What do you think?
Rate this book
Race Marxism: The Truth About Critical Race Theory and Praxis
Critical Race Theory is one of the hottest and most controversial topics in the world today, but what is it, really? Rightly understood, Critical Race Theory is a reinvention of an older, terrible idea, Marxism, using race "as the central construct for understanding inequality" in place of economic class. That is, Critical Race Theory is Race Marxism. The evidence of this claim is so overwhelming upon even casual examination that it is a shock that it isn't immediately plain to everyone who encounters it. Therefore, this book by James Lindsay, the leading investigator of Critical Race Theory, serves less to make the case that Critical Race Theory is Race Marxism and more to serve as a long permission slip to the public to call Critical Race Theory what it plainly is.
Race Marxism exists to tell the truth about Critical Race Theory in unprecedented clarity and depth. Across its six weighty chapters, Lindsay explains what Critical Race Theory is, what it believes, where it comes from, how it operates, and what we can do about it now that we know what we're dealing with. It exposes Critical Race Theory for what it is by ranging widely across its own literature and a survey of some of the darkest philosophical currents of the last three hundred years in Western thought. Readers will come away understanding Critical Race Theory and be able to speak the truth about it with authority: Critical Race Theory is Race Marxism, and, like all Marxist Theories before it, it will not work this time.
Race Marxism exists to tell the truth about Critical Race Theory in unprecedented clarity and depth. Across its six weighty chapters, Lindsay explains what Critical Race Theory is, what it believes, where it comes from, how it operates, and what we can do about it now that we know what we're dealing with. It exposes Critical Race Theory for what it is by ranging widely across its own literature and a survey of some of the darkest philosophical currents of the last three hundred years in Western thought. Readers will come away understanding Critical Race Theory and be able to speak the truth about it with authority: Critical Race Theory is Race Marxism, and, like all Marxist Theories before it, it will not work this time.
357 pages, Kindle Edition
First published February 15, 2022
About the author
James Lindsay
11 books387 followersJames Lindsay is an author, internationally recognized speaker, and the founder and president of New Discourses. He is best known for his relentless criticism of "Woke" ideology, the now-famous Grievance Studies Affair, and his bestselling books including Race Marxism and Cynical Theories, which has been translated into over a dozen languages. In addition to writing and speaking, Lindsay is the voice of the New Discourses Podcast and has been a guest on prominent media outlets including The Joe Rogan Experience, Glenn Beck, Fox News, and NPR.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews
Shelved as 'might-get'
April 5, 2022"Critical Race Theory is a reinvention of an older, terrible idea, Marxism, using race "as the central construct for understanding inequality" in place of economic class. That is, Critical Race Theory is Race Marxism. The evidence of this claim is so overwhelming upon even casual examination that it is a shock that it isn't immediately plain to everyone who encounters it." It is to some of us.
It is interesting that the majority of the ratings of this book are either 1 or 5 star. I wonder how many people actually read it, or used their vote to show their support or otherwise of CRT? I'm no fan of it, or anything that has the slightest whiff of Marxism which is, in practice in all but one example, a police dictatorship in practice. The best-ever book on Marxism is Animal Farm.
The island I live on is mostly Black, it's also well-off, not a poor island of people leaving school at 14 to help out in the bananas or, these days, in debt to the Chinese. Those people become immigrants to my island. Island thought on BLM which morphed very rapidly into Black Lives/Marxism is that America should stop trying to convince the world that everywhere is like that.
Politically CRT is very unpopular except with one politician, a mother and her crowd of people who do not as it was put to me 'mix with Caucasians socially except when necessary' and her son who is my nephew and a university professor. He believes in CRT, all his speeches are about colonialism and rewriting the true history of the island from the point of view of slavery. He's not likely to keep his seat at the next election. As someone on one of the island news sites said, 'N only knows the words to one song' and 'We voted him in to improve the roads and they getting worse while he spouts his nonsense'.
This is pretty much a general Caribbean view. Rewriting history, knocking down statues, looking towards Marxism isn't going to solve anything at all. Showing the examples of some of the Caribbean islands that have come up from slavery same as the US, to where the most cherished dream of an Islander is to build their own home, and a couple of apartments for rent and have a Master's degree is attainable by the many. Show how they got there. (Hint: education. Ghetto education is not up to the level that the children of Bill Gates went to. Why not? That would be a good place to spend money. Hint 2. The world's greatest geniuses arise from any background not the most privileged than the less so. They move the world forward. (education).
The only place Marxism works and it works perfectly as it was intended, is on kibbutzim in Israel. They have weekly meetings and vote on everything to make sure everyone is happy with projected policies, with current operation and can discuss anything they like from business to recreation to getting everyone's houses painted or needing more gardeners or nice new cars.
People who join a kibbutz and don't fit in, they have to leave. No police state, no punishment, no pigs-on-two-legs leading. But they only have 100-2,000 members, so everyone knows each other personally. Marxism like this is wonderful, it's a fantastic life, if you can fit in. But it's not scaleable as history has proved. Class is with us forever, in every country and race is not class, when it is, it's racism. Marxism won't remove racism look at the Pigs.
If you want to disagree with me on any or every point, no problem, I like discussions, I'm always happy to consider another point of view even if I don't adopt it. If you haven't got anything nice to say, at least try and put it politely.
It is interesting that the majority of the ratings of this book are either 1 or 5 star. I wonder how many people actually read it, or used their vote to show their support or otherwise of CRT? I'm no fan of it, or anything that has the slightest whiff of Marxism which is, in practice in all but one example, a police dictatorship in practice. The best-ever book on Marxism is Animal Farm.
The island I live on is mostly Black, it's also well-off, not a poor island of people leaving school at 14 to help out in the bananas or, these days, in debt to the Chinese. Those people become immigrants to my island. Island thought on BLM which morphed very rapidly into Black Lives/Marxism is that America should stop trying to convince the world that everywhere is like that.
Politically CRT is very unpopular except with one politician, a mother and her crowd of people who do not as it was put to me 'mix with Caucasians socially except when necessary' and her son who is my nephew and a university professor. He believes in CRT, all his speeches are about colonialism and rewriting the true history of the island from the point of view of slavery. He's not likely to keep his seat at the next election. As someone on one of the island news sites said, 'N only knows the words to one song' and 'We voted him in to improve the roads and they getting worse while he spouts his nonsense'.
This is pretty much a general Caribbean view. Rewriting history, knocking down statues, looking towards Marxism isn't going to solve anything at all. Showing the examples of some of the Caribbean islands that have come up from slavery same as the US, to where the most cherished dream of an Islander is to build their own home, and a couple of apartments for rent and have a Master's degree is attainable by the many. Show how they got there. (Hint: education. Ghetto education is not up to the level that the children of Bill Gates went to. Why not? That would be a good place to spend money. Hint 2. The world's greatest geniuses arise from any background not the most privileged than the less so. They move the world forward. (education).
The only place Marxism works and it works perfectly as it was intended, is on kibbutzim in Israel. They have weekly meetings and vote on everything to make sure everyone is happy with projected policies, with current operation and can discuss anything they like from business to recreation to getting everyone's houses painted or needing more gardeners or nice new cars.
People who join a kibbutz and don't fit in, they have to leave. No police state, no punishment, no pigs-on-two-legs leading. But they only have 100-2,000 members, so everyone knows each other personally. Marxism like this is wonderful, it's a fantastic life, if you can fit in. But it's not scaleable as history has proved. Class is with us forever, in every country and race is not class, when it is, it's racism. Marxism won't remove racism look at the Pigs.
If you want to disagree with me on any or every point, no problem, I like discussions, I'm always happy to consider another point of view even if I don't adopt it. If you haven't got anything nice to say, at least try and put it politely.
February 16, 2022
This man is illiterate.
March 16, 2022
pseudo research
It is quite disheartening to see pseudo research being presented as if it’s Academic research. It went out of its way to explain their own belief system and biased viewpoint. It’s rather funny that this book took two different points and try to make it into some sort of academic pontification in reality it’s just propaganda move for the author and it will be promoted as a breakthrough when it’s nothing but propaganda and trying to push a narrative that doesn’t even exist.
It is quite disheartening to see pseudo research being presented as if it’s Academic research. It went out of its way to explain their own belief system and biased viewpoint. It’s rather funny that this book took two different points and try to make it into some sort of academic pontification in reality it’s just propaganda move for the author and it will be promoted as a breakthrough when it’s nothing but propaganda and trying to push a narrative that doesn’t even exist.
February 27, 2022
It’s so hard to write a negative review of this book because James Lindsay fans will immediately think, “This is just a hater, so that’s why they wrote a negative review.” In fact, that’s exactly what James wants his audience to do so he can avoid any type of criticism. But I think it’s important to note that his book with Peter Boghossian is one of my favorite books, and I’ve read it multiple times, but this book was just bad, and it’s because of the brand James has created since becoming a larger influencer.
I said this on Twitter and I’ll say it again: James Lindsay’s brand can be summarized as, “I’ve read a bunch of stuff. Here’s how I interpreted it in the worst possible way, and this is why you should panic.”
Much like every interview and James has ever done, this book is filled with him citing and quoting people and giving a bad faith explanation for what it means. He believes his arguments are strong because he says, “I read actually read it.” That is flawed logic because if I read The Three Little Pigs and tell you it’s a metaphor for the Cold War, that doesn’t mean I’m right.
I encourage everyone to read books by people they disagree with, and that’s why I picked up this book. Usually I can find plenty I agree with, but that wasn’t the case with this book at all. Towards the very end, he makes some decent critiques of Robin DiAngelo and Ibram Kendi as well as the fringe group of social justice folks, but that’s maybe .5% of what this entire book is. The book isn’t good, but if you’re someone worried about the influence James Lindsay has, I recommend reading it just so you know what he’s feeding his audience.
I said this on Twitter and I’ll say it again: James Lindsay’s brand can be summarized as, “I’ve read a bunch of stuff. Here’s how I interpreted it in the worst possible way, and this is why you should panic.”
Much like every interview and James has ever done, this book is filled with him citing and quoting people and giving a bad faith explanation for what it means. He believes his arguments are strong because he says, “I read actually read it.” That is flawed logic because if I read The Three Little Pigs and tell you it’s a metaphor for the Cold War, that doesn’t mean I’m right.
I encourage everyone to read books by people they disagree with, and that’s why I picked up this book. Usually I can find plenty I agree with, but that wasn’t the case with this book at all. Towards the very end, he makes some decent critiques of Robin DiAngelo and Ibram Kendi as well as the fringe group of social justice folks, but that’s maybe .5% of what this entire book is. The book isn’t good, but if you’re someone worried about the influence James Lindsay has, I recommend reading it just so you know what he’s feeding his audience.
March 26, 2022
An invaluable book for the current generation, Race Marxism is perhaps the best work to come from James Lindsay who has already done a fantastic job fighting against the highly destructive Critical Theories plaguing modern society through his past collaborative works. Lindsay takes his readers on an odyssey to uncover the origins of Critical Race Theory so that it can be better understood and therefore better fought against. Following in the same vein as "Cynical Theories," Lindsay ends the work with an appeal to classical universal liberal values and ideals such as those that serve as the foundation for American society. The only real weakness I think the book has, similarly to "Cynical Theories," is the density of its subject matter. Consequently, the book requires a patient and slow read in order to get the most out of it. Personally, I don't find this problematic although I recognize that this may make it a bit tougher of a work for other would be readers. That being said, I still think that this book is definitely worth putting in the time and effort to read.
February 19, 2022
All of my questions finally answered
If you are looking for the definitive but approachable text about CRT this is the one. It will inform beyond all previous including how it will impact your children and you. Never have I had such an excellent and succinct explanation presented. I was familiar with some of the aspects but I didn’t know the details and how the different people intertwined. Indispensable.
If you are looking for the definitive but approachable text about CRT this is the one. It will inform beyond all previous including how it will impact your children and you. Never have I had such an excellent and succinct explanation presented. I was familiar with some of the aspects but I didn’t know the details and how the different people intertwined. Indispensable.
June 17, 2022
Of all the bad faith idiocy oozing out of right-wing cranks lately, one of the most pernicious examples is the recent Critical Race Theory (CRT) panic. It’s an attempt to cast all discussion of racial & social justice as some sort of sinister indoctrination plot out to get white suburban kids to feel bad about themselves. James Lindsay has been at the forefront pushing this panic, and he’s written a book claiming that CRT is a “Marxian theory”; i.e., it is “Race Marxism.”
The problems with this book are too numerous to detail without a chapter by chapter analysis, which would take more time than this book deserves. But maybe a few broad points will suffice.
First, it appears Lindsay is unaware that a body of thought can be influenced by a previous body of thought without being subsumed under it. In other words, in Lindsay’s mind, if some CRT scholars are influenced by Marx or other Marxist thinkers, then that means CRT is Marxist. His discussion of the “proximate ideological origins of CRT” revolves extensively around one particular work by Herbert Marcuse (An Essay on Liberation). I’m not all that familiar with Marcuse, but the text Lindsay talks about does appear to be an example of illiberal thought. However, he doesn’t actually show how the thought there is connected to CRT in any significant way – his evidence that it is influential on CRT is that Angela Davis (not a CRT theorist) was his student and that Ibram Kendi (not a CRT theorist) spoke highly of him.
Second, for someone who has touted himself as a “world-level” expert on CRT, he doesn’t appear to have actually done the reading. He does not engage in any serious way with primary CRT sources, instead relying almost solely on one introductory text for his discussion of CRT. His lengthy discussions of Marx & Hegel do not cite specific places in those thinkers’ texts to substantiate the readings, which are beyond weird. Lindsay claims, to cite just one example, that Marx doesn’t present an economic theory but is instead a gnostic faith (this would be news to Marx). There is no secondary literature engaged with, either. One would think that a book supposedly detailing the connection between Marxism and CRT would be deep in the literature showing the dependency of the latter on former. Instead, by my count Robin DiAngelo has four times the number of citations in the footnotes as Karl Marx (16 to 4).
Which brings me to my third overall comment. Like his sidekick Christopher Rufo, Lindsay makes a concerted effort to bring absolutely all contemporary discussions of race under the umbrella of CRT. So here we get Robin DiAngelo, Ibram Kendi, and others being propped up as examples of CRT in action, when, in fact the thinkers he’s discussing aren’t actually CRT theorists. It’s really a basic logical fallacy – CRT critiques existing social structures around race, therefore anything that critiques existing social structures around race is CRT. All beagles are dogs, James, but that doesn’t make all dogs beagles.
That’s all I can manage to say about it. Other useful critiques by folks more patient with this nonsense are here and here.
This book is dumb; don’t waste your time.
The problems with this book are too numerous to detail without a chapter by chapter analysis, which would take more time than this book deserves. But maybe a few broad points will suffice.
First, it appears Lindsay is unaware that a body of thought can be influenced by a previous body of thought without being subsumed under it. In other words, in Lindsay’s mind, if some CRT scholars are influenced by Marx or other Marxist thinkers, then that means CRT is Marxist. His discussion of the “proximate ideological origins of CRT” revolves extensively around one particular work by Herbert Marcuse (An Essay on Liberation). I’m not all that familiar with Marcuse, but the text Lindsay talks about does appear to be an example of illiberal thought. However, he doesn’t actually show how the thought there is connected to CRT in any significant way – his evidence that it is influential on CRT is that Angela Davis (not a CRT theorist) was his student and that Ibram Kendi (not a CRT theorist) spoke highly of him.
Second, for someone who has touted himself as a “world-level” expert on CRT, he doesn’t appear to have actually done the reading. He does not engage in any serious way with primary CRT sources, instead relying almost solely on one introductory text for his discussion of CRT. His lengthy discussions of Marx & Hegel do not cite specific places in those thinkers’ texts to substantiate the readings, which are beyond weird. Lindsay claims, to cite just one example, that Marx doesn’t present an economic theory but is instead a gnostic faith (this would be news to Marx). There is no secondary literature engaged with, either. One would think that a book supposedly detailing the connection between Marxism and CRT would be deep in the literature showing the dependency of the latter on former. Instead, by my count Robin DiAngelo has four times the number of citations in the footnotes as Karl Marx (16 to 4).
Which brings me to my third overall comment. Like his sidekick Christopher Rufo, Lindsay makes a concerted effort to bring absolutely all contemporary discussions of race under the umbrella of CRT. So here we get Robin DiAngelo, Ibram Kendi, and others being propped up as examples of CRT in action, when, in fact the thinkers he’s discussing aren’t actually CRT theorists. It’s really a basic logical fallacy – CRT critiques existing social structures around race, therefore anything that critiques existing social structures around race is CRT. All beagles are dogs, James, but that doesn’t make all dogs beagles.
That’s all I can manage to say about it. Other useful critiques by folks more patient with this nonsense are here and here.
This book is dumb; don’t waste your time.
May 12, 2022
Analysis of the Marxist cult
The best in depth analysis of the current racial Marxism plaguing America and most of the world. James Lindsey breaks it all down in understandable pieces, then paints the whole picture to help us fully grasp this insidious agenda. This ideology is truly terrifying for the future of America and must be stopped at all costs.
The best in depth analysis of the current racial Marxism plaguing America and most of the world. James Lindsey breaks it all down in understandable pieces, then paints the whole picture to help us fully grasp this insidious agenda. This ideology is truly terrifying for the future of America and must be stopped at all costs.
April 4, 2022
Really helped me make sense of some current events and how many I know have been converted into this pernicious ideology. I know James Lindsay gets a lot of criticism for speaking out on this, but I really appreciate him and the work that he and Michael O'Fallon are doing to expose these Marxists
April 15, 2022
Poorly Researched
Regurgitates talking points from others who misunderstand what Critical Race Theory is and how it is used. Seems to use quotes out of context in an effort to mislead readers. Not a great read.
Regurgitates talking points from others who misunderstand what Critical Race Theory is and how it is used. Seems to use quotes out of context in an effort to mislead readers. Not a great read.
September 1, 2022
In many ways, the present volume is a podcast. It is structured like a set of episodes instead of a well-organized book, and anyone who has read James Lindsay before or who has listened to his podcasts would understand what is to be found here. There's very little new content, but we get the classical exposition we have come to expect. I understood quite easily and clearly everything presented here. My favorite segment was on the Mott-and-Bailey fallacy which he explains, and it goes like this: Much of what's presented as critical race theory scholarship — or really most of modern feminism, postmodernism, and the other bizarre new disciplines like queer studies, fat studies, women studies, environmental studies (in the activism, not scientific sense) — is given on two dimensions. The first exterior dimension is what's agreed by almost everyone, that the environment is being degraded in many areas, that in many places women are not respected and not granted their natural freedoms, and the concerns of people suffering from obesity are downsized or ignored, homosexuals and people who identify as queer are prosecuted, and finally, there are discriminatory practices based on races that continue still. But that exterior shell is merely a cover for what's practiced in the classroom and the journals and the conferences, a highly theoretical inquiry that is geared towards activism and normative subversion. A lot of what is being touted as a difficult (really esoteric) yet novel ideas are repackaged Marxist and Frankfurt school thought, repeated in a newly constructed language. And whenever the new works are being attacked, the conflation of the exterior with the interior occurs, which is the Mott-and-Bailey fallacy. The fallacy consists basically of conflating controversial opinions with generally held ones when the controversial opinions are attacked. I find a problem, however, with Lindsay's suggestion that Marxism should legally be treated as a religion. Though that is a great suggestion, using the corrupt structure of the government and its broken legal system to attack Marxism would backfire.
The book would be interesting for people who have not been introduced to the works of James Lindsay, but there is not much that's new, and the structure and the organization of the book really need to be worked on if the book was to be made public. In many ways, this is an unpolished draft, but it still holds the same old interesting ideas and exposes we have come to expect from James Lindsay.
The book would be interesting for people who have not been introduced to the works of James Lindsay, but there is not much that's new, and the structure and the organization of the book really need to be worked on if the book was to be made public. In many ways, this is an unpolished draft, but it still holds the same old interesting ideas and exposes we have come to expect from James Lindsay.
November 11, 2022
Rigorous, brash, and forthright, Lindsay proceeds to hammer the reader with the origins of probably the most dividing idea in America today, Critical Race Theory or, as he prefers to label it, Race Marxism. Does a good job explaining Dialectical Reasoning and how it allows some of the historical connections of ideas originating from its process to be blurred in their origin. I enjoyed learning about these connections and will certainly pursue research into some of these. Of more import, however, was his analysis of praxis and how it marks the progress of Hegelian History. That this is used as a a justification and excuse for the tragedies born of Hegelian philosophies and Marxism was shocking. A must read for those wanting an insight into the progress of modern Marxist attempts at totalitarianism.
June 17, 2022
An excellent deconstruction of the theological basis of critical theory.
Specifically, it is about how critical race theory has essentially formed in order for Marxism to get over the hurdle of capitalism’s success.
The (convincing) argument is that Marxists needed to find a ‘new’ proletariat in the form of good-intended leftists. However these leftists have been corrupted to follow a religion disguised as academia.
The only flaw is that this book is not particularly accessible to those who do want to learn about this criticism but haven’t got a strong background in the social sciences.
Specifically, it is about how critical race theory has essentially formed in order for Marxism to get over the hurdle of capitalism’s success.
The (convincing) argument is that Marxists needed to find a ‘new’ proletariat in the form of good-intended leftists. However these leftists have been corrupted to follow a religion disguised as academia.
The only flaw is that this book is not particularly accessible to those who do want to learn about this criticism but haven’t got a strong background in the social sciences.
April 6, 2022
This excellent book describes the toxicity of race Marxism and how it is destroying everything it touches and everyone who encounters it. It also makes a case for liberal common sensibility rather than the divisive trainwreck of identity Marxism.
July 30, 2023
In this book, James Lindsay makes the highly controversial claim that Critical Race Theory is Race Marxism. Despite the criticism this book has received and a few missteps he makes, Lindsay's claim is ultimately convincing.
Making the Case that CRT is Race Marxism
What is CRT?
Part of the controversy around CRT revolves around exactly what it is. In the strictest sense, it is merely a school of legal studies that studies the legal system and closely related entities such as law schools relative to the racial context of the day. Significant are discussions of legal rulings in that racial context.
Lindsay argues that the narrow definition, which some claim proves that CRT is not taught in schools, is inadequate. For example, he cites a paper by Gloria Ladson-Billings entitled "Toward a Critical Race Theory of Education," showing that CRT quickly moved into education. Citing Isaac Gottesman's The Critical Turn in Education: From Marxist Critique to Poststructuralist Feminism to Critical Theories of Race, Lindsay further argues CRT is just one of a host of "critical theories of race" often lumped together, by critical scholars themselves, under the name CRT. Lindsay also strengthens his claim by stating that most CRT now appears in educational journals.
Moving into somewhat shakier ground, Lindsay expands the notion of CRT to include critical theories of races other than black people. Hence, Critical Whiteness Studies is included in his discussions. Robin DiAngelo, the author of White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism, thus becomes fair game. Most controversially, Lindsay even includes Ibram X Kendi, author of How to Be an Antiracist, as a critical race theorist.
What is Marxism?
Lindsay argues that although Marx happened to focus on class and, hence, economic struggles, economics was not critical for his work: its appeal to themes from Gnostic religion is. Class happened to be the point of most significant concern of the day, but if another had been, Marx would have run with that instead. This might sound surprising to some who point to the fact that Das Kapital was subtitled "A Critique of Political Economy," but here, Lindsay is on solid ground.
Although Lindsay does not mention it specifically, anyone familiar with mathematics who has started to read Kapital will notice that, in Chapter One, it never gets off the ground. Although presented mathematically, it is clear that Marx assumes what he wants to prove. (See Chapter 7 of Thomas Sowell's Marxism: Philosophy and Economics for details.) Lindsay points out that this is a general feature of Marx's work: his conclusions do not follow from facts and logic; instead, they assume the conclusion and then build his elaborate worldview.
Given what Marxism is not, Lindsay makes a solid case that it is a Gnostic religion. Indeed, this is the central theme of the book. The key to the case is the centrality of the dialectic. More exactly, the dialectic as interpreted by Hegel, but with refinements in the direction of materialism away from idealism, thanks to Marx. Lindsay shows how closely concepts in Marxism map to Gnostic and Hermetic concepts.
CRT as Race Marxism
Lindsay argues that Marx saw the world as a sort of prison into which the proletariat, without their choosing, are flung. Imprisoning them are the bourgeoisie, who possess a special kind of property called capital. The key to escaping the prison is for the proletariat to develop a special knowledge called class consciousness*. With this consciousness, the proletariat can seize the means of production and abolish this form of private property. What follows will be an intermediate Socialist state on the road to the final Communist Utopia in which the nature of man will be transformed and no longer require a state.
Lindsay's argument proceeds by mapping the various concepts from what I will call Marx's classical or Class Marxism onto racial concepts. For example, black people replace the proletariat; whiteness replaces capital; racial consciousness replaces class consciousness; racial equity replaces socialism; and, finally, racial justice replaces Communist Utopia.
Thus, the central argument in Lindsay's book is that Classical Marxist concepts map directly onto Gnostic and Hermetic concepts and that one can also map CRT concepts onto Classical Marxist concepts or, directly, onto Gnostic and Hermetic ones.
Is CRT Postmodern Neo-Marxism?
Lindsay traces the evolution of Marxism through the 20th century with a particular emphasis on the Frankfurt School. Lindsay argues that identity politics emerged in the late 1960s and was celebrated in an essay by New Left icon Herbert Marcuse. Lindsay's book further details two other keys to CRT's intellectual history: the sometimes uneasy merging with postmodernism and the incorporation of the crucial concept of intersectionality.
Lindsay meticulously points out that CRT can correctly claim that it is not precisely anything that preceded it. For instance, it is not classical Marxism since it centers on race instead of Class. Also, it is not postmodernism since it does not discard race as deconstructed. Instead, it looks to race as something that, although socially constructed, cannot be ignored due to its power dynamics and, indeed, should be embraced as a site of resistance.
Lindsay, indeed, argues that CRT believes that the dialectic is central to CRT, and as such, it cannot be exactly anything that preceded it. Nevertheless, it is fair to call it a blend of Marxism and postmodernism or, simply, "postmodern neo-Marxism" because of how strong the key contributions of the two schools remain.
Other Key Insights from the Book
Although I read Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings That Formed the Movement before I heard of Lindsay, Lindsay's books gave me more profound insight into CRT than I expected.
For example, the most significant insight from the book is just how central the dialectic is to classical Marxism, neo-Marxism, and CRT. Along these lines, the book also helped me see the power of negative thinking in the minds of Marxists. It turns out that it is a crucial neo-Marxist belief. As Adorno said, "One may not cast a picture of utopia in a positive manner," meaning the oppressive nature of society can render one incapable of even conceiving of a better one. Nevertheless, neo-Marxists believe they must critique what they know is wrong to move the dialectic forward.
Another important case that Lindsay establishes is the important role the idea of a "black nation" plays in CRT. I was skeptical when I read this claim in Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity—and Why This Harms Everybody, but Lindsay makes the case convincingly in this book.
Genuine Missteps
Although Lindsay's case is ultimately convincing, there are some missteps along the way, including:
- Lindsay includes Ibram X Kendi as an important critical race theorist, but the justification for this inclusion is insufficient. Lindsay's claims regarding a "Dictatorship of the Antiracists" would be stronger if he cited sources who more clearly are critical race theorists.
- Marx did not believe that there was a conspiracy of capitalists that caused its evils, but rather that it was due to the nature of the way society was structured that capitalists acted in the manner they did. In particular, he thought the enormous technological advances during the Industrial Revolution made fierce competition inevitable, which was the primary factor leading to the poor condition of the workers.
- Critical Race Theorists do not take disparity alone as sufficient proof of discrimination. In Part IV of Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings That Formed the Movement, for instance, there is an essay by Charles Lawerence that includes a discussion of how although an increase in bus fare, for instance, could be expected to have a disproportional impact on black people, that is not sufficient proof of discrimination. Instead, the author states that there must be a disparate impact, and the matter in question should have a history of racist motivations before being subject to strict scrutiny.
- In some cases, citations are missing for claims which seem hard to believe. For example, there is no citation for Lindsay's claim that some critical race theorists argue that two plus two plus may not be four.
- The book would benefit from demonstrating that his notion of Marxism is narrower than including any opposition to any status quo at any time in history. Were America’s Founders postmodern neo-Marxists according to the notion of Marxism presented?
Unfair Criticism
Although some of the criticism directed at this book is justified, it has also received its share of unfair criticism. For example:
Lindsay is accused, or at least strongly implied, to be equating CRT to Nazism. Lindsay explicitly states, however, that he does not believe they are the same. Indeed, he lays out many points in which the theories are opposite, e.g., the most obvious being that CRT wants to abolish any notion of innate differences between races and create a society in which all are equal.
Another common criticism is that Lindsay is accused of, generally, having a poor understanding of Marxism and postmodernism. This is hyperbole. In many ways, Lindsay understands Marx much better than his critics, for example, in arguing that Marxism is not an economic theory at its core. Lindsay also shows that he is deeply aware of the sometimes subtle differences between the evolving strands of Marxism in the twentieth century. Lindsay also has a deep understanding of the differences between postmodernism and Marxism.
At worst, Lindsay does not always seem to be aware that Marx's positions in private correspondence, as described in Sowell's Marxism: Economics and Philosophy, were sometimes much softer and doubtful than his public pronouncements. Indeed, Marx admitted to deliberately overstating his case to lay “traps” for critics. However, none of this significantly derails any of Lindsay’s essential claims.
Summary
Although there are some missteps along the way, Lindsay does prove his point. Critics of what he writes will always be able to find something, perhaps taken out of context or mistaken as central to his argument, when it is not, to dismiss his ideas. Nevertheless, those who can discern what is truly important will see that the missteps are not fatal. Furthermore, Linday's writing is concise, well-organized, and easily accessible for those without encyclopedic prior knowledge.
This book is an important read, even for those who do not ultimately accept his conclusions. This is because Lindsay clearly spells out his belief that Marxism, CRT, and Wokeism are religions. Vivek Ramaswamy, a friend of Lindsay's, also believes this and has made this case in Woke, Inc.: Inside Corporate America's Social Justice Scam although coming from a different angle.
Going forward, then, expect conservatives, once they identify test cases, to begin establishing legal precedents that CRT is a religious belief and hence in conflict with the first amendment. If this is established, it will not be legal to push CRT in public schools and other institutions or force it in the workplace.
* This phrase is more due to György Lukács than Marx.
Making the Case that CRT is Race Marxism
What is CRT?
Part of the controversy around CRT revolves around exactly what it is. In the strictest sense, it is merely a school of legal studies that studies the legal system and closely related entities such as law schools relative to the racial context of the day. Significant are discussions of legal rulings in that racial context.
Lindsay argues that the narrow definition, which some claim proves that CRT is not taught in schools, is inadequate. For example, he cites a paper by Gloria Ladson-Billings entitled "Toward a Critical Race Theory of Education," showing that CRT quickly moved into education. Citing Isaac Gottesman's The Critical Turn in Education: From Marxist Critique to Poststructuralist Feminism to Critical Theories of Race, Lindsay further argues CRT is just one of a host of "critical theories of race" often lumped together, by critical scholars themselves, under the name CRT. Lindsay also strengthens his claim by stating that most CRT now appears in educational journals.
Moving into somewhat shakier ground, Lindsay expands the notion of CRT to include critical theories of races other than black people. Hence, Critical Whiteness Studies is included in his discussions. Robin DiAngelo, the author of White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism, thus becomes fair game. Most controversially, Lindsay even includes Ibram X Kendi, author of How to Be an Antiracist, as a critical race theorist.
What is Marxism?
Lindsay argues that although Marx happened to focus on class and, hence, economic struggles, economics was not critical for his work: its appeal to themes from Gnostic religion is. Class happened to be the point of most significant concern of the day, but if another had been, Marx would have run with that instead. This might sound surprising to some who point to the fact that Das Kapital was subtitled "A Critique of Political Economy," but here, Lindsay is on solid ground.
Although Lindsay does not mention it specifically, anyone familiar with mathematics who has started to read Kapital will notice that, in Chapter One, it never gets off the ground. Although presented mathematically, it is clear that Marx assumes what he wants to prove. (See Chapter 7 of Thomas Sowell's Marxism: Philosophy and Economics for details.) Lindsay points out that this is a general feature of Marx's work: his conclusions do not follow from facts and logic; instead, they assume the conclusion and then build his elaborate worldview.
Given what Marxism is not, Lindsay makes a solid case that it is a Gnostic religion. Indeed, this is the central theme of the book. The key to the case is the centrality of the dialectic. More exactly, the dialectic as interpreted by Hegel, but with refinements in the direction of materialism away from idealism, thanks to Marx. Lindsay shows how closely concepts in Marxism map to Gnostic and Hermetic concepts.
CRT as Race Marxism
Lindsay argues that Marx saw the world as a sort of prison into which the proletariat, without their choosing, are flung. Imprisoning them are the bourgeoisie, who possess a special kind of property called capital. The key to escaping the prison is for the proletariat to develop a special knowledge called class consciousness*. With this consciousness, the proletariat can seize the means of production and abolish this form of private property. What follows will be an intermediate Socialist state on the road to the final Communist Utopia in which the nature of man will be transformed and no longer require a state.
Lindsay's argument proceeds by mapping the various concepts from what I will call Marx's classical or Class Marxism onto racial concepts. For example, black people replace the proletariat; whiteness replaces capital; racial consciousness replaces class consciousness; racial equity replaces socialism; and, finally, racial justice replaces Communist Utopia.
Thus, the central argument in Lindsay's book is that Classical Marxist concepts map directly onto Gnostic and Hermetic concepts and that one can also map CRT concepts onto Classical Marxist concepts or, directly, onto Gnostic and Hermetic ones.
Is CRT Postmodern Neo-Marxism?
Lindsay traces the evolution of Marxism through the 20th century with a particular emphasis on the Frankfurt School. Lindsay argues that identity politics emerged in the late 1960s and was celebrated in an essay by New Left icon Herbert Marcuse. Lindsay's book further details two other keys to CRT's intellectual history: the sometimes uneasy merging with postmodernism and the incorporation of the crucial concept of intersectionality.
Lindsay meticulously points out that CRT can correctly claim that it is not precisely anything that preceded it. For instance, it is not classical Marxism since it centers on race instead of Class. Also, it is not postmodernism since it does not discard race as deconstructed. Instead, it looks to race as something that, although socially constructed, cannot be ignored due to its power dynamics and, indeed, should be embraced as a site of resistance.
Lindsay, indeed, argues that CRT believes that the dialectic is central to CRT, and as such, it cannot be exactly anything that preceded it. Nevertheless, it is fair to call it a blend of Marxism and postmodernism or, simply, "postmodern neo-Marxism" because of how strong the key contributions of the two schools remain.
Other Key Insights from the Book
Although I read Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings That Formed the Movement before I heard of Lindsay, Lindsay's books gave me more profound insight into CRT than I expected.
For example, the most significant insight from the book is just how central the dialectic is to classical Marxism, neo-Marxism, and CRT. Along these lines, the book also helped me see the power of negative thinking in the minds of Marxists. It turns out that it is a crucial neo-Marxist belief. As Adorno said, "One may not cast a picture of utopia in a positive manner," meaning the oppressive nature of society can render one incapable of even conceiving of a better one. Nevertheless, neo-Marxists believe they must critique what they know is wrong to move the dialectic forward.
Another important case that Lindsay establishes is the important role the idea of a "black nation" plays in CRT. I was skeptical when I read this claim in Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity—and Why This Harms Everybody, but Lindsay makes the case convincingly in this book.
Genuine Missteps
Although Lindsay's case is ultimately convincing, there are some missteps along the way, including:
- Lindsay includes Ibram X Kendi as an important critical race theorist, but the justification for this inclusion is insufficient. Lindsay's claims regarding a "Dictatorship of the Antiracists" would be stronger if he cited sources who more clearly are critical race theorists.
- Marx did not believe that there was a conspiracy of capitalists that caused its evils, but rather that it was due to the nature of the way society was structured that capitalists acted in the manner they did. In particular, he thought the enormous technological advances during the Industrial Revolution made fierce competition inevitable, which was the primary factor leading to the poor condition of the workers.
- Critical Race Theorists do not take disparity alone as sufficient proof of discrimination. In Part IV of Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings That Formed the Movement, for instance, there is an essay by Charles Lawerence that includes a discussion of how although an increase in bus fare, for instance, could be expected to have a disproportional impact on black people, that is not sufficient proof of discrimination. Instead, the author states that there must be a disparate impact, and the matter in question should have a history of racist motivations before being subject to strict scrutiny.
- In some cases, citations are missing for claims which seem hard to believe. For example, there is no citation for Lindsay's claim that some critical race theorists argue that two plus two plus may not be four.
- The book would benefit from demonstrating that his notion of Marxism is narrower than including any opposition to any status quo at any time in history. Were America’s Founders postmodern neo-Marxists according to the notion of Marxism presented?
Unfair Criticism
Although some of the criticism directed at this book is justified, it has also received its share of unfair criticism. For example:
Lindsay is accused, or at least strongly implied, to be equating CRT to Nazism. Lindsay explicitly states, however, that he does not believe they are the same. Indeed, he lays out many points in which the theories are opposite, e.g., the most obvious being that CRT wants to abolish any notion of innate differences between races and create a society in which all are equal.
Another common criticism is that Lindsay is accused of, generally, having a poor understanding of Marxism and postmodernism. This is hyperbole. In many ways, Lindsay understands Marx much better than his critics, for example, in arguing that Marxism is not an economic theory at its core. Lindsay also shows that he is deeply aware of the sometimes subtle differences between the evolving strands of Marxism in the twentieth century. Lindsay also has a deep understanding of the differences between postmodernism and Marxism.
At worst, Lindsay does not always seem to be aware that Marx's positions in private correspondence, as described in Sowell's Marxism: Economics and Philosophy, were sometimes much softer and doubtful than his public pronouncements. Indeed, Marx admitted to deliberately overstating his case to lay “traps” for critics. However, none of this significantly derails any of Lindsay’s essential claims.
Summary
Although there are some missteps along the way, Lindsay does prove his point. Critics of what he writes will always be able to find something, perhaps taken out of context or mistaken as central to his argument, when it is not, to dismiss his ideas. Nevertheless, those who can discern what is truly important will see that the missteps are not fatal. Furthermore, Linday's writing is concise, well-organized, and easily accessible for those without encyclopedic prior knowledge.
This book is an important read, even for those who do not ultimately accept his conclusions. This is because Lindsay clearly spells out his belief that Marxism, CRT, and Wokeism are religions. Vivek Ramaswamy, a friend of Lindsay's, also believes this and has made this case in Woke, Inc.: Inside Corporate America's Social Justice Scam although coming from a different angle.
Going forward, then, expect conservatives, once they identify test cases, to begin establishing legal precedents that CRT is a religious belief and hence in conflict with the first amendment. If this is established, it will not be legal to push CRT in public schools and other institutions or force it in the workplace.
* This phrase is more due to György Lukács than Marx.
January 7, 2024
If you are expecting to enter into this book and get an experience such as Fascism by Roger Griffin you will be sorely disappointed. If you are expecting a book closer to Michael Savage’s Liberalism is a Mental Disorder, then this book is certainly for you. Enjoy.
The quickest (and intentionally reductive) way to summarize this book is that Critical Race Theory is Marxist, Marxism is Bad, therefore the only possible solution is to reject it outright. This does not necessitate 300+ pages.
Spoiler alert, Lindsay alleges that Critical Race Theory is a belief system (based on a “poisonous worldview”) rooted in paranoia (mentioned more than 20 times), a conspiracy theory (a point he alludes to more than 30 times), and a fundamentalist religion (and is intentional and clear in explaining that it is not “like” one but rather “that it is one.”)
If this book was devoid of Lindsay’s personal opinions, and all the emotional and vitriolic nonsense, I’d give this book a three. I think that there are valid critiques of not just critical theory, but also of critical race theory, Marxism, neo-Marxism, postmodernism, and Hegel. Unfortunately, Lindsay often makes it difficult to differentiate between what is his clear disdain for all of it and what is a fair and good-faith critical assessment.
Lindsay jumps headlong into what I would say is an intellectually dishonest premise built upon a foundation of logical fallacies. Take for example this passage:
“All this said, Critical Race Theory—like many Marxian Theories— resists being clearly and concisely defined. Even in the books just mentioned, both of which bear the main title Critical Race Theory, the authors point out that many Critical Race Theorists don’t agree with one another about what exactly Critical Race Theory is. This too is intentional; it’s smoke and mirrors—very tedious smoke and mirrors. Sorting out how we should define Critical Race Theory, whatever they say about themselves, is therefore a necessary first task.” [emphasis added]
But later, in the book, Lindsay points out that:
“Postmodernism is a very complicated topic and very difficult to define or succinctly summarize.”
Apparently, though, this is not by design, or in any attempt to obfuscate some ‘paranoid, conspiratorial or noxious attempt’ at ‘dismantling’ any order. In fact, I would say that Lindsay’s few attempts at seeming unbiased is in his attempt to define a very complex series of ideas, as well as breaking down Hegel's dialectics (as well as a brief history of this dating back to Pluto).
I’m curious if Lindsay feels that attempts to define life or evolution by biologists and philosophers is equally by some nefarious design.
I wonder if Lindsay thinks that capitalism should be defined as a religion, or originalism in constitutional interpretation, or any of the other sets of ideas that have very strong adherents, supporters, and dare I say “advocates.”
My guess is that he does not. I suspect that he gives the same deference to those ideas as he does postmodernism in his book. Lindsay – because of his education – understands the importance of defining terms, and more than likely the difficulty in doing just that. What he labels as an “outsider’s definition” is nothing more than a reductive (albeit, revisionist) one that primes the reader not for any fair, or even objective assessment of Critical Race Theory, but one of disdain.
I think that this is disappointing and only adds to the “smoke and mirrors." If it wasn't for the fact that this book is considered non-fiction, I'd label it under satire, and philosophical absurdism.
Lindsay even goes as far as to give more deference to the vulgarity of Marxism by pointing out that it is a “profoundly misunderstood ideology.” (This is a fact, it is.) So why not Critical Race Theory?
Lindsay begins his last chapter with a Polish proverb:
“Never attempt to cure what you don’t understand…”
Yet, he offers solutions (“cures”) to a “problem” build entirely on a reductive, not at all close to the actual definition(s) in what can only be assumed to be an accidental Hegelian-like synthesis of CRT that got transfigured into what he now calls “Race Marxism” the ‘Hegelian Gnostic Science Religion.’
I give this book a one because it is more-or-less a 300+ page opinion piece extolling his hatred of Marxism and Hegel by slogging through a series of cherry-picked quotes from key sources on Critical Race Theory.
That being the case, I did learn some new information, and this offered a competing (although not at all surprising) perspective. This book, though, I think flatly falls on its face in terms of any meaningful attempt to "solve" what Lindsay views as a "problem." Anti-Communism, Anti-Marxism, Anti-Hegelianism, etc., remains a pillar of conservative thought, but the book left me wondering what it is exactly that Lindsay is for, exactly. I cannot conclude that he is in favor of looking at issues from all directions, because that would be too Hegelian. I cannot conclude that he thinks it is worthwhile to assess whether or not the colorblindness of law achieves the functionality of colorblindness of law, in fact, that also appears to be too Hegelian for him.
If I hadn't already consumed the source material for this book already, I would be left scratching my head wondering whether CRT is a science, a legal framework, a philosophy, a religion, a conspiracy theory, Marxist, postmodern, Hegelian, maybe Rousseauan? And in the most astonishing application of Hegel's rejection of the principle of non-contradiction Lindsay asserts that all of these characterizations - of which some being entirely contradictory - are the applicable, all at the same time, for Critical Race Theory.
Somehow, Critical Race Theory, according to Lindsay, is built upon a very difficult to define and understand philosophical model (postmodernism) and a 'profoundly' misunderstood ideology' (Marxism), but don't be fooled for one second that this means Critical Race Theorists aren't intentionally hiding behind 'smoke and mirrors' to try and confuse you by simply not coming to a consensus on how CRT ought to be defined, for you, the unsuspecting recipient of something you probably didn't hear about until two years ago (as of the time of writing this review).
In fact, I don't think Lindsay knows what Critical Race Theory is, and instead wrote a treatise of sorts trying to characterize in the most backwards way possible based on the most cursory understanding of CRT, and a much better understanding of philosophy, in an attempt to conflate it all as a religious paranoia. In a way, this book runs in a similar vein of criticism as John McWhorter's book Woke Racism: How a New Religion Has Betrayed Black America.
Entirely absent from this regurgitation of now more than a century of anti-Marxian rhetoric is any real assessment of the merits of Critical Race Theory. The book is very much a "toss the baby out with the bathwater," as the saying goes, kind of analysis and conclusion based entirely on his hated of Marxism.
The biggest strength of Lindsay’s, I think, is that he does a decent job (when he makes the effort to separate his opinion from an explanation) explaining complex philosophical histories and ideas in a way that I think a common person could understand. Given the dryness of the specific topics, Lindsay has an ability to write in a way that is engaging, and if I shared the same level of paranoia regarding Marxism I’d probably have found it even more appealing and funny.
Being against Marxism is old and predictable. Tell me how the idea (as in Critical Race Theory), as it has been implemented, has failed, or has not failed. Don't rattle your sword and pretend to be an expert.
The quickest (and intentionally reductive) way to summarize this book is that Critical Race Theory is Marxist, Marxism is Bad, therefore the only possible solution is to reject it outright. This does not necessitate 300+ pages.
Spoiler alert, Lindsay alleges that Critical Race Theory is a belief system (based on a “poisonous worldview”) rooted in paranoia (mentioned more than 20 times), a conspiracy theory (a point he alludes to more than 30 times), and a fundamentalist religion (and is intentional and clear in explaining that it is not “like” one but rather “that it is one.”)
If this book was devoid of Lindsay’s personal opinions, and all the emotional and vitriolic nonsense, I’d give this book a three. I think that there are valid critiques of not just critical theory, but also of critical race theory, Marxism, neo-Marxism, postmodernism, and Hegel. Unfortunately, Lindsay often makes it difficult to differentiate between what is his clear disdain for all of it and what is a fair and good-faith critical assessment.
Lindsay jumps headlong into what I would say is an intellectually dishonest premise built upon a foundation of logical fallacies. Take for example this passage:
“All this said, Critical Race Theory—like many Marxian Theories— resists being clearly and concisely defined. Even in the books just mentioned, both of which bear the main title Critical Race Theory, the authors point out that many Critical Race Theorists don’t agree with one another about what exactly Critical Race Theory is. This too is intentional; it’s smoke and mirrors—very tedious smoke and mirrors. Sorting out how we should define Critical Race Theory, whatever they say about themselves, is therefore a necessary first task.” [emphasis added]
But later, in the book, Lindsay points out that:
“Postmodernism is a very complicated topic and very difficult to define or succinctly summarize.”
Apparently, though, this is not by design, or in any attempt to obfuscate some ‘paranoid, conspiratorial or noxious attempt’ at ‘dismantling’ any order. In fact, I would say that Lindsay’s few attempts at seeming unbiased is in his attempt to define a very complex series of ideas, as well as breaking down Hegel's dialectics (as well as a brief history of this dating back to Pluto).
I’m curious if Lindsay feels that attempts to define life or evolution by biologists and philosophers is equally by some nefarious design.
I wonder if Lindsay thinks that capitalism should be defined as a religion, or originalism in constitutional interpretation, or any of the other sets of ideas that have very strong adherents, supporters, and dare I say “advocates.”
My guess is that he does not. I suspect that he gives the same deference to those ideas as he does postmodernism in his book. Lindsay – because of his education – understands the importance of defining terms, and more than likely the difficulty in doing just that. What he labels as an “outsider’s definition” is nothing more than a reductive (albeit, revisionist) one that primes the reader not for any fair, or even objective assessment of Critical Race Theory, but one of disdain.
I think that this is disappointing and only adds to the “smoke and mirrors." If it wasn't for the fact that this book is considered non-fiction, I'd label it under satire, and philosophical absurdism.
Lindsay even goes as far as to give more deference to the vulgarity of Marxism by pointing out that it is a “profoundly misunderstood ideology.” (This is a fact, it is.) So why not Critical Race Theory?
Lindsay begins his last chapter with a Polish proverb:
“Never attempt to cure what you don’t understand…”
Yet, he offers solutions (“cures”) to a “problem” build entirely on a reductive, not at all close to the actual definition(s) in what can only be assumed to be an accidental Hegelian-like synthesis of CRT that got transfigured into what he now calls “Race Marxism” the ‘Hegelian Gnostic Science Religion.’
I give this book a one because it is more-or-less a 300+ page opinion piece extolling his hatred of Marxism and Hegel by slogging through a series of cherry-picked quotes from key sources on Critical Race Theory.
That being the case, I did learn some new information, and this offered a competing (although not at all surprising) perspective. This book, though, I think flatly falls on its face in terms of any meaningful attempt to "solve" what Lindsay views as a "problem." Anti-Communism, Anti-Marxism, Anti-Hegelianism, etc., remains a pillar of conservative thought, but the book left me wondering what it is exactly that Lindsay is for, exactly. I cannot conclude that he is in favor of looking at issues from all directions, because that would be too Hegelian. I cannot conclude that he thinks it is worthwhile to assess whether or not the colorblindness of law achieves the functionality of colorblindness of law, in fact, that also appears to be too Hegelian for him.
If I hadn't already consumed the source material for this book already, I would be left scratching my head wondering whether CRT is a science, a legal framework, a philosophy, a religion, a conspiracy theory, Marxist, postmodern, Hegelian, maybe Rousseauan? And in the most astonishing application of Hegel's rejection of the principle of non-contradiction Lindsay asserts that all of these characterizations - of which some being entirely contradictory - are the applicable, all at the same time, for Critical Race Theory.
Somehow, Critical Race Theory, according to Lindsay, is built upon a very difficult to define and understand philosophical model (postmodernism) and a 'profoundly' misunderstood ideology' (Marxism), but don't be fooled for one second that this means Critical Race Theorists aren't intentionally hiding behind 'smoke and mirrors' to try and confuse you by simply not coming to a consensus on how CRT ought to be defined, for you, the unsuspecting recipient of something you probably didn't hear about until two years ago (as of the time of writing this review).
In fact, I don't think Lindsay knows what Critical Race Theory is, and instead wrote a treatise of sorts trying to characterize in the most backwards way possible based on the most cursory understanding of CRT, and a much better understanding of philosophy, in an attempt to conflate it all as a religious paranoia. In a way, this book runs in a similar vein of criticism as John McWhorter's book Woke Racism: How a New Religion Has Betrayed Black America.
Entirely absent from this regurgitation of now more than a century of anti-Marxian rhetoric is any real assessment of the merits of Critical Race Theory. The book is very much a "toss the baby out with the bathwater," as the saying goes, kind of analysis and conclusion based entirely on his hated of Marxism.
The biggest strength of Lindsay’s, I think, is that he does a decent job (when he makes the effort to separate his opinion from an explanation) explaining complex philosophical histories and ideas in a way that I think a common person could understand. Given the dryness of the specific topics, Lindsay has an ability to write in a way that is engaging, and if I shared the same level of paranoia regarding Marxism I’d probably have found it even more appealing and funny.
Being against Marxism is old and predictable. Tell me how the idea (as in Critical Race Theory), as it has been implemented, has failed, or has not failed. Don't rattle your sword and pretend to be an expert.
February 23, 2024
Thoroughly studied, and in-depth in its presentation. I found the authors writing style to be a bit difficult at times, however this does disregard the plethora of information presented. Certainly this is a resource to read in the consideration of such an ideology.
December 11, 2022
Race Marxism — The Truth About Critical Race Theory and Praxis
James Lindsay, ©2022, 299 pages
a short Book Report by Ron Housley (12.9.2022)
Tag Line: another “Decoder Ring” for Critical Race Theory
WHAT IS CRITICAL RACE THEORY?
What is “Critical Race Theory,” anyway? When I ask that question, most people simply don’t know, even though they’re vaguely familiar with the expression.
They don’t know that Critical Race Theory, also known as “CRT,” is changing fundamental aspects of their own lives. They don’t realize that CRT is actually an entire worldview spreading through the culture and being adopted by important and influential cultural institutions — such as schools, universities, corporate boardrooms, the halls of congress, courtrooms, churches, Hollywood, media, news outlets.
And they certainly don’t know what James Lindsay has made clear in this book: that CRT is a direct descendant of the Marxian worldview and that it is central to a cultural upheaval tearing down the fabric that holds our society together.
CRT is the reason that we have “trigger warnings,” “safe spaces,” a “defund the police” movement, Drag Queen Story Hour in elementary schools, ESG scores re-directing major corporations, DEI officers overseeing strategic corporate decisions, and is the reason that the Summer 2020 riots were called “peaceful protests” with over 15 dead police officers and over $2-billion in property damage.
With an impact of such magnitude, I decided to engage with this book in order to figure out what’s going on.
WHAT I LEARNED ABOUT CRT’S EARLY ORIGINS
By book’s end I had come to a better understanding of how critical Theory came about, and of how it successfully invented and deployed a system-wide change in how we judge truth and objectivity — in how we arrive at and validate knowledge itself.
I learned that CRT is essentially a movement of scholars AND activists, which grew out of the Frankfurt School of neo-Marxism where the label, “critical,” was coined and came to mean critique of the various cultural institutions which were supporting the advanced industrial capitalism which Frankfurt School disciples all despised.
The neo-Marxists had acknowledged that Marx’s revolt of the working class was never going to happen, so instead of a working class revolt, their mission directed itself to a cultural revolution instead — by relentless critiques, by pointing out and complaining about the oppression inherent in every one of the culture’s institutions: including religion, family, education, media, law.
Marxism became neo-Marxism when the focus transitioned from fomenting class conflict to fomenting cultural conflict. The neo-Marxists of the 1920s, 30s, 40s and 50s produced a vast literature criticizing every aspect of culture, all while contending that well-off workers were actually being oppressed by power dynamics that each cultural institution was supporting. Their goal was to create an awareness of the oppression, an awareness which they called a “critical consciousness.”
THE ROLE OF POSTMODERNISM’S “SOCIAL CONSTRUCT” IN CRT’S GESTATION
CRT was not actually off and running until these early critical neo-Marxists would merge with a group called the Postmodernists — a group which didn’t announce its arrival on the scene until the late 1960s.
The Postmodernists’ claim to fame was their invention of what they called the “Social Construct” — which was basically a concept which was somehow excused from abiding by the rules of concept formation, a concept which was then able to take on new meaning in accordance with the whim of the moment.
Postmodernists were using the same vocabulary as before, but now they were attaching brand new definitions.
For instance, race was no longer a concept categorizing humanity by biologic phenotype, but was suddenly a “Social Construct” that claimed social power dynamics to be essential in framing race itself.
During the 1970s and 80s another vast literature developed, this time using “Social Construct” to change the meaning of many cultural concepts.
Race as a “Social Construct” was now framed as a conflict between oppressors (white) and the oppressed (black); sex was framed as a conflict between oppressors (males) and the oppressed (females); sexual preference was framed as a conflict between oppressors (straight) and the oppressed (gay). The Postmodernists wrote about these topics relentlessly, always attempting to provoke conflict among the groups.
Just as the neo-Marxists of the 1960s had focused on cultural conflict (in keeping with Marxist class conflict theory), so the Postmodernists focused on conflict among their own chosen representatives of what they called “the oppressed.”
Out of the counter-culture revolution (the Vietnam war protests; the Civil Rights protests; the “Women’s Lib” protests; the ecology protests) came the perspective that there were always oppressors and oppressed, which Postmodern writers seized upon.
Their literature was made possible by substituting “Social Construct” in place of a legitimate concept.
The Postmodernists could always contend that women were oppressed, especially black women, if they could frame gender as a “Social Construct,” such that a person’s identity is suddenly the sum of social attitudes, and no longer an aspect defined by biological science.
THE BIRTH OF CRITICAL RACE THEORY (CRT)
I learned from this book how CRT was born over thirty years ago as two movements joined together: the neo-Marxists complaining about cultural conflicts, joining together with the Postmodernists who were deploying their gimmick of “Social Construct” to effectively remove truth and objectivity from the public conversation about the “construction” of knowledge.
I learned that there was a famous conference where the term, “Critical Race Theory,” was first coined; and that one of the conference leaders approvingly self-referred to the founding members as “a bunch of Marxists” — the significance being that their mission was, to use Marx’s own words, not merely to study social phenomena but to “change the world.”
In the end they gave birth to Critical Race Theory as “a faith system founded on the belief that the fundamental organizing principle of society is racism created by white people for the benefit of white people.”
Thus, CRT had basic beliefs but it also had operational tenets that would govern what it intended to do.
First and foremost, CRT embraced the Marxian Dialectic, which was essentially the commitment to bring about a clash of (cultural) opposites, in order to advance the “revolution,” to move history along to its next stage, on the way to a utopian stateless communism that they envisioned. Anything that moved history along in this direction was said to be acting “on the right side of history.”
That is why Henry Giroux vigorously pursued his goal to get at least one-hundred Marxist professors into tenured positions, a modest goal which has since been eclipsed many times over. The first expression of his goal was always to develop what the Critical Race Theorists called “a critical consciousness of race” in as many people as possible, so as to foment a true cultural revolution.
CRT’s view was that incremental improvements (in race relations) should be rejected, because only full “cultural” revolution would satisfy the larger objective. Incremental gains do not advance their Marxian Dialectic of crashing opposites together in order to blow up the status quo. It is because this specifically Marxian strategy is being applied to race issues that Lindsay calls his book “Race Marxism.”
CRT's ROLE in EDUCATION
Today we hear complaints that CRT is being taught in our schools, but teachers contend that CRT is not being taught in our schools.
The trick here is that while CRT is probably not being formally “ taught ” in the schools, CRT is being “ done ” in the schools. The beliefs of CRT are playing out in the schools, in nearly every hour of every day, where the teaching goal is to create in the student a “critical consciousness of race,” according to the Dialectic approach required to move history along to its next determined stage.
CRT's ROLE in DEI
(DIVERSITY – EQUITY -INCLUSION)
Lindsay shows us how the DEI phenomenon has become a CRT initiative where HR departments all across the land are “seizing the means of cultural production,” installing people at all levels who are sympathetic to the goal of developing “critical racial consciousness,” all in the hope that racial justice will spontaneously come about if enough awakened (woke) Critical Race Theory advocates are put into positions of power and influence.
Lindsay points out that for the Critical Race Theorists, their objective is not a “dictatorship of the Proletariat” but instead a cultural “dictatorship of the Antiracist.”
CRT's ROLE in ESG
(ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, GOVERNANCE)
James Lindsay describes the ESG movement as another piece of the CRT puzzle. Part of ESG comes from climate activism (the “E”), but an important part (the “S” and the “G”) comes from Critical Race Theory.
ESG is a scoring system used to control the world’s major corporations, not unlike the Chinese Communist Party’s “Social Credit System” which imposes compliant personal behavior on individual Chinese citizens. But ESG allows activists to impose their agendas on most of the world’s productive corporations by manipulating over $10-trillion in pension fund investments.
Under threat of falling out of ESG compliance, the activists are able to coerce corporations into adopting New Green Deal-type policies (the “E”); they are able to force corporations into supporting Critical Race Theory’s goal of promoting woke programs like Social Justice initiatives (the “S”); and they are able to influence who corporations are allowed to have on their boards of directors, as well as who they may install as their political officers (think: DEI officers), to steer basic corporate strategic decisions (the “G”).
THE 30,000-FOOT VIEW
Back in 1776 the signers of the Declaration of Independence claimed that they believed certain “truths to be self-evident.” By 2017 when the cover of Time Magazine read “Is Truth Dead?” the Postmodernist “Social Construct” version of truth had become widely accepted in our culture; truth and objectivity were widely questioned; and social oppression was suspected in every corner of society.
Critical Race Theory was made possible when Immanuel Kant’s version of objectivity as “collective subjectivism” was first proposed over two hundred years ago. CRT has given modern voice to a level of philosophic absurdity that is capable of driving an entire culture into ruin.
This book not only questions whether the sexualizing of first graders with Drag Queen Story Hour may be just the tip of the iceberg. It sees a much broader civilizational threat. James Lindsay proposes some counter-measures, but the real value of his book, “Race Marxism,” is in offering up a broad historical picture of how critical Theory was born, how it was able to achieve cultural dominance, how it is dismantling cultural stability and how it grew up largely unnoticed by the man in the street.
The contents of Lindsay’s book are absolutely worth grappling with; there’s too much at stake to ignore it. Critical Race Theory’s grab for power is impacting every aspect of our lives today(!).
James Lindsay, ©2022, 299 pages
a short Book Report by Ron Housley (12.9.2022)
Tag Line: another “Decoder Ring” for Critical Race Theory
WHAT IS CRITICAL RACE THEORY?
What is “Critical Race Theory,” anyway? When I ask that question, most people simply don’t know, even though they’re vaguely familiar with the expression.
They don’t know that Critical Race Theory, also known as “CRT,” is changing fundamental aspects of their own lives. They don’t realize that CRT is actually an entire worldview spreading through the culture and being adopted by important and influential cultural institutions — such as schools, universities, corporate boardrooms, the halls of congress, courtrooms, churches, Hollywood, media, news outlets.
And they certainly don’t know what James Lindsay has made clear in this book: that CRT is a direct descendant of the Marxian worldview and that it is central to a cultural upheaval tearing down the fabric that holds our society together.
CRT is the reason that we have “trigger warnings,” “safe spaces,” a “defund the police” movement, Drag Queen Story Hour in elementary schools, ESG scores re-directing major corporations, DEI officers overseeing strategic corporate decisions, and is the reason that the Summer 2020 riots were called “peaceful protests” with over 15 dead police officers and over $2-billion in property damage.
With an impact of such magnitude, I decided to engage with this book in order to figure out what’s going on.
WHAT I LEARNED ABOUT CRT’S EARLY ORIGINS
By book’s end I had come to a better understanding of how critical Theory came about, and of how it successfully invented and deployed a system-wide change in how we judge truth and objectivity — in how we arrive at and validate knowledge itself.
I learned that CRT is essentially a movement of scholars AND activists, which grew out of the Frankfurt School of neo-Marxism where the label, “critical,” was coined and came to mean critique of the various cultural institutions which were supporting the advanced industrial capitalism which Frankfurt School disciples all despised.
The neo-Marxists had acknowledged that Marx’s revolt of the working class was never going to happen, so instead of a working class revolt, their mission directed itself to a cultural revolution instead — by relentless critiques, by pointing out and complaining about the oppression inherent in every one of the culture’s institutions: including religion, family, education, media, law.
Marxism became neo-Marxism when the focus transitioned from fomenting class conflict to fomenting cultural conflict. The neo-Marxists of the 1920s, 30s, 40s and 50s produced a vast literature criticizing every aspect of culture, all while contending that well-off workers were actually being oppressed by power dynamics that each cultural institution was supporting. Their goal was to create an awareness of the oppression, an awareness which they called a “critical consciousness.”
THE ROLE OF POSTMODERNISM’S “SOCIAL CONSTRUCT” IN CRT’S GESTATION
CRT was not actually off and running until these early critical neo-Marxists would merge with a group called the Postmodernists — a group which didn’t announce its arrival on the scene until the late 1960s.
The Postmodernists’ claim to fame was their invention of what they called the “Social Construct” — which was basically a concept which was somehow excused from abiding by the rules of concept formation, a concept which was then able to take on new meaning in accordance with the whim of the moment.
Postmodernists were using the same vocabulary as before, but now they were attaching brand new definitions.
For instance, race was no longer a concept categorizing humanity by biologic phenotype, but was suddenly a “Social Construct” that claimed social power dynamics to be essential in framing race itself.
During the 1970s and 80s another vast literature developed, this time using “Social Construct” to change the meaning of many cultural concepts.
Race as a “Social Construct” was now framed as a conflict between oppressors (white) and the oppressed (black); sex was framed as a conflict between oppressors (males) and the oppressed (females); sexual preference was framed as a conflict between oppressors (straight) and the oppressed (gay). The Postmodernists wrote about these topics relentlessly, always attempting to provoke conflict among the groups.
Just as the neo-Marxists of the 1960s had focused on cultural conflict (in keeping with Marxist class conflict theory), so the Postmodernists focused on conflict among their own chosen representatives of what they called “the oppressed.”
Out of the counter-culture revolution (the Vietnam war protests; the Civil Rights protests; the “Women’s Lib” protests; the ecology protests) came the perspective that there were always oppressors and oppressed, which Postmodern writers seized upon.
Their literature was made possible by substituting “Social Construct” in place of a legitimate concept.
The Postmodernists could always contend that women were oppressed, especially black women, if they could frame gender as a “Social Construct,” such that a person’s identity is suddenly the sum of social attitudes, and no longer an aspect defined by biological science.
THE BIRTH OF CRITICAL RACE THEORY (CRT)
I learned from this book how CRT was born over thirty years ago as two movements joined together: the neo-Marxists complaining about cultural conflicts, joining together with the Postmodernists who were deploying their gimmick of “Social Construct” to effectively remove truth and objectivity from the public conversation about the “construction” of knowledge.
I learned that there was a famous conference where the term, “Critical Race Theory,” was first coined; and that one of the conference leaders approvingly self-referred to the founding members as “a bunch of Marxists” — the significance being that their mission was, to use Marx’s own words, not merely to study social phenomena but to “change the world.”
In the end they gave birth to Critical Race Theory as “a faith system founded on the belief that the fundamental organizing principle of society is racism created by white people for the benefit of white people.”
Thus, CRT had basic beliefs but it also had operational tenets that would govern what it intended to do.
First and foremost, CRT embraced the Marxian Dialectic, which was essentially the commitment to bring about a clash of (cultural) opposites, in order to advance the “revolution,” to move history along to its next stage, on the way to a utopian stateless communism that they envisioned. Anything that moved history along in this direction was said to be acting “on the right side of history.”
That is why Henry Giroux vigorously pursued his goal to get at least one-hundred Marxist professors into tenured positions, a modest goal which has since been eclipsed many times over. The first expression of his goal was always to develop what the Critical Race Theorists called “a critical consciousness of race” in as many people as possible, so as to foment a true cultural revolution.
CRT’s view was that incremental improvements (in race relations) should be rejected, because only full “cultural” revolution would satisfy the larger objective. Incremental gains do not advance their Marxian Dialectic of crashing opposites together in order to blow up the status quo. It is because this specifically Marxian strategy is being applied to race issues that Lindsay calls his book “Race Marxism.”
CRT's ROLE in EDUCATION
Today we hear complaints that CRT is being taught in our schools, but teachers contend that CRT is not being taught in our schools.
The trick here is that while CRT is probably not being formally “ taught ” in the schools, CRT is being “ done ” in the schools. The beliefs of CRT are playing out in the schools, in nearly every hour of every day, where the teaching goal is to create in the student a “critical consciousness of race,” according to the Dialectic approach required to move history along to its next determined stage.
CRT's ROLE in DEI
(DIVERSITY – EQUITY -INCLUSION)
Lindsay shows us how the DEI phenomenon has become a CRT initiative where HR departments all across the land are “seizing the means of cultural production,” installing people at all levels who are sympathetic to the goal of developing “critical racial consciousness,” all in the hope that racial justice will spontaneously come about if enough awakened (woke) Critical Race Theory advocates are put into positions of power and influence.
Lindsay points out that for the Critical Race Theorists, their objective is not a “dictatorship of the Proletariat” but instead a cultural “dictatorship of the Antiracist.”
CRT's ROLE in ESG
(ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, GOVERNANCE)
James Lindsay describes the ESG movement as another piece of the CRT puzzle. Part of ESG comes from climate activism (the “E”), but an important part (the “S” and the “G”) comes from Critical Race Theory.
ESG is a scoring system used to control the world’s major corporations, not unlike the Chinese Communist Party’s “Social Credit System” which imposes compliant personal behavior on individual Chinese citizens. But ESG allows activists to impose their agendas on most of the world’s productive corporations by manipulating over $10-trillion in pension fund investments.
Under threat of falling out of ESG compliance, the activists are able to coerce corporations into adopting New Green Deal-type policies (the “E”); they are able to force corporations into supporting Critical Race Theory’s goal of promoting woke programs like Social Justice initiatives (the “S”); and they are able to influence who corporations are allowed to have on their boards of directors, as well as who they may install as their political officers (think: DEI officers), to steer basic corporate strategic decisions (the “G”).
THE 30,000-FOOT VIEW
Back in 1776 the signers of the Declaration of Independence claimed that they believed certain “truths to be self-evident.” By 2017 when the cover of Time Magazine read “Is Truth Dead?” the Postmodernist “Social Construct” version of truth had become widely accepted in our culture; truth and objectivity were widely questioned; and social oppression was suspected in every corner of society.
Critical Race Theory was made possible when Immanuel Kant’s version of objectivity as “collective subjectivism” was first proposed over two hundred years ago. CRT has given modern voice to a level of philosophic absurdity that is capable of driving an entire culture into ruin.
This book not only questions whether the sexualizing of first graders with Drag Queen Story Hour may be just the tip of the iceberg. It sees a much broader civilizational threat. James Lindsay proposes some counter-measures, but the real value of his book, “Race Marxism,” is in offering up a broad historical picture of how critical Theory was born, how it was able to achieve cultural dominance, how it is dismantling cultural stability and how it grew up largely unnoticed by the man in the street.
The contents of Lindsay’s book are absolutely worth grappling with; there’s too much at stake to ignore it. Critical Race Theory’s grab for power is impacting every aspect of our lives today(!).
October 1, 2022
A Misguided diatribe
It fascinating how fear distorts critical reflection. Whether you are a familiar or not with Marxist thought, in reading this book you can see the author pushing a particular ideology: you are either cuddled into what he calls “race Marxism” or you resist and push back. This is a tactic that the public should be familiar as it has been in full display during the Trump administration. Whether you agree, are unsure, or not, the political projects of Marxists/Communism asked questions of justice-how are resources to be distributed to promote progress. The means to make that happened, as in any política project, are always up for debate and reflection-as they should be. Herein lies the troubling perspective of this book. Just like Trump has done, and continues to do (as of 2022), it calls a few to double down “seize power” from an imaginary enemy.
It fascinating how fear distorts critical reflection. Whether you are a familiar or not with Marxist thought, in reading this book you can see the author pushing a particular ideology: you are either cuddled into what he calls “race Marxism” or you resist and push back. This is a tactic that the public should be familiar as it has been in full display during the Trump administration. Whether you agree, are unsure, or not, the political projects of Marxists/Communism asked questions of justice-how are resources to be distributed to promote progress. The means to make that happened, as in any política project, are always up for debate and reflection-as they should be. Herein lies the troubling perspective of this book. Just like Trump has done, and continues to do (as of 2022), it calls a few to double down “seize power” from an imaginary enemy.
July 7, 2023
An excellent read and necessary work that really needed to be done. Lindsay makes the case that CRT and Critical Theory (which is neither critical or a theory) is Race Marxism. As much as this work needed to be done it's sad that it even needed to be done. For anyone who knows anything about the Hegelian dialectic and Marx's adaptation of it, the similarities are all too obvious when one compares them to today's happenings.
Lindsay's central point is that while Marxism centered class as the global conspiracy of oppression that resulted in inequality, today's Marxist tyrants use race as one of the main constructs that create inequality.
Marcuse in the middle of the 20th century was confronted with the dual failings of communism. It wasn't taking effect like Marx predicted in the West and where it did take place, was a violent totalitarian failure. The reason for this could not be Marxism it must be that a new world could not be created in the old sensibility. So a new sensibility was needed and that need was eventually filled by Intersectionality (aka the oppression Olympics of the slave moralists).
In the early part of the 20th century cultural Marxists such as Lukacs came up with Cultural Marxists and the plan of taking over the institutions that created cultural. This plan was then put into effect by Mao.
Neo-Marxism is an attempt to fix Marxism often with a return to Hegelianism. The best example is the Frankfurt school. They also incorporate psychoanalysis, Critical Theory, and existentialism.
Lindsay's central point is that while Marxism centered class as the global conspiracy of oppression that resulted in inequality, today's Marxist tyrants use race as one of the main constructs that create inequality.
Marcuse in the middle of the 20th century was confronted with the dual failings of communism. It wasn't taking effect like Marx predicted in the West and where it did take place, was a violent totalitarian failure. The reason for this could not be Marxism it must be that a new world could not be created in the old sensibility. So a new sensibility was needed and that need was eventually filled by Intersectionality (aka the oppression Olympics of the slave moralists).
In the early part of the 20th century cultural Marxists such as Lukacs came up with Cultural Marxists and the plan of taking over the institutions that created cultural. This plan was then put into effect by Mao.
Neo-Marxism is an attempt to fix Marxism often with a return to Hegelianism. The best example is the Frankfurt school. They also incorporate psychoanalysis, Critical Theory, and existentialism.
July 15, 2022
This is a great follow-up to James Lindsay and Helen Pluckrose's "Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity - and Why This Harms Everybody". Critical Theory has made huge in-roads into almost every aspect of our society. Critical Theory and Critical Race Theory advocates in government, business and education are active and have developed an expanding base of influence. Unlike the American Communist Party in the 20th century which lived hidden in the shadows, today's American Marxists have become mainstream and openly advocate for destroying the institutions upon which this nation was founded and in which Americans have strived to make this a 'more perfect union." "Race Marxism" is a must read for those who want to understand the true nature of Critical Theory's racial component. Lindsay has done the 'heavy lifting' for us by trudging through the philosophical basis for Critical Theory and by extension Critical Race Theory and lays bare these anti-liberty, morally vacuous theories. Get this book, read this book, share this book, discuss this book and use this book as a reference. Critical Theory and Critical Race(ism) Theory are gaining momentum largely because activist supporters prey upon most Americans' ignorance of the threat these theories pose to free societies here and globally. Under the spot light of a skeptical citizenry, Critical Theory will whither.
August 19, 2023
This book took me 8 months to read, and not in a good way. While I expected the primary sources to be dense, I was dismayed to find out that the irritating jargon and stilted sentence structure flowed into Lindsay's explanations of the primary sources as well. The book reads like it was written in a hurry and then edited only minimally. With that being the case, it is difficult to follow the development of the book's thesis. It might improve upon a second reading, but I can't imagine myself devoting the time to it again. Overall, I thought Cynical Theories provided a much cleaner exposition of the same idea, and I would recommend this book only for someone who has a decent understanding of philosophy and critical theories going in (and, since most people are presumably reading this book to gain precisely that, I'm not sure how big a pool of potential readers that is).
May 2, 2023
4.5 stars
In the first pass of going through this book, I followed Lindsay's course (linked below) out of which he developed this book. I focused more on the course and glanced through specific parts of the book. I might visit it again in more depth.
Resisting Critical Race Theory by James Lindsay (New Discourses channel)
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2...
While the course is fairly self-contained, one would further benefit from going through the course History of Philosophy by Leonard Peikoff.
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLq...
In the first pass of going through this book, I followed Lindsay's course (linked below) out of which he developed this book. I focused more on the course and glanced through specific parts of the book. I might visit it again in more depth.
Resisting Critical Race Theory by James Lindsay (New Discourses channel)
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2...
While the course is fairly self-contained, one would further benefit from going through the course History of Philosophy by Leonard Peikoff.
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLq...
July 18, 2022
An excellent, through analysis and deep dive about critical race theory
"Race Marxism" intelligently covers the intellectual, academic, ideological and historical origins, evolution and spreading of what became known as critical race theory. This is a deep dive and thorough, thoughtful analysis. The author, James Lindsay, is politically liberal, a former academic PhD mathematician who resigned from his career to explore the origins of the radical political ideology that became noticeable to him and others, such as myself during 2017.
"Race Marxism" intelligently covers the intellectual, academic, ideological and historical origins, evolution and spreading of what became known as critical race theory. This is a deep dive and thorough, thoughtful analysis. The author, James Lindsay, is politically liberal, a former academic PhD mathematician who resigned from his career to explore the origins of the radical political ideology that became noticeable to him and others, such as myself during 2017.
August 6, 2022
Quote from Jean Stefancic & Richard Delgado, Critical Race Theory: An Introduction
Hmmm... maybe Critical Race Theroy IS Marxism after all?
"Unlike traditional civil rights, which embraces incrementalism and step-by-step progress, critical race theory questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law."
Hmmm... maybe Critical Race Theroy IS Marxism after all?
March 20, 2023
This falls into the "pseudo intellectualism" problem we are seeing. The author begins with stating he is the sole authority on this topic and knows more than anyone and his book is to save the world. This is not a hyperbole, that is literally how it starts. The author must have been paid by the word, because if you remove Marx, Marxism, and Marxist from the book, it would be a pamphlet. It is garbage.
Shelved as 'unfinished'
August 17, 2023I have only just begun reading this book, but the first thing I have noticed is that the hammer and sickle on the cover are black, within a white circle, on a red background. Traditionally, the hammer and sickle are yellow/gold directly on a red background. While trying not to judge a book by its cover, I'm curious about why Lindsay is conflating Nazism with Marxism when the Nazis explicitly rejected Marxism.
May 20, 2023
difficult reading
Just too much detail/deep thinking. Best for those who are deep into research. I found 23 pages to take months to absorb. Amazing mind, this Author has…just too much for me. HOWEVER … i did learn a different perspective about actually how Marxism is pushed by Racial ideology.
Just too much detail/deep thinking. Best for those who are deep into research. I found 23 pages to take months to absorb. Amazing mind, this Author has…just too much for me. HOWEVER … i did learn a different perspective about actually how Marxism is pushed by Racial ideology.
March 13, 2022
Lindsay, even admitted the books is like The Communist Manifesto, just written for our day. It helps you understand who the modern day communist are.
Honestly, it is the same game that has played out though history. So many wanted ‘world domination’ the only difference for today is the internet.
Honestly, it is the same game that has played out though history. So many wanted ‘world domination’ the only difference for today is the internet.
July 12, 2022
Exhaustive review of the literature and ideas behind Critical Race Theory, it practice, and how to combat it. Iowahawk on Twitter captured the nugget of it in a famous tweet: 1. Identify a respected institution. 2. kill it. 3. gut it. 4. wear its carcass as a skin suit, while demanding respect.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews