The pundits of Critical Race Theory (CRT) will tell you (in unison) that “the Critical race theory is an academic movement made up of civil-rights scholars and activists in the United States who seek to critically examine the law as it intersects with issues of race, and to challenge mainstream liberal approaches to racial justice.”

The Encyclopedia Britannica says, Critical race theory (CRT), is an intellectual movement and loosely organized framework of legal analysis based on the premise that race is not a natural, biologically grounded feature of physically distinct subgroups of human beings but a socially constructed (culturally invented) category that is used to oppress and exploit people of color. Critical race theorists hold that the law and legal institutions in the United States are inherently racist insofar as they function to create and maintain social, economic, and political inequalities between whites and nonwhites, especially African Americans.”

The American Bar Association allowed an article on the principles of Critical Race Theory, written by liberal civil rights attorney and adjunct associate professor, Janel George,  who teaches a course on racial injustice in K–12 public education through a Critical Race Theory (CRT) framework.

However, the material and principles contained in that paper should not be construed as the position of the ABA House of Delegates or the CRSJ Council has adopted it.

Here is a link to the “American Bar Association web page”

Are you confused,  yet?  Tired of reading?


Reading about CRT is a never ending task.  Understanding what you read is  even more (unnecessarily) difficult.  I believe the interminable defining of CRT is intended to discourage the reader and cause him or her to throw up their hands and say, “Oh well.  Whatever!”  But, we cannot do that.  We cannot give in.  We must understand what is happening and learn to fight back!


Critical Race Theory says that racism is embedded in every institution in America.  And, that everyone who is not “a person of color” (Black) has been taught to be racist and needs to be retrained in their thinking or eliminated (cancelled or removed).

NOTE:  Critical Race Theory (CRT) is a deeply rooted in the Marxist doctrine of “Critical Theory”.  It has been borrowed and cultivated by modern Marxists to say “If you are not ‘black’ or some other ‘minority skin color’, you are racist, and you need to be retrained or eliminated.”

The message that “anyone who does not believe in systemic racism is part of the problem” and that message, is sadly, permeating all the literature on race in America today, our school systems, the courts and our churches.

These ideas of oppression and systemic racism come from a Marxist doctrine called “critical theory.”

It is important to note that Marxism is the theory and Communism is the practical implementation of Marxism.  Communism has never worked as advertised.  It is an inhumane, murderous scheme to enrich a few at the cost of hundreds of millions of lives.

Examples of the viral spread of this lie can be found in Buffalo, New York, the school district’s “Emancipation Curriculum” told children that “all white people play a part in perpetuating systemic racism.”

Another example is at the National Museum of African-American History and Culture, a Smithsonian institution funded by taxpayers.  Officials released a document last year intended for use in schools that claimed ideas such as “hard work is the key to success” and that trying to “be polite” are evidence of an oppressive society.

Contemporary Marxists claim that Karl Marx “was well aware of the centrality of race under capitalism”.  Even though Marx never wrote on the question of slavery and its racial impact in societies, he did write about America from his own egocentric and psychopathic point of view:

According to Marx: “The discovery of gold and silver in America, the extirpation, enslavement and entombment in mines of the aboriginal population, the beginning of the conquest and looting of the East Indies, the turning of Africa into a warren for the commercial hunting of Black skins, signalized the rosy dawn of the era of capitalist production.”

Although Marx never personally witnessed anything of what he wrote about regarding America, he found it expedient to ‘fill in his necessary blanks to make his points.  He wrote:

“Direct slavery is just as much the pivot of bourgeois industry as machinery, credits, etc. Without slavery, you have no cotton; without cotton, you have no modern industry. It is slavery that has given the colonies their value; it is the colonies that have created world trade, and it is world trade that is the pre-condition of large-scale industry. Thus, slavery is an economic category of the greatest importance.

“Without slavery, North America, the most progressive of countries, would be transformed into a patriarchal country. Wipe out North America from the map of the world, and you will have anarchy–the complete decay of modern commerce and civilization. Cause slavery to disappear, and you will have wiped America off the map of nations. Thus, slavery, because it is an economic category, has always existed among the institutions of the peoples. Modern nations have been able only to disguise slavery in their own countries, but they have imposed it without disguise upon the New World.”

Thus, Marx proposed a fundamentally flawed and a gross misunderstanding of the centrality of slave labor in the national and international economy.

But what about race?  Marx never addressed race. Let me repeat:  Karl Marx never addressed race.  His supporters and adherents state unequivocally that Marx addressed race, but with the implied disclaimer, “What Marx meant to say” – even though he never said it.  And, for a man to write as prolifically as Marx, to never have mentioned a matter simply means it was not relevant in his thinking.

So, using the fundamental tenant of the Critical Race Theory, KARL MARX WAS PROFOUNDLY RACIST, himself.  In fact, Marx used the ‘underprivileged’, the ‘oppressed masses’ for his own ends from the beginning.

Is CRT (Critical Race Theory), rooted in Marxism?  Yes. Absolutely.  But, it is nothing more than another fabrication of The Beast and the Dragon of the Bible, this thinly veiled “New Marxism” has come only to steal, kill and destroy!.

An article by Christopher F. Rufo, founder and director of Battlefront, A public policy research center, explains Critical Race Theory, its dangers and how to fight it. You can read this article by clicking this link.

It is a good article, and gives us an idea of how to respond, how to fight the manifest evil known as “CRT”.  But, it also falls short of giving us a grassroots remedy.  None of us can muster up a “PhD Quality dissertation” to fight with.  We need a simple and powerful method. I have listed some links to additional articles which will help can you find methods that will work.

Let me conclude this very brief introduction to CRT by saying, Critical Race Theory is a Marxist battle plan to overthrow the American system of government, and our way of life.  Marxism’s goal is to subjugate every man woman and child under ‘state control’, to eliminate the right standards of living according to the Bible, and to vanquish God from His Throne.

It is time to get serious.  Find groups in your area who are fighting this battle.  Also, consider supporting a frontline legal team, such as Alliance Defending Freedom, and ADF Church Alliance who are busy engaging this enemy.

Your Brother and Friend,

Mike Young

Click Here to go BACK TO THE MAIN PAGE

For Additional reading, click these links:

Critical Race Theory – The Threat

Critical Race Theory (CRT) Exposed

How to Engage in Effective Biblical Warfare

The Enemy:  How to Identify Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing

How to Deal with Marxists in the Church

How to Overcome

Why America is Unraveling and What You Can Do


  1. During my time in the university, I had one professor that didn’t like me (There may have been others.), and since he was “politically” connected, he could fail me without concern (But I think he passed me, giving me the lowest passing grade, out of some of his own concern.). I had to take his class, as he was the only one teaching that part of my degree. So I took both his classes, failing the first time, getting D’s the next two (I could remove the first grade by retaking.).
    Since I always did well in my field, I decided to do my best, and still garnered Ds. Once, actually twice, I compared my essay to a classmate, finding our points were very similar, but mine, on one day, better in description. She got an A. I got a D.
    What I think the professor didn’t like was I would really listen to his lectures, looking to understand where he was coming from, what points he was making (if any), and learn what we was attempting to teach, whether I agreed or not. My purpose was to simply pass the class, but get a better grade if possible, preferably an A. But I knew from the first class this was not possible. But I tried anyway.
    What I realized over the course of his classes is, he never wanted anyone to understand him, for his lectures were empty of real information. But he sounded like an intellectual, full of words and ideas, but bereft of real meaning. But I got that. I learned to “see” when people are talking but empty, for I compare their words with the real. But to them who like to sow confusion, they don’t like this. They don’t want to be understood, for their entire sense of self comes from thinking people can’t understand them, or that their confusion keeps people wondering.
    Very often, intellectuals are people who like to think of themselves as “above the rest,” for reasons of their own. And if we, break them down to simplicity, they don’t like that. They want people to study them, be in awe of their intelligence and wisdom, and from that, they grow worse with time. An intellectual doesn’t know anything everyone else cannot, except for people strong in their specific fields (like mathematics, physics, and so forth), but that’s because they pour themselves into one or two fields. And there are some very bright people with high IQs, but I don’t know that necessarily makes them wise.
    Karl Marx and many arguing Critical Race Theory enjoy sounding “intelligent” and causing other people to listen, study, and research them. They love the followers, the clingers, the ones who follow with their tails wagging and sitting by them in awe. For whatever reason of their own, they’ve become this way, deteriorating in their own minds, and love creating chaos and difficulties, because in that, they feel like they matter. In other words, if everyone saw them for who they are, they would ignore them, and these people would have to go back to work, unnoticed.
    Regarding Marx, which I’ve read some (I won’t pretend to have read much.), my take is he wasn’t very smart at all. For whatever reason, he had supporters, and found a way to use others to gain his movement, whatever it is and was. I suppose, had I known him as a kid, all of us growing up, he would have been the troubled kid who couldn’t stop thinking, unhappy with himself and life.
    That was my professor. He was teaching nonsense, but the growing politics of the times were moving in that direction, the puppet masters unseen, though controlling. Marx has a master he may or may not have seen. Those purporting CRT have masters, again, who they may or may not know. But none of them truly thinks for themselves, because if they did, they couldn’t speak, but would go back to real work, fixing cars, flipping burgers, or running a small shop, or something else. But they can’t find real value in doing something good and decent, needing attention. Other than when I hear about them, as in this article, do I ever think about them. I rather enjoy reading about people doing real and good works, like Nate Shiransky, Ronald Reagan, and more….
    Oh, by the way, if you, a reader, is noticed by no one (But you have friends and family. But even if you don’t, perhaps having had to move….), you might count yourself fortunate. Better to be honest, understand some important things in life, but never receive an award, then become well-known but full of hot air.


    1. We are in agreement. And, interestingly enough, I had a similar thing happen while in college, although many years prior. A “Lefty” was sitting cross-legged on his desk, profaning the returning US soldiers (I had been one of those). After his rant, I got up, walked up to him, told him to get off the desk and teach the class, as I had paid good money for a education and not for his political fantasies. He was shocked, but, he got up and taught the class. I expected a “F” on the next exam, but, got an “A” and a note from him apologizing. Go figure? And, thanks for the comments. Michael Young.


  2. Basically, it’s blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, too hard to understand because they don’t understand it themselves. It’s simply designed to create disruptions and antagonism. Divide and conquer, they’re thinking.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s