Critical theory

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Goals of Marxism
  1. Destroy the Family
  2. Destroy Private Property
  3. Destroy Religion
  4. Destroy the Nation
— Ted Baehr[1]

Critical theory is an ideological effort of representatives of Frankfurt School such as Max Horkheimer[2] to challenge all previously accepted standards in every aspect of societal life from a Marxist perspective. This was to be performed by means of circulating every negative thing one could possibly say about traditional society in books, movies, TVs, schools, colleges, and even a clergy so that youth would be endlessly indoctrinated.

This youth, known also as Baby Boomers, internalized their criticisms when being repeatedly exposed to brainwashing about what they came to refer to as 'establishment' portraying it as bunch of racists, overly religious, sexually deprived sexists, who were xenophobic, Indian-killers, antisemites and soon movies and songs began to reflect these new 'values' spreading them throughout the nation's youth culture. Critical theory was doing its job, especially on people like Charles Manson and John Lennon.

Even though in reality the baby boomers of 1960s were most free, most affluent and most privileged of any youth in any age, they were bored with their lives and swallowed the Frankfurt school's propaganda in form of books like The Death of the Family, Escape from Freedom, Sexual Revolution, The Joy of Sex, The Authoritarian Personality and counter-culture drug movies like Easy rider, The wild angels, and Born Losers, attacking especially a family unit as a Christian institution and basic building block of middle class. So along came movies like The battle of the sexes, How to murder your wife which depicted the family as sexually repressed and dysfunction and instilled the cultural pessimism about families.[1]


The early leaders of Critical theory re-located to America and after living here and seeing it first hand, quickly began to realize the flaws of Marx's thinking. They were honest with themselves about what they saw first hand, that Marx's ideas are incorrect and that Capitalism does indeed work. Recognizing this, they realized that in order to affect change within the system, any flaw real or perceived must be amplified to create a sense of misery. Horkheimer said:[3]

This sociology went beyond the critical theory of society conceived by Marx in order to reflect reality more adequately. One point is very important. For Marx had the ideal of a society of free human beings. He believed that this capitalist society would necessarily have to be overcome by the solidarity spelled by the increasing immiseration of the working class. This idea is wrong. This society in which we live does not immiserate the workers but helps them to build a better life. And apart from that. Marx did not see that freedom and justice are dialectical concepts. The more freedom, the less justice and the more justice, the less freedom. The critical theory which I concieved later is based on the idea that one cannot determine, what is good, what a good, a free society would look like from within the society which we live in. We lack the means. But in our work we can bring up the negative aspects of this society, which we want to change.

The only way to achieve the goals of Marxism was to reject the failures of Marxist ideology and proceed with a new plan.

For Marx, ruthless criticism was a principal maxim. He himself inspired the ideals employed by "critical theorists" as he pointed out in a letter written in 1843 to Arnold Ruge:

if constructing the future and settling everything for all times are not our affair, it is all the more clear what we have to accomplish at present: I am referring to ruthless criticism of all that exists, ruthless both in the sense of not being afraid of the results it arrives at and in the sense of being just as little afraid of conflict with the powers that be.[4]

Immanent critique

Through the use of immanent critique, the more intellectual far leftists target opponents. Immanent critique is defined as
" a method of discussing culture which aims to locate contradictions in society's rules and systems....The purpose the detection of societal contradictions which suggest possibilities for emancipatory social change.... It highlights the gaps between what something stands for and what is being done in actual terms. Immanent critique tries to find contradictions and indirectly provide alternatives, without constructing an entirely new theory."[5]
From this is born the ostracism of political correctness.

Nevermind that purveyors of these idea-less theories themselves are caught up in the same hypocrisy, hold the same bigoted views and are guilty of the same actions as the people they target. It is "us versus them," the enlightened few against the powers that be and the unwashed masses, who are all bigots and hypocrites until they bow before their new revolutionary masters.

And the intellectual masters of this revolutionary thought turn a blind eye to the violence of their less-intellectual followers, who join the movement because "it's the hip thing to do." Justification of violence is necessary to any revolutionary movement that does not respect the ballot box and free speech.

And the aim is always the same, put themselves in power without any guiding principles and only historically discredited theories to lead them.

Critical race theory

See also: Critical Race Theory and Communist racism

Derrick Bell,[6] Barack Obama’s favorite Harvard professor, devised Critical Race Theory,[7] which exemplifies Lenin’s strategy as applied to race. According to Discover the Networks:

Critical race theory contends that America is permanently racist to its core, and that consequently the nation’s legal structures are, by definition, racist and invalid … members of “oppressed” racial groups are entitled—in fact obligated—to determine for themselves which laws and traditions have merit and are worth observing. …

Bell’s theory is in turn an innovation of Critical Theory, which was developed by Marxist thinkers of the Frankfurt School in Frankfurt, Germany, in 1923. The Institute’s left-wing scholars fled Hitler’s Germany in the 1930s, relocating to Columbia University in New York. Critical Theory, which discredits all aspects of Western society, we know today as political correctness. One of its most famous purveyors was the Frankfurt School’s Herbert Marcuse, longtime associate of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Julian Bond. Marcuse invented the concept of “partisan tolerance,” that is, tolerance for leftist ideas and intolerance of all others. The Southern Poverty Law Center applied Marcuse's strategy in developing its “Hate Watch” list, and Rules for Radicals author Saul Alinsky used it in his own life's work.

The “racist” narrative was turbocharged with the concept of “White Privilege,” the notion that whites—the dominant demographic group in capitalist America—are irretrievably racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, imperialistic oppressors who exploit everyone. Whites are the only true evil in the world and should be exterminated. “Dr. Kamau Kambon, who taught Africana Studies 241 in the Spring 2005 semester at North Carolina State University, also said this needs to be done ‘because white people want to kill us.’”[8]

The New Abolitionism

The “White Skin Privilege” idea was created in 1967 by Noel Ignatiev,[9] an acolyte of Derrick Bell and professor at Harvard's W.E.B. Du Bois Institute. Ignatiev was a member of the Communist Party USA’s most radical wing, the Provisional Organizing Committee to Reconstitute the Marxist-Leninist Communist Party from 1958–66. The Provisional Organizing Committee was the intellectual forerunner to the Freedom Road Socialist Organization, a vanguard group. Writing under the alias Noel Ignatin, Ignatiev co-authored a Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) pamphlet with fellow radical Ted Allen titled, White Blindspot. In 1992 he co-founded Race Traitor: Journal of the New Abolitionism. Its first issue coined the slogan “Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.” Its stated objective was to “abolish the white race.” More specifically, the New Abolitionist newsletter declared:

The way to abolish the white race is to challenge, disrupt and eventually overturn the institutions and behavior patterns that reproduce the privileges of whiteness, including the schools, job and housing markets, and the criminal justice system. The abolitionists do not limit themselves to socially acceptable means of protest, but reject in advance no means of attaining their goal.[10]

See also


External links