchy, tracking, affirmative action, high-stakes testing, controversies over curriculum and history, bilingual and multilingual education, and alternative and charter schools.
Delgado and Stefancic continue: “Critical race theory has exploded from a narrow sub-specialty of jurisprudence chiefly of interest to academic lawyers into a literature read in departments of education, cultural studies, English, sociology, comparative literature, political science, history, and anthropology around the country.”
Again, that speaks for itself.
The case of Kendi
James Lindsey also drills down on the wild work of Ibram X. Kendi, the father of the “How To Be An Anti-Racist” movement—the title of his huge bestselling book. Kendi defenders insist that Kendi is not an actual CRT advocate. We need not worry about him. But what has Kendi said?
Kendi told MSNBC (June 23, 2021): “I admire critical race theory, but I don’t identify as a critical race theorist. I’m not a legal scholar. So I wasn’t trained on critical race theory. I’m a historian.”
Okay, fair enough. But Kendi has certainly been influenced by CRT.
“I’ve certainly been inspired by critical race theory and critical race theorists,” said Kendi in Slate magazine (June 12, 2021). “The ways in which I’ve formulated definitions of racism and racist and anti-racism and anti-racist have not only been based on historical evidence, but also Kimberlé Crenshaw’s intersectional theory. She’s one of the founding and pioneering critical race theorists…. It’s important for us to understand that and that’s foundational to my work.”
More important is how Kendi has taken off with these ideas and, akin to CRT’s aggressive advocates, sought to implement them pervasively throughout (truly) all of society. In fact, to say that Kendi’s ambitions are pervasive is an understatement. James Lindsey quotes Kendi from his opus, How to Be an Antiracist: “There is no such thing as a racist or race-neutral policy. Every policy in every institution in every community in every nation is producing or sustaining either racial inequity or equity between racial groups.”
If you’re keeping tabs, that’s four “everys” in one sentence.
As James Lindsey shows, when Kendi uses sweeping language like “every,” he really does mean “every.” In fact, Kendi favors the entire country seeking, passing, and implementing a grandiose “Anti-Racist Constitutional Amendment.” And what would that entail? Kendi tells us:
Americans should pass an anti-racist amendment to the U.S. Constitution…. The amendment would make unconstitutional racial inequity over a certain threshold, as well as racist ideas by public officials (with “racist ideas” and “public official” clearly defined). It would establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees. The DOA would be responsible for preclearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won’t yield racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas.
That is utterly extraordinary. Truly breathtaking.
Lindsey’s book is filled with such statements from the likes of Kendi, Delgado and Stefancic, Crenshaw, and maybe the zaniest advocate of them all, Robin DiAngelo, who penned the outrageous White Fragility.
For exposing this and more, James Lindsey deserves our praise. And yet, for exposing this and more, Lindsey is pilloried by the woke mobs of the cancel culture. They roast him for “racism.”
Ideological stereotyping
But in truth, the racism is found in the very assumptions of Marxist-based critical race theory. It is a theory that stereotypes people according to race. It defines people by race. It views everything through the lens of race. Like with classical Marxism, which defined people through class and viewed everything through the lens of class, your category is your destiny. Your group defines you.
You are not an individual made in the Imago Dei, but a member of an ideologically defined group. The ideologues hammer you into their tidy ideological categories.
Of course, the Christian faith rejects identity-based classifications of human beings. Marxism and critical race theory pit people against one another, into camps of oppressed vs. oppressor.
Dr. Wyatt Tee Walker, a close friend and associate of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., said of CRT: “Today, too many ‘remedies’—such as Critical Race Theory, the increasingly fashionable post-Marxist/post-modernist approach that analyzes society as institutional group power structures rather than on spiritual or one-to-one human level—are taking us in the wrong direction: separating even school children into explicit racial groups, and emphasizing differences instead of similarities.”
Unlike the Christian worldview, Dr. Walker added that, “The roots of CRT are planted in entirely different intellectual soil. It begins with ‘blocs’ (with each person assigned to an identity or economic bloc, as in Marxism).”
Walker’s good friend, the Rev. Dr. King, would not have supported CRT. “I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character,” said King.
CRT judges people by the color of their skin.
I asked David Garrow, the preeminent biographer of King, what King might have thought of CRT. “CRT so post-dates him that there’s no connection,” said Garrow, “but MLK would have most certainly rejected ANY identity-based classification of human beings.”
He most certainly would have.
Obviously, and really it should be needless to say, CRT is not something that Christians or Catholics should be embracing. Though James Lindsey’s book does not get into that aspect, it does dive deep into the “race Marxism” behind CRT. And for exposing those poisonous roots behind CRT, we should be grateful to James Lindsey.
Race Marxism: The Truth About Critical Race Theory and Praxis
By James Lindsey
New Discourses, 2022
Hardcover, 297 pages
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
EWTN’s, ‘Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing’, explains clearly what the white Liberal Left is up to with all their race confusion. The white Liberal Left is inducing racial conflict to gain world power for the white Liberal Left.
https://youtu.be/ZnKB9NzgD4k
This is a good piece and I have to thank Dr. Kengor for it, along with pitying him, along with Mr. Lindsey, for the work they have done to make the obvious idiocy attached to crt more plain to us all.
But – surely saul alinsky deserves mention. The rotten seeds he planted so many years ago continue to produce an increasingly rancid harvest, and he should be ‘credited’ for that.
Lindsay’s book is specifically focused on the primary ideological history, movements, and current leaders who advocate and promote Critical Race Theory/Race Marxism. In this regard, Alinsky plays a very minor role as the one-time radical community organizer in pursuit of socialist goals without focusing very much on specific race issues. Moreover, Critical Race Theory/Marxism, as it developed long after Alinsky left the scene, is not inspired by Alinsky, and any of Alinsky’s rules applicable to the Critical Race Theory/Marxism movement were already set forth by the ideological leaders who directly influenced Critical Race Theory as we know it today. To be sure, the seeds of Critical Race Theory/Marxism were planted long before Alinsky put forth his blueprint for achievnig a more socialist society, and so Lindsay had no need to mention Alinsky in his book.
However, Lindsay does on occasion mention Alinsky’s general influence on the pursuit of socialism/communism in various talks he gives, and Alinsky also comes up in various articles on his website (New Discourses).
Your last paragraph is exactly what I meant, more than 50 years after alinsky’s passing.
Okay, Terence, but Lindsay’s book on CRT is not about any of Alinsky’s work or influence, and justifiably so. Accordingly, Kengor’s review of Lindsay’s book also ignores Alinsky and rightly so. Alinsky’s impact on CRT in and of itself is nil. In fact, Alinsky did not agree with some of the forerunners of CRT among black activists of his time who spoke about a desire to emphasize special complaints of blacks separate from the masses Alinsky represented as “oppressed” and in need of socialism. So again, neither Lindsay’s book nor Kengor’s review need to mention Alinsky in any way as you believe they should.
It may also interest you to know that Ed Feser’s much shorter introduction to CRT (contains remarkably similar material on CRT to that found in Lindsay’s book published earlier in the same year) in his book also does not mention Saul Alinsky, and rightly so. Many people who have heard about Alinsky and what he did in pushing his agenda assume that he is at the center or a major influence of various movements like CRT, but it’s simply not the case with CRT.
I hope you pick up a copy of Lindsay’s book if you want an in-depth analysis and excellent critique of CRT, along with specific ways to combat it, but if a briefer introduction is more to your liking, then Feser’s “All One in Christ” that contains some elements of Catholic teaching regarding racism in general would be a good choice as well.
The bottom line is the hysteria about CRT like this book and this review is indeed a phenomenon that articulates the fears and grievances of the conservative white that actually hides its underlying racist anti-anti-racism white supremacy.
Race is an outdated social construct but even in societies which have few ethnic differences there are always other distinctions like income and status that can be used to stir up class resentment and political strife.
Race isn’t really the issue. It’s more about political opportunism and race is simply the tool being used for that currently.
Let us never forget Saul Alinsky and how he suckered Catholics into supporting him and his cause, the destruction of Christianity and especially the Catholic Church.
Sorry, but that’s not the case based on the evidence presented. You are defending the indefensible here.
Is that why migrant and black parents are among those complaining about the presence of reductive race nonsense in schools?
My kids are only ostensibly “white” due to their having partial white parentage.
You’d see nothing wrong with a white left-wing pedagogue reducing my kids to a caricature of who they are.
You don’t think that’s racist?
You people are massive hypocrites: you accuse others with ease of “racism” when you have nothing to say about the visceral racial hatred directed towards any Black man or woman who so much as wears a badge or votes conservative.
You don’t care about those who are marginalised.
All you care about is your political tribe.
It’s gross.
L. Gu:
LOL. Lindsay’s book exposes and completely obliterates the claptrap you just spewed that reveals your own bigotry, plus your use of the classic intellectually dishonest tactic of attempting to dismiss arguments without honestly engaging them. Instead, just label them as “hysterical” and add in the pejoratives of “racist” and “white supremacy,” but never seriously engage the objective arguments.
None of what you claim is even remotely true, but of course all of CRT is based on false narratives and a disdain for objective truth that is also dismissed by CRT yahoos as a species of “white supremacy.”
Deeply grateful for scholars who are willing to wade through original source material and then summarize it in a way that is concise, reasonable, accessible, and relevant. Honoring truth requires us to call a spade a spade, particularly when it manifests itself in the form of neo-marxist thought. It also requires us to call out hucksters who try to use race to advance their own self-interests.
Thanks for the excellent review, Dr. Kengor. Last year I also highly recommended Dr. Lindsay’s book in quite a few comments on relevant articles in CWR, but of course such recommendations are limited in the breadth and depth that have now been provided by your fine review. One more thing that should be pointed out for others interested in picking up a copy of the book, there is also a paperback version available that is indeed less expensive than the hardback version you set forth.
One must not forget the pride and narcissism by which thinkers can assume that it is within their ability to adopt a “critical” analysis. It indicates that somehow they assume that it is within their ability to reason to truth without premises. In the case of Kant and others the new sciences with their admittedly ‘a priori’ assumptions bolstered support for a belief that critique could lead to truth. But, as the validity of the assumptions disappeared with new findings the desire for wanting to retain trust in “critique” remained. The new “premises” for this critique became the purely emotional attachments of the self-proclaimed “thinkers” or “intellectuals”. If they happened to have lived through a juvenile attachment to socialist distribution of goods, then that in their thought could become the assumed but not necessarily explicit premise throughout their writings. No “critical” theory can stand up against either a questioning of their basis or of the consequences they invariably have.
For readers who appreciated this article by Paul Kengor, I would like to mention a short new book by Edward Feser that I read recently, which deals with the same subject in more depth: *All One in Christ: A Catholic Critique of Racism and Critical Race Theory* (2022, Ignatius Press). What I especially like about Feser’s book is the way he demonstrates the faulty logic and intellectual incoherence of Kendi, DiAngelo, and the other currently trendy race grifters.
Say what, Phillip? 🙂 Feser’s book does indeed go into more detail than Kengor’s review of Lindsay’s book, but Lindsay’s book (published before Feser’s book) is the one that goes into much more depth than Feser’s book, which contains less than half of the same material covered in Lindsay’s book. I also pointed out the greater depth of Lindsay’s book than Feser’s book in a few CWR comments posted last year. Moreover, Lindsay does what you say Feser does that you especially like in exposing the faulty reasoning of the people you mentioned, plus Lindsay skewers many, many more influential pushers of Critical Race Theory as well. In addition, Lindsay devotes the last chapter of his book to specific and practical ways to combat Critical Race Theory/Race Marxism, and such excellent advice you will not find in Feser’s book that concludes with a general admonition calling on Catholics to “resolutely oppose Critical Race Theory”…. Lindsay provides more specific and very sound advice on how to do just that.
I urge you and others to pick up a copy of Lindsay’s book if you are looking for more detail and insights into Critical Race Theory than Feser’s brief overview provides, and if you also want to learn some effective ways to more specifically combat Critical Race Theory wherever you encounter it.
To give Feser appropriate credit, his book does contain some specific references to Catholic teaching not found in Lindsay’s book, and in that it is a valuable supplement to Lindsay’s more in-depth analysis and critique of Critical Race Theory.
The only way to stop the implementation of Critical Race theory is to fight it whenever and wherever it raises its ugly and deceptive head. At the corporate level,in school districts , or in federal institutions. Elect people who will fight it, in the congress or on the school board. And dont be fearful of speaking up about your opposition. A tiny jabbering minority are pushing this agenda. Being that most are persons of color, people are afraid to oppose for fear of being called a racist. I would prefer to be called a racist, knowing it is not true, than to be a slave to the very racists pushing this theory.I laugh out loud when people natter on about “white privilege”. I grew up in a neighborhood that was lower middle class at best, where my dad picked up extra work after his primary job was finished. I wore hand me down clothing, as did all my friends, whose lives were just like mine My family’s first car was an ancient broken down hunk of junk. . And its a good thing we kids all liked pasta because that had the virtue of being cheap when the budget was tight, which was ALWAYS. Now, you might imagine that since my family has been in the US since the 1600’s and I am WHITE, that my family would have been rolling in dough. But they were not. Funny thing about “white privilege”. It does not exist, except to people making a cottage industry of pitching the idea to credulous, self-loathing, white liberals. The govt has spent decades making racist, social-engineering policies which benefit only some races. But in reality, its a given that if you fail to succeed, its primarily because you have made life decisions which are not too smart. For example, you are doing drugs, dropped out of school, have gotten arrested ( often more than once), or become pregnant as a young teen. Those decisions are on YOU, and have nothing to do with race. My brothers and I all managed to stay out of trouble, get an education and have succeeded in our occupations. We worked hard and made good choices.As teens we worked hard at minimum wage jobs. Our race had nothing to do with ANY of it. Anyone who dare attempts to push me down by claiming my success is race based will find themselves getting heartily dismissed with a lot of laughter, which is all such an assertion deserves. This will be followed by me clarifying my position with them in words which would never be printed in this column. For certain, the exchange will not end with me cowering at their feet. Not by a longshot. Always fight for what you know to be true.
Race Marxism (CRT) is Nazism without the jackboots.
Hello LJ,
I don’t believe in separate races in the first place. In former colonies like the United States virtually everyone with African ancestry has European ancestors well and it can work in a similar way for many Americans who identify themselves as “white. ” Especially if a family has been here since colonial times.
Our DNA is often much more complicated than we realize.
Discrimination can be based upon appearance, social status, or ethnicity . And whatever shade of complexion, we can find ourselves recipients of some sort of discrimination. A study in the UK found that low income “white ” British men had the lowest rates of university attendance.
Self destructive behaviors aren’t related to race but they can be influenced by the culture we are raised in and what role models we have growing up. Clarence Thomas was blessed to have grandparents who understood that. It sounds like your parents set a good example too.
God bless!
🙂
Yes, Marxist roots. No surprise; what else would one expect from small-niche academics, angling for a corner office by courting notoriety and favorable peer reviews?
But, maybe even CRT is only a niche market within the broader un-discipline of us-vs-them?
Besides Marxist CRT the world is also differently divided: GLOBALLY between the House of Islam and infidels; NATIONALLY, especially in India between two dozen states based mostly on major languages, and above these the four major language groups (Indo-European, Dravidian, Austroasiatic, and Sino-Tibetan); OTHERWISE the religious divides—mostly Hindu since the Muslim sector already peeled-off to become Pakistan (1947); AND then there are the (yes) racial, but also cultural, ethnic, dialectic, geographic, and tribal groupings—TRIBAL especially as in Africa where post-colonial “nation-state” boundaries are a bit arbitrary. MORE, in post-modernity we even divide into “conservative” non-amnesiacs versus lobotomized “progressives” quite content to decapitate everything from before some arbitrary date (2013 for example?)
So, CRT is at best a start-up cottage industry within the world as a whole…if there is a world as a whole?
Well, at least the perennial Catholic Church has a durable message from a Triune God about His internal dynamic of love and truth—which is to be shared by all because including (inclusiveness!) whatever is permanent and universally moral in the human person…
Wait, what?…High-ranking clericalists in red hats propose/impose their own us-vs-them invention, signaled and niched into the synodal block party: CHT (critical homophobe theory). As in: “I believe that the sociological-scientific foundation of this teaching [on sexual morality] is no longer true [….] I think it’s time we make a fundamental revision of the doctrine” https://www.aol.com/news/liberal-cardinal-calls-revised-catholic-135429645-181222377.html
The further the civil rights revolution has progressed since the sixties the more radical the left and its demands have become. Racial discrimination, other than affirmative action, is illegal. Schools have been desegregated. Massive government welfare programs have transferred trillions of dollars to “oppressed communities”. A national holiday was created for Martin Luther King and famous or at least notorious blacks are celebrated non-stop by government agencies, non-profits, schools, and the media. A black man has served two terms as President. Leaving aside whether all or any of these developments were good or bad, we were told that they would bring about racial reconciliation. Instead, liberalization has only been met with increasingly extreme rhetoric and behavior. This cannot end well.
JMJ
Thank you, CWR, for this great piece, and we especially admire the analysis of the phoney-baloney, forced, contrived, artificial, out-of-thin-air, “theory” as related to the universal Truths of our Holy Faith.
The information in this article justifies the efforts made by us here in southern Arizona to inform local school boards that we do not want our tax dollars applied to this “critical race theory” garbage–with the result that we have made several changes in the people who are now on the school boards.
ORA ET LAVORA! Folks, lets get to work!!! Doggone it!!!
On their own, third-rate crackpots like Kendi, etc. and their theories would not garner any significant followings. However, very powerful and wealthy interests find it useful to promote poisonous nonsense like critical race theory. Who are these people and what is their agenda? That seems to be a question no one is interested, or maybe more to the point, allowed to ask.
We’ve been suckered. By ‘we’ I mean people of good will, Christians and others. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 paved the way for Critical Race Theory and related literature which seeks to totally eradicate Western Civilization. Proponents promised a regime based on merit and color-blindness. But as soon as the law passed, we got Affirmative Action and now CRT. Will we ever stop believing these liars?
Excellent article. Isn’t Race Marxism just another word for Fascism?
“My advice to Catholics: invest your precious reading time in something edifying, spiritually uplifting, and not in this intellectual rubbish and sophistry”
Will do!