Part 3: The Revolutionary Monoculture of BLM/CRT/DEI
To Dismantle the Master’s House
Critical social justice theorists and their acolytes aren’t as concerned about the technical correctness of facts as their moral impact. As a result, the phrase “hate facts” recently entered the western lexicon. A hate fact is a term used predominantly by politically left wing individuals to describe a matter of truth or reality that belies a social justice belief or imperative, or offends a minority or special interest group — for example, it might be called a “hate fact” to cite a study result showing that higher infraction rates by black drivers, rather than police racism, are causing disparities in the numbers of black vs nonblack drivers being pulled over by police. Social justice educators regularly present teaching materials full of inaccuracies, misleading claims, and logical fallacies, but being factually correct is not important, since they feel certain that their work is undergirded by noble truths and righteous goals. On the road to social justice, it simply isn’t progressive enough to allow oneself to get bogged down arguing about factual correctness of all the small details — all the “antiracists” accept that facts mustn’t stand in the way, and use several different strategies to stop facts from interfering with progress toward racial equity.
A core strategy of the critical theorist is to deflect engagement with an ideological opponent and avoid being drawn in to discussions about the factuality/accuracy of their assertions by positioning traits traditionally favoured by western academics (such as perfectionism, scholarly rigour, empiricism, and objectivity) as undesirable traits of “whiteness”. This has vastly reduced the pressure on academics and writers to display reasoned intellectual inquiry, to use empirical methods to ascertain objective truths, and practice modes of thought privileging logic over emotion — all these traditions in western academia are now devalued as white supremacist tools of oppression developed by the dominant racial group to subjugate other races. Black feminist activist Audre Lorde’s used a metaphor in a 1984 speech that encapsulates this imperative to dissent from prevailing academic and discourse norms, and her words have now become a popular slogan of the “antiracist” movement: “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house”. This has become an all-purpose slogan supporting revolutionary resistance to western norms and practices of all kinds.
Building A New Superstructure
Western traditions of discourse and research/inquiry are among “the master’s tools”, as these are core parts of the social “superstructure”, that complex of systems both integral and subordinate to society’s economic base. According to Marxist thought traditions, prevailing academic and public discourse traditions perpetuate “false consciousness” in the population, and this results in ongoing subordination of and exploitation of people in the lower classes. An oppression-enabling social superstructure continues to exist because exploited classes collectively accept these social norms as “natural” rather than socially constructed tools of oppression manufactured by an exploitative ruling class. So, the job of a liberator who desires to release human beings from bondage to an unjust social system is to unmoor the population from its attachment to existing norms, in order to move the population toward rejecting false consciousness. Thus, for example, it becomes possible for people to believe that the destruction of neighbourhoods by rioters and arsonists during BLM protests is “not violence”, while small everyday slights, or even silence, can be “literally violence".
The ultimate goal of all this inversion and rejection of norms is to overthrow the oppressor class through revolution and establish a socialist — and then, ultimately, a communist — society. Social justice activism teaches people to reject the conventional transactional means by which the social superstructure is maintained. Praxis involves ditching the master’s tools, using new tools, gathering together a different toolkit and sharing it with others who will become (or maybe already are) awakened to class/race consciousness. This is how people functioning within a Marxist paradigm work to convert the superstructure into one that supports and is supported by a classless and truly equitable economic base (socialism or communism).
As noted by many commentators, the descriptions of “whiteness” produced by “antiracists” fit nicely with any number of traditional racist tropes and stereotypes, as infographics like the one above claim that the following characteristics are distinctive features of “whiteness” and “white culture”:
Hard work
“Delayed gratification”
Planning for the future
The “nuclear family”
Rational thinking
Promptness
Politeness
“Decision-making”
Personal responsibility
Speaking standard English
This implies that black people and cultures are not characterized by these traits… unless they are guilty of assimilating into white culture for material gain. The suggestion is that non-white people achieving success within the existing system are race-traitors. Only left wing “antiracist” activism and supporting revolutionary change can save a person from being tainted with proximity to “white supremacy culture”.
Whiteness and Capitalism are One
The racial stereotyping and obsessive racializing that the “antiracists” call “interrogating whiteness” is not a mission to find truth or spread factual information, it is a propaganda exercise designed to be subversive of the western social order. Anyone who describes the above characteristics as positive or admirable is clearly not “antiracist” (good), so can only be racist (evil). And since these characteristics are foundational and necessary to the functioning of the social order known as western civilization, that civilization must be, at a foundational level, evil, and good citizens will therefore desire its destruction, and — following the command to praxis — actively contribute to its end. Most educated people are fully aware that western societies are renowned for offering the highest degrees of freedom, opportunity, stability, and pluralism to citizens of all races and origins, so it isn’t surprising that in order to sell their ideas, the “antiracists” are actively undermining the primacy of reason and objectivity. Within critical social justice theory, all ideas are constructed to lead to a revolutionary mindset that sees destruction of core aspects of western civilization as inevitable for progress and justice: the social justice activists teach that whiteness/capitalism/patriarchy is the disease that kills BIPoC, and antiracism/Marxism/feminist intersectionality is the cure that will save them. Additionally, as their story goes, the establishment of a communist nanny state will ultimately liberate everyone from oppression, because “until black women are free, none of us will be free”.
Inverting Norms
Social justice activists don’t need to be critical theorists or have a solid understanding of Marxist dialectics to be useful and effective to the revolutionary cause, they only need to be trained to accept the ideology’s core beliefs and agree to spread certain illogical suppositions and strategic inversions of convention that encourage the people around them to cut ties to the past, conceptually. Revolutionary leaders work to inculcate in followers the understanding that by virtue of their initiation into social justice ideology and activism, they already collectively “inhabit” a partially built new social superstructure. Via praxis they contribute to its ongoing construction, and the ultimate goal, they project they are encouraged to support, is the renovation of the superstructure to accommodate and provide for all citizens equitably. The commune they labour together to build isn’t a physical building, it’s an ideological structure, a paradigm, a set of beliefs, new ways of thinking and seeing. “Antiracists” view themselves and their comrades as an enlightened elect, the ones with eyes open, the ones willing and able to continuously “do the work” of detecting bias and raising race consciousness by sussing out the racism inherent in every social situations or system. Thusly, the movement works like a cult or religious commune to break individual ties of loyalty to tradition and family.
Rupturing the populace’s connections to the past is a well-documented feature of successful communist revolutions throughout history. For example, the “Four Olds” that were targeted by Maoists during the Chinese Cultural Revolution were categorized as follows: old ideas, old culture, old habits of mind, and old customs. In the modern era, Marxist zealots trained to believe that the progress of humanity depends on the destruction of the existing superstructure have engaged in horrific acts of mass destruction and violence against their elders. Although the current racial justice movement has not yet produced mass violence against dissidents and the old guard, we have witnessed escalations of racial conflict resulting in billions of dollars of property damage, along with plenty of symbolic violence against “the olds”, including the toppling of statues, the demonization of “old white males”, and the removal of iconic and canonical artifacts and texts from institutions and curricula. During the recent “BLM years” in many western jurisdictions, we have witnessed significant increases in the incidence of violent crime within Black communities and perpetrated by Black offenders, including increases in crimes with a racial dimension, but these worrying crime waves are largely being ignored by mainstream media outlets and liberal politicians, who seem to generally align with the neoMarxist revolutionary movement — discussion of high crime rates in the Black population is generally considered taboo, the data is typically treated as “hate facts”. We will likely soon see “antiracists” demanding an end to the practice of sorting crime data by racial categories.
“Antiracists” heavily invest in information and narrative control. They demand we purge public spaces of historical figures who are considered racist by today’s standards, but they have even been known to fight for removal of statues and memorials representing individuals who fought for the abolition of slavery. However strange this may seem, even apparently illogical or irrational claims and enactments can be desirable and useful to revolutionaries if they disrupt the citizenry’s respect for past progress, which serves as a tie to tradition.
“Antiracists”, and critical social justice theorists generally, use moralizing language to pressure a population to accept “noble untruths” that aren’t factually true. In racial justice circles, some of the “noble untruths” that serve the revolutionary cause include the following: memorializing abolitionists nonetheless upholds systemic racism; racial disparities are always caused by systemic racism; police are hunting down Black people on the streets of America; racism is a public health emergency; eradicating racism requires that we engage in racist stereotyping and discrimination against white/Asian/Jewish people; George Floyd was a gentle giant who should be memorialized like a saint. Leftist activists are busy toppling traditional statuary, but also busy erecting new icons to glorify their side’s new martyrs, such as George Floyd. They are mentally unmooring people from conventions regarding the discovery and falsification of truth, making the population progressively easier to control via further moralizing decrees.
Consider the “racism is a public health emergency” claim that is now popular, not just in America but in Canada, the UK, and elsewhere. This extremely odd public health pronouncement became common in 2020 during ongoing BLM protests, and has been used to justify government spending and restructuring to massively increase DEI programming and policy development. Despite the fact that mass chaotic protesting and rioting was occurring in the middle of pandemic lockdowns, American public health officials overwhelmingly supported BLM at this time. A collective of at least 1200 signed an open letter to declare that racism, not Covid-19, was the more urgent “public health emergency”.
Many people found this pronouncement astonishing, because in western societies, it had previously been considered unusual for public health bureaucrats to issue such blatantly political decrees. These officials seemed to feel no compunction to compile or assess data in the traditional manner to support this dramatic finding. The letter outlined pandemic safety precautions that they hoped street protestors would take, such as use of masks and social distancing, but acknowledged these suggestions wouldn’t likely be followed: “even so, we continue to support demonstrators who are tackling the paramount public health problem of perverse racism”. The health officials were demonstrating their belief that activism for the racial justice movement was their highest calling in that moment, and this enabled them to adopt a “new toolkit” for the occasion. They collectively and consciously rejected conventional methods of analysis, as well as thresholds of evidence that are traditionally required to achieve consensus and declare truth. Their pronouncements also aligned with the CRT tenet that differences in racial group outcomes (i.e. poorer average health outcomes in black and indigenous populations) are always caused by “broken systems”, and to suggest otherwise is racist.
Challenging and deconstructing power systems via activism is the highest truth of “antiracism”, to which all other truths become subordinate. Modern ideological frameworks in the Marxist tradition strongly favour relativism and reject the idea of truth as universal and absolute law that can be discovered, instead asserting that truth is changeable, and determined by a society's dominant power structures. Social justice activists are pushing hard to disrupt and dismantle even the hard sciences. In New Zealand, for example, a group of professors were recently pilloried and subjected to investigations by their professional associations for daring to politely challenge the idea that public school curriculum should be reformed so that educational content related to Maori mythology and indigenous “ways of knowing” receives equal attention to conventional western science.
New Terms, New Definitions
We have witnessed the same upending of traditional discourse conventions with regards to increasing restrictions on “hate speech” to curtail dissemination of any content that could be deemed hurtful to racial minorities, even if that content is verifiably factual (resulting as previously mentioned in the coining of the term “hate fact”). Activists often campaign for stricter laws regulating speech, and have in many cases successfully achieved reforms that reflect this contemporary concern with “political correctness”. But outside of formal policy and legal frameworks, proponents of CRT also use various other mechanisms of cancel culture to control information and constrict the flow of information that is deemed politically undesirable. Western culture is becoming a minefield for anyone even mildly critical of social justice orthodoxy, while anti-white and anti-conservative expressions — even of the most hateful nature — are condoned, and very rarely result in negative consequences for the speaker, because these are considered to be “punching up” and contributing to the progressive cause.
Anti-white hatred and discrimination against white people don’t even rate as “racism” in the minds of many people now, because the “antiracists” have redefined the word “racism”. The new definition of racism requires that a perpetrator(s) of racism possesses collective power/privilege by virtue of racial status. Marxism makes most everything in society about collective power — power is the ideology’s highest truth. For “antiracists”, it’s not possible to be racist against white people, because white people collectively hold power. Racially-motivated acts that harm white people are now popularly understood to be prejudice or bigotry, but not racism, because all white people are understood to enjoy “white privilege” by virtue of their skin colour. The movement’s success is evidenced by the fact that their new definitions are widely accepted, and several reputable dictionary brands have officially adopted the Marxist redefinition of the word “racism”.
Equality Out, Equity In
Changing racism’s definition serves not only to upend tradition and raise class consciousness (along with the racial justice movement’s authority) via language, but also to free people from the arguably very deep western attachment to the idea of equality as our highest social ideal. Cultural attachment to the ideal of equality is an obstacle to far-left revolution. Believing in equality leads people to reject the racial justice movement’s profound changes to the social order when those changes clearly aren’t intended to achieve equality, and racial justice activism requires support for programs and policies that do not benefit all people equally — some are downright punitive for citizens categorized as white or white adjacent. Equity is the new holy grail, because equity is collectivist, equity supports reparations for historical racial injustices, equity demands the dismantling of any current systems deemed oppressive, and any number of “affirmative actions” that move society in a communist direction. Racial equity is the long-term goal that makes it easiest to justify intensive, ongoing government intervention and large-scale redistribution of wealth and power. The far left’s intellectual leadership is fully aware that using race as a proxy for class is their side’s best bet for achieving desired political ends. Westerners want so badly for society to be NOT racist that millions are willing to support a radical Marxist uprising whose leaders purport to know how best to minimize the effects of racism.
Praxis Fuels A Cultural Revolution
Through widespread dissemination of ideas popular in Marxist dialectics (“antiracist” education), combined with new mechanisms to control social discourse (cancel culture) and restructure social systems (equity policies), critical theorists have successfully developed a new culture. The cultural revolution Marxists have long worked to achieve through a “long march through the institutions” has arrived. In most institutions today, and particularly within the fields of education and media, people who self-identify as social justice advocates dominate leadership positions. This is an obstacle to any deep sustained analysis or critique of the movement’s nature, origins, and goals — our institutions are dominated by people who support a far-left revolutionary movement but who often don’t even recognize “social justice advocacy” as essentially Marxist — they often do not identify as “far left revolutionaries”, but are typically driven to support the revolutionary agenda of BLM/CRT/DEI by feelings of sympathy for the disadvantaged, along with the desire to cultivate an admirable public image and personal/professional reputation.
Universities and corporations now resemble left-wing indoctrination mills, where even relatively moderate conservatives and classical liberals are now commonly tarred as “racists” and “extremists” if they openly criticize social justice ideology. University job ads nowadays, especially for teaching positions, commonly specify that candidates must submit documentation that attests to a fulsome, active, ongoing commitment to social justice activism. In many institutions now, enthusiastic support for BLM/CRT/DEI is, quite simply, a condition of employment. Researchers applying for funding and approval are now often required to submit DEI plans in addition to the conventional project outline/proposal. Professors who dissent from social justice orthodoxy report being harassed by students and colleagues, and many have faced discrimination and been forced out of their jobs for their refusal to participate in the revolutionary zeitgeist.
The purging of intellectuals who refuse to submit to the newly favoured political ideology is a common feature of far left revolutions. During the Chinese cultural revolution, zealous youth even murdered many of their teachers. In the cultural revolution currently sweeping western society, professors have not yet been killed, but zealous students have shown an eerily similar propensity for violence, sometimes rioting to protest professors or other speakers who are deemed political enemies by social justice activists. Violent rebellion is generally presented as a valid and effective approach to praxis within the current racial/social justice movement’s ethical framework. This is a major departure from the nonviolent ethical framework that characterizes the “MLK” approach to civil protest, an approach that rose to prominence during the civil rights movement last century, and continued to dominate western protest culture until very recently.
The “Antiracist” Spirit Moves Us (Toward Secular Collectivism)
The newly ascendent neoMarxist commandment to racial justice activism reflects the belief that western liberal capitalism and whiteness are conjoined structural elements of the old society that need to go to make way for the new social structure — a progressive and socially just economic/power base that will purportedly benefit all citizens equitably and move humanity into an era marked by a unified collective awareness, traditionally called “class consciousness” but now often dubbed “race consciousness”.
The racial justice movement is, currently and by far, the most powerful branch of the broader foundational movement often called “Wokeness”, but all branches of this new social justice movement are successfully advancing in a similar way, silencing opposition by constructing new moral frameworks for public discourse, new rules governing access to participation in the economy, and new idols to command public reverence and ritualistic supplication… all elements we’ve witnessed not only in successful Marxist revolutions of the past, but also in theocratic and fundamentalist movements, such as the Iranian Revolution. Social justice activists (those who are not merely cynical anarchists) always testify to a deeply held belief that social justice ideology and activism represents the true path of the good heart, the highest good, and the belief that the practical implementation of DEI policies and programs represent the western collective’s righteous journey toward establishing a “secular kingdom of God” on earth.
Marxism is traditionally an atheistic belief system, but many commentators today are noting the racial justice movement seems to be tapping in to religious instincts and desires. We are seeing class consciousness revered like a godhead, social/racial justice upheld as ideals of godliness or goodness, and a complex of equity policies, confessional self-abasement, and physical gestures of supplication like “kneeling for Black lives” used as rites of worship. And also, of course, we are becoming very familiar with the movement’s faithful calling for punishment of blasphemers and apostates who openly challenge “woke” dogma. Professors John McWhorter, Jason Hill, Glenn Loury, Carol Swain, and Eric Smith are just a handful of of the black American intellectuals who’ve recently been busy publishing articles and books to flesh out this analogy (between social justice and cultishness) and to warn the public about the damage wrought by this ideology. Many other journalists and academics are publishing similar findings, but the large and growing contingent of black academics and cultural commentators who do not support BLM/CRT/DEI is noteworthy, since the movement purports to be for the betterment of the black community. Perhaps black dissidents against social justice orthodoxy can be most effective in leading the resistance within certain demographics, particularly that of “white liberals” — white liberals comprise perhaps the largest subgroup of the social justice army, and commonly exhibit a pathology known as “white saviour complex”, which leads them to treat nonwhite peoples as a monolith with reduced agency. Black thinkers who challenge BLM/CRT/DEI can not be brushed aside as racists not worth listening to, although supporters of the movement do attempt to undermine their authority by portraying them as sell-outs and race traitors.
Black Wrongthink is White Wrongthink
The impetus for obsequiousness has been so strong, uptake of the ideology so rapid and widespread, and media blackout and marginalization of dissenting voices so thorough, that even the existence of a contingent of dissenting opinion by a large cadre of articulate black intellectuals has so far made little difference to the advancement of the “antiracist” agenda in western institutions, corporations, and general culture. Many excellent arguments against BLM/CRT/DEI are being made by non-white thinkers, and many subgroups of minority voters are shifting their ballot choices rightward as a result of the political left’s embrace of Marxist social justice platforms, but this seems to engender no serious reflection or revision in the left-liberal public imagination. Dissenting voices are simply not being amplified, as mainstream media and big tech platforms continue to operate in a manner suggesting their leaders believe that dissenting people of colour should be ignored, silenced, insulted, slurred as “white adjacent”, and/or dismissed as suffering from “internalized white supremacy”.
Although we hear constant demands to end bigotry and stereotyping, and increase diversity and inclusion, by “elevating and amplifying voices of colour”, we’ve also witnessed a parallel rise in social acceptability of using racial slurs against Black thinkers and community leaders who dare to criticize the tenets of CRT and align with traditional western values. Several media outlets called California’s recent gubernatorial candidate Larry Elder “the new black face of white supremacy”; Democrat politicians labelled Republican Tim Scott a race traitor and “Uncle Tom” after he expressed the opinion that America is not a racist nation. There are many, many examples of such marginalization of non-leftist “people of colour”, which is strong evidence that the “racial justice” movement is a neoMarxist political movement that is merely using race and other identity categories as proxies for class, to foment revolution, and isn’t at all concerned with supporting nonwhite achievement or celebrating nonwhite successes within the current system.
Social justice activism has created a dominant culture with a primary feature of silencing political opposition through enforcement of a new moral framework — and although it is a framework that purports to exist for the universal benefit and protection of people of colour, it actively suppresses the voices of any people of colour who oppose social justice ideology, justifying this apparent contradiction by focusing attention on their opponents' proximity to/taint of whiteness. In Rules for Radicals, the legendary far-left organizer Saul Alinsky coaches activists to conjure a common enemy and demonize this enemy mercilessly. Any cursory analysis of BLM/CRT/DEI literature makes it abundantly clear that the common enemy conjured by critical race theorists is called “whiteness” and “white supremacy”, terms which merely serve as euphemisms for white people and their various European cultures and traditions, because it is these cultures and traditions that dominate western societies. “Abolishing whiteness” is one of the movement’s stated intentions, and proponents of the ideology seem to believe that a semantic distinction between “whiteness” and “white people” is adequate to deflect accusations that their ideology is undergirded by genocidal ideation.
Racial justice activists have strategized that if they can convince the general public that Black people who are critics of BLM/CRT/DEI are actually “coconuts” (white on the inside), then the racial justice movement’s validity and cohesion remains intact. Left-leaning media are more than happy to oblige in this regard, frequently running offensive and racist opinion pieces about the inner whiteness of Black people who express conservative, libertarian, and/or classically liberal ideas and beliefs.
Shutting Up for the Sake of Diversity
The current practice of shutting people up, even non-white people, for the sake of “diversity and inclusion” is woefully common — freedom of conscience and expression, including academic freedom, have been absolutely gutted by the current social justice movement. Many people dismiss critics of cancel culture as “right-wing conspiracy theorists” and claim that cancel culture is actually a net good because although it clearly harms individuals, it’s a mechanism by which society upholds conventions of decency by meting out just consequences for objectionable beliefs and acts. But supporters of cancel culture tend to understand cancel culture very superficially, as a mechanism to hold individuals accountable, rather than acknowledging that cancel culture’s primary purpose is totalitarian, and the furtherance of revolutionary political aims. Cancel culture is eminently useful to the movement, as it removes from public purview perspectives contrary to social justice orthodoxy. Cancel culture is politically expedient, and arguably even a necessity for this movement to succeed. Cancel culture permits activists to avoid ideological challenges and to sidestep public debate and defence of often illogical and hypocritical critical social justice beliefs and demands.
To be fair, many racial justice activists and their followers are still relatively uneducated about their movement’s Marxist political foundation and goals. But for this very reason, cancel culture’s continuance is the savvy Marxist’s best hope for long-term political success, so we will no doubt continue to see strident challenges to freedom of conscience and expression packaged as needed protections for vulnerable minorities.
The social justice movement’s attack on the free flow of ideas can be witnessed very clearly in the ongoing movement to ban “Islamophobia” as a form of racial discrimination, and so to legislate against criticism of all things Islamic. Recently, Toronto’s largest school board displayed this illiberal spirit when a superintendent used “Islamophobia” as a reason to disapprove of a book selected by a community volunteer who runs a successful and dynamic teen girls’ book club in the TDSB, featuring interactive events where students get to meet the female authors of the books they've read. A school board official told the book club leader that Nadia Murad’s book and meeting were disallowed, as they might promote Islamophobia — Murad, a Yazidi activist and recipient of a Nobel Peace Prize, was kidnapped by the Islamic State at age 14 and lived as a sex slave for several years. Her book is called The Last Girl: My Story of Captivity, and My Fight Against the Islamic State. As this incident illustrates, racial justice activism and DEI policy is, ironically (consdiering the terminology the movement uses), leading to increasingly authoritarian censorship and exclusion of actually diverse voices and perspectives, and de facto adoption of blasphemy prohibitions in the name of “antiracist” progress.
Painting A Facade of Unity
Along with cancel culture mechanisms and raising the spectre of a common enemy, the racial justice movement deploys “symbol construction” as a unifying strategy to advance their political agenda. We are now inundated with a selection of unifying rally cries, symbols, slogans, and demands that were adopted and birthed by the Black Lives Matter movement. Since #BLM went viral, these symbols and slogans (including the black power fist image, #ACAB (all cops are bastards), “defund the police”, “I can’t breathe”, etc.) are now ubiquitous in western culture, giving the movement an outward appearance of unity that would make famed communist community organizer Saul Alinsky immensely proud. So ubiquitous are their symbols that many people simply presume that BLM represents the collective values and aspirations of the black community, but clearly, this is not so — remember when we used to consider it racist to presume that all people sharing a skin colour form a monolith in any manner whatsoever? And since BLM/CRT very publicly advances intersectionality theory, masses of people also believe that the BLM movement encompasses and represents any and all identify groups that are deemed victims of “cis het male white supremacy culture”. Along with “people of colour”, BLM/CRT promises to save many categories of other people from the suffering caused by the “oppressive” culture and socio-political systems developed over centuries by western civilization’s dominant racial group.
Ahistorical Perspective and Mass Delusion
Many outside the racial justice movement find it baffling that social justice activists are able to live with such powerful cognitive dissonance: everyone can see that all the western nations (all iterations of the same “systemically racist” civilization) nonetheless have enduring and strong appeal for many millions of non-western, non-white immigrants, for whom “the west” is still the globe’s primary beacon of freedom and opportunity. But social justice activists nonetheless remain determined to promulgate the idea that western liberal democratic systems are inherently oppressive and need dismantling. Typically, social justice activists struggle to get past the “tear it all down” and “redistribute the wealth and power” rhetoric; they have trouble explaining the blueprints for the “antiracist” society they wish to construct from the ashes of western civilization. People should recognize that modern social justice culture is very much a grievance culture — this is not a movement of builders capable of engineering a new society, a functional civilization that will better serve the needs of a greater number of people than our current social structure. Misguided Marxist idealism, sometimes with a “racial justice” face like we are seeing today, has engendered systemic poverty and oppression in several nations in the modern era, including Russia, China, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, South Africa. Left-leaning mainstream media outlets in the west are conspicuously quiet regarding current (and historical) devastation caused by socialism and communism. Many media outlets today actively suppress all narratives that don’t support the racial/social justice revolution.
Along with its oppressive “whiteness”, BLM/CRT accuses western society of oppressive heteronormativity, patriarchy, ableism, etc. But the millions of people sharing BLM slogans and hashtags, or kneeling to show allegiance to the movement, definitely do not share full understanding of the movement’s beliefs and agenda, and BLM is actually happy to keep it that way — this is why, immediately after the movement shot to global stardom, BLM leaders chose to scrub from their web site the more radical bits, for example about their mandate to disrupt the nuclear family. BLM leaders also made sure to scrub the profile of convicted communist domestic terrorist Susan Rosenberg from the web site of the organization that was handling donations for BLM, despite her senior management position in that organization (as mentioned in Part 1, since BLM was not a registered charity in its early years, it could not accept donations directly, so Thousand Currents, a registered charity, “sponsored” BLMGN between 2016-2020). Patrisse Cullors once stated (in an interview with a sympathetic left-wing host) that she and other BLM founders are ”trained Marxists”, but an important part of Marxist training appears to be that it’s imperative to hide or significantly downplay the movement’s Marxism. Cullors might more accurately have declared that they are trained in “stealth Marxism”, and she likely regrets having declared the group’s Marxist credentials in that obscure interview that is now available for anyone to view on YouTube.
What is a “Trained Marxist” Trained to Do, Exactly?
The majority of people morally and financially supporting BLM are not trained in activism or critical theory traditions — they are mostly people who simply believe racial equality is a common good, and they are happy to contribute to a movement they believe to be decreasing suffering and increasing fairness and mutual respect. BLM’s supporters are largely unschooled about the intellectual foundations, core principles, and long-term goals of the movement’s leadership. If you tell an average BLM supporter that BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors stated on camera, in defence of the organization’s capacity to bring lasting change to society, that they are “trained Marxists”, the BLM supporter is likely to either react with suspicion, doubting the veracity of your claim, or with a display of near complete ignorance, and therefore a lack of concern, about what it actually means to be a “trained Marxist”. The leftist bias in education has resulted in very little instruction being offered in schools and universities about Marxism and the many failed communist socio-political experiments in modern history.
Antiracism is Neoracism
As more information emerges and circulates in the wake of the movement’s rapid ascent to global dominance, this public knowledge deficit is slowly decreasing, and questions and doubts about BLM and the “anti-racists” are slowly increasing. Many people are discovering that despite believing in racial equality and condemning racial discrimination, they are not in agreement with BLM’s beliefs and methods, and many are noticing that the movement doesn’t at any rate seem to be resulting in improvements in “race relations” or conditions of life for marginalized people. In recognition of BLM/CRT’s focus on racialization, segregation, and division, one academic started a movement to replace the name “antiracist movement” with “neoracist movement”. Yet many people are reluctant to admit the movement is counterproductive, and continue to push radical “woke” ideas — these types typically blame the intransigence of “racist” white people and their “white supremacist” systems for the undeniable fact that social conditions are worsening all over the western world. In America, violent crime rates have soared in several jurisdictions where BLM has a strong presence, and no one can deny that the movement has resulted in the normalization of anti-white stereotyping and hostile, divisive rhetoric. Pro-BLM/CRT policymakers in Democrat-run cities are now regularly being forced by plagues of crime to reverse decisions to defund police forces, and their cities are suffering from an exodus of dissatisfied residents, which is causing population booms in several red states and cities.
Unfortunately, resistance to social justice activism is still heavily stigmatized in many organizations, and people are still being fired for expressing criticism of the “antiracist” movement, but opposition is growing. Resistance to social justice orthodoxy is seen in the emergence of anti-CRT/BLM political organizing at both local and national levels, especially in the rise of parents passionately protesting critical social justice indoctrination in schools. Fed up parents have withdrawn millions of students from public school systems to be home schooled. We are seeing a plethora of newly published books, articles, and videos contesting the ideology and documenting the rise of BLM/CRT and Marxist thought generally, and consequent degradation of social cohesion. Several American states have passed legislation to limit or ban dissemination of BLM/CRT ideology through public schools. The current federal government of USA is currently still pushing the ideology, and it is being fully embraced by governments in nations such as Canada, UK, and New Zealand, but this could change if voters in upcoming elections make known their displeasure with politicians and parties that support the woke agenda.
The world is taking note of the radically far left cultural shift that has occurred in western contexts, with some leaders even making bold statements rejecting critical social justice theory. French officials have been very vocal about their determination to fight the ideology, asserting their commitment to preserving traditional French values. Vladmir Putin made a speech expressing pity for westerners dealing with the plague of “wokeness”. He noted parallels between the current western cultural revolution and Russia’s terrible past experiences with similar ideology during their communist period, suggesting Russians have learned their lesson and will not be allowing the ideology to rise again. UK’s current Women and Equalities Minister, a black woman named Kemi Badenoch, dismisses CRT and “antiracism” and related ideologies/movements such as “anti-colonialism” and has forthrightly declared that teaching white privilege as a fact, or inculcating inherited racial guilt, is illegal in the UK
But the pushback everywhere by proponents of critical social justice ideology is also intense. French academics with Marxist beliefs, for example, are loudly decrying their government’s “McCarthyism” and noting that “equality” in French society exists on paper but not unreality. When America’s National School Board Association asked the federal government to treat parent protestors against CRT as potential domestic terrorists, the Biden administration complied (and even helped draft the request letter). Public uproar resulted in many state-level School Board Association bodies dissociating from the request and severing ties with the national body. The NSBA eventually issued a letter of apology, but the damage was done, and the association now faces significant financial hardship as a result of the row. No one can deny the raging culture war centred on the racial justice movement is significantly destabilizing western society and causing deep divisions between people and groups. A threat currently hangs in the air of much more violent civil conflict, and the chatter on social media reflects the commonly held belief that the social contract is now broken and western society, particularly in America, is collapsing.
“Antiracism” Hides an Iron First in a Velvet Glove
The “iron fist in a velvet glove” is a phrase used to describe the trick of gaining popular support with empty promises that belie the tyrannical reality that lies ahead. “Antiracists” are essentially the same as the Marxist revolutionaries who arose in every past time and place, believing that only mass compliance with their beliefs and policies will produce a just and fair social order, one in which an extensive state bureaucracy will provide security, all life necessities, and meaningful work for everyone. The velvet glove that charms the masses is constructed in language. Modern iterations of the “velvet glove” are movements/belief systems with simple names that appeal to people who value decency, fairness, and morality: “Antiracism” and “Black Lives Matter” and “Social Justice”. Today’s Marxist movements presents themselves, as always, as liberating humanist movements, but scratch the surface and you’ll find they actually offers the same tired and doomed far-left agendas of Marxist revolution and intense, ongoing social conflict as the left wing struggles to consolidate its grip on power and recreate society in its own image. People who would balk at joining a forthrightly named Marxist revolutionary movement have been pledging support to the new racial justice movement because they are being deceived into believing this movement’s leaders will solve pressing social issues with radical reforms. It’s imperative to show people the historical precedents that very clearly indicate that these leaders and their proposed reforms are in reality extremely destructive..
The racial justice facade was designed, just as Alinsky stipulated in Rules for Radicals, to provoke artificial rather than organic socio-political conflict. Marxist revolution requires a large number of disaffected and resentful citizens that can be mobilized into violent rebellion. In an era when racism is considered extremely distasteful and wrong, successfully conjuring the spectre of systemic and inherent racism has ensured widespread uptake of the belief that western liberal democracy needs to be destroyed in order for humanity to progress. Artificial conflict has been generated with a potent mix of truth and lies. It is an incontrovertible truth, for example, that black citizens and communities are typically the most police-involved of western racial demographic groups. This fact presented Marxist organizers with an opportunity to construct a false narrative that systemic anti-black racism are resulting in an epidemic of innocent black people being hunted in the streets by rabidly anti-black police. The movement pushed this horrific narrative hard, despite statistics and research studies not supporting its veracity. And simultaneously, they deflect any culpability for such inordinately high rates of police involvement away from black people, by rejecting as “racist” any claim that high rates of criminality in black populations are caused by anti-social behaviours or cultural norms. People should of course protest use of excessive force by police, and “policing the police” is required to ensure authorities use their power judiciously. But by overstating and exacerbating policing problems for purely political ends. “antiracists” have grossly and irresponsibly inflamed tension and caused significant unnecessary destruction and death.
The movement has made it socially unacceptable to suggest that anything other than systemic racism and white supremacy cause black people in western societies to commit violent crimes at extraordinarily high rates compared to other racial groups. The “antiracist” movement has effectively shut down real exploration of causes and possible solutions to social problems in black communities that have led to violence, poverty, failure, and despair becoming normalized. Along with using political correctness as a mechanism to control discourse, the leadership used information warfare strategy and new information technology effectively to create the unity of messaging and allegiance to false narratives that are required for a movement to become forceful. Viral dissemination of catchy slogans and iconography led to widespread allegiance to via new symbols, signifiers, and moral codes. Repeating the same false information frequently, loudly, and on many platforms eventually leads to a large percentage of the population accepting the information as truth. Behind the humanistic “civil rights” facade of BLM, the movement’s leaders are merely using the time-worn technique of disseminating propaganda to fuel hostility and revolutionary fervour.
Marxists are infamous for justifying all manner of abuses in pursuit of collective class consciousness — what’s a little tyranny, totalitarianism, and violence when the end result will surely be a promised land of equality, peace, and communal prosperity? Misidentifying the causes of a disease or disorder will generally result in the application of cures that don’t work, but in the case of social justice activism, the leaders don’t care, because the point at this stage isn’t actually to find a cure. Their imperative now is to foment revolutionary zeal and feed the movement by generating legions of activist protestors, the “foot soldiers” who cause chaos and disorder in the streets. The legions of disaffected protestors give their Marxist leadership newly acquired political leverage. If the legions become violent in their protests, that is spun as a net positive and used for increased leverage, as it is explained as merely a reflection of the monumental institutionalized violence of their establishment oppressors. We’re nowhere near seeing the end of this disease.
The racial justice movement, also as per Rules for Radicals, has successfully raised the spectre of a common enemy of great evil known as the white police state/white supremacy culture/whiteness. They’ve ridiculed that enemy mercilessly, and personalized the conflict (“say his/her name”) and outright martyred a number of black people who were killed in police interactions (despite the fact that most BLM martyrs were engaged in serious criminal activity and/or resisting arrest). Shrines and icons memorializing George Floyd are now a dime a dozen. Rational, data-driven counterarguments are ineffective against the rage and passion machine of this artificially-induced conflict.
During a very stressful period in world history, the racial justice movement has been providing community events that serve as outlets for people to actively vent frustration, and targets of blame onto which people can project pent-up resentment. BLM’s recent meteoric rise to prominence rested heavily on contentious (if not patently false) claims that American policing is systemically racist and police are hunting down black people in the streets. Statistical evidence does not support their claims, and BLM leaders have been caught lying about numerous cases, but no matter: several decades of critical social justice rhetoric against whiteness, empiricism, and objectivity are now paying great dividends to the Marxist side.
Big questions remain to be answered: Do the majority of westerner leaders and citizens actually want to ditch western individualism and pursue systemic/structural change that is expressly Marxist? Do most people supporting the movement even understand that this is what BLM/CRT/DEI represents? If not, how did we allow such mass miseducation to happen, how can it be rectified, and how could this socio-political disaster have been prevented? Why are traditionally centre-left leaning western political parties such as the Democrats in America and the Liberal Party in Canada now fully and openly supporting far-left Marxist revolutionaries and their political agenda? Why do the bulk of western corporations support leftist agitation? And, above all… if Marxist restructuring continues apace as our primary means for pursuing progress, what does the future hold for denizens of western societies, particularly the millions of people who dissent against Marxist ideology and resist Marxist restructuring?