DeSantis’ over-arching point is that such claims of systemic racism are used as a political catch-all, whereby literally everything someone on the left doesn’t like is relegated to some form of systemic racism. That then gives them license to destroy the system instead of just dealing with whatever bad apples may emerge. Thus, the comparison to Marxism is profound and relevant, especially considering that many of those same people self-identify as Marxists.

The real goal of Black Lives Matter and the myriad of other social justice activists out there is not to stop supposed examples of racism (note that even Derek Chauvin was never found to have had racist intentions). Rather, by their own admission, it’s to tear down the system as it exists and rebuild it in a more “equitable” fashion. But forcing equity via the heavy hand of government is, in and of itself, discrimination, because it throws out individual choices and performance in favor of defining people by their immutable characteristics. That’s racism. //

Arcturus77
17 hours ago edited
Bonchie,

I think a more succinct way of explaining the Marxist underpinnings of Critical Race Theory is to note that like "traditional" economic class-based Marxism, CRT posits a zero-sum struggle between groups of people, in its case, based upon racial or other biomarker identities (e.g., gender / sex). Individuals do not exist except insofar as they are members of a group -- and that group is either oppressed or oppressor. CRT is simply a Cultural Marxism.

Unlike other Marxism ideologies and movements that were economic power-based but included a cultural element -- most famously, the Maoist Cultural Revolution and, even more extreme, the Khmer Rouge -- CRT is a uniquely American Marxism. That's because it sidesteps the actual issue of excessive concentration of wealth and power by the overclass (except insofar as the overclass is white) and focuses on culture and racism -- via the "systemic racism" struggle between groups.

This is how multimillionaire Blacks such as the Obamas, LeBron James, and Oprah are, ipso facto, oppressed and a working class white living in a trailer park in Appalachia is the oppressor.

It is getting extra traction in America because corporate oligarchy has discovered the usefulness (at least short-to-medium term) of CRT because, as a Cultural Marxism, it really doesn't upset the highly imbalanced economic system but keeps it in place by keeping the population at war with itself.

It is a profoundly immoral and, operationally, a violent philosophy, but that's the inherent nature of Marxism in whatever form the "struggle" takes.

Facts, truth, reality itself are all subservient to the ideology and its zero-sum struggle. Needless to say, it is a profoundly illiberal philosophy. But young people with no real prospects in society and addicted to social media love it because of its all-embracing explanation of reality and good-versus-evil struggle it posits. Every Marxist movement has been like that.

The tragedy of the Obama presidency was rather than healing America's traditional racial divide, Obama made it acceptable for anyone who had one drop of "BIPOC" blood in them to claim the mantle of oppressed victimhood no matter their actual station or situation in life. //

skeptic62 Arcturus77
15 hours ago edited
Marxism is not about creating a more equitable system; far from it.

Each of us is bestowed with different skill sets. In Capitalism, the best in each field rise to the top, with the rest taking spots on the lower rungs.

For some though, their best if not only skill is the ability to take. Most are just common criminals, but under Marxism the “best” rise to the top by inflaming passions and pitting several groups against one. Until there is only one.

Marxists can’t compete in The Marketplace of Ideas, but they can surely surf the wave of revolution. THIS is why the Marxist Revolution never ends. //

timcooper62 Arcturus77
17 hours ago
I like what you wrote. They don't want to acknowledge the individual because then they may have to acknowledge individual rights. These schemes are the antithesis of individual rights. The individual has no rights under these schemes. Its totally un American and really as you say immoral. Its evil on its face. When people fail, instead of looking inward and making changes to improve, they can claim victim status and blame some oppressor. //

ConservatarianGirl
18 hours ago
For Republicans to be brave, they're going to have to care more about being right than about being liked. //

IrishMailey ConservatarianGirl
15 hours ago
And they need to say over and over: Rep. Lincoln freed the slaves and made them full citizens under the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments, Rep. Eisenhower sent NG to desegregate Southern schools, and the 1964 Civil Rights Act comes from a 1957 Eisenhower bill that was defeated by sens. JFK, Johnson, and Al Gore's dad.