Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 451 | On CRT, the Right Is Winning

Episode Date: July 8, 2021

Over the past few weeks and months, we've seen a dramatic shift in the Left's rhetoric on critical race theory. They've gone from denying they know anything about it to embracing it loudly and proudly. However, almost no one on the Left knows what CRT actually is, and yet they are the ones who claim those on the Right don't know what they're talking about. This is called gaslighting. CRT is being taught in our schools, and it's reached the highest levels of government as well. But the more it spreads, the more parents find out about it and speak up. Today we're going to break down very specifically what CRT is, so that the next time you see a leftist trying to package Marxist ideas as something more palatable, you'll be able to see right through it. --- Today's Sponsors: Patriot Mobile is America's only Christian conservative wireless company & right now they have two great offers to choose from: get 50% off your first two months or $100 off any phone. Both come with premier activation, just go to PatriotMobile.com/ALLIE for details! ExpressVPN creates a secure, encrypted tunnel between your device and the internet, so people can't peep on your online activity. Visit ExpressVPN.com/ALLIE & you can get an extra three months free! Good Ranchers safely delivers American craft beer & better than organic chicken, right to your door. Place a one-time order or better yet ... subscribe! Go to GoodRanchers.com/ALLIE to get $20 off & free express shipping. --- Buy Allie's book, You're Not Enough (& That's Okay): Escaping the Toxic Culture of Self-Love: https://alliebethstuckey.com/book Relatable merchandise: https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey

Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort.

We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. Hey, guys, welcome to Relatable. Happy Thursday. Hope everyone is having a wonderful week. So today we are going to talk about this brand new subject that no one has ever talked about before, least of all, me.

That is critical race theory. I know, I know some of you are. tired of talking about this. I completely understand if you've been listening to this podcast for any amount of time. You know that we have talked about this a lot for the past year. Probably every week for over a year now, we have been talking about what is often described as this kind of obscure esoteric law school concept of race in the law, but is actually much more common and pervasive than that. We have been talking about it much longer than a lot of people have been talking about it in the political commentating world.

And now there are a lot of people, both on the left and the right, that are discussing critical race theory, what it is, where it's showing up, how it shows up, and what we should do about it. I asked on Instagram whether or not you guys wanted to talk about theology or critical race theory and it was a slight tilt towards critical race theory. Now, if you're in the crowd that wanted a break from CRT, like I said, I totally understand, but I still don't want you to miss this episode. I am going to try my hardest to make sense of a lot of the crazy and the confusion that we've been seeing going on. I promise you we will talk theology next week. I think I'm going

to do like the theology of motherhood. I understand if you want to break from all of this, but I do feel that it's my responsibility in this position to keep trying to add clarity to a lot of the noise and the confusion that we're seeing, especially among Christian circles when it comes to critical race theory. Honestly, I am pretty tired of talking about it many days, but then I think about it and I get all riled up again and I remember how important it is for us to be able to dissect and understand this. So in the past few months, the conversation about CRT on Twitter, on social media, and the mainstream media has gone, something like this. First, it was on the left.

What CRT is not happening, critical race theory is only taught in law school, not in K through 12 public school. It doesn't have any effect on our conversations about race and racism. What are conservatives even talking about? This is a boogeyman. They don't even know what critical race theory is. There were evangelical saying that this isn't coming from the pulpits, no Christian, and no evangelical believes this in anyone who talks about critical race theory or says that it's

something we need to worry about. They didn't even know what critical race theory is. There were Christians saying that sort of thing and have been saying that sort of thing for the past few months. Well, that attitude has shifted to, well, actually, CRT is really good. And its concepts should be taught in schools. And, you know, it can be helpful to study scripture. And it should characterize our conversations about race and racism. And actually, if you're against critical race theory, you're racist. You're just like the anti-integrationist in the 1960s south. The parents protesting against CRT or Q&ON, white nationalists, as Joy Reid said on MSNBC recently. Carrie Washington, Gary Washington posted a picture of herself on July 4th on Instagram with a

shirt that says, I love critical race theory. Amy Schumer and Jennifer Anderson liked this picture. Now, let me ask you, what are the chances that these people have any idea what critical race theory is? You honestly think, I'm not trying to be rude, but you honestly think Amy Schumer is reading up on it in her spare time? No. It seems like the majority of mainstream liberals have no idea what it is and especially don't know how it manifests itself. It seems like they think that it means to be critical of racism. I think a lot of people on the left defend it because the right is attacking it. They see it as another culture war issue. So their knee-jerk reaction is to say that it's good. I think the right does this as well when the left brings up their concerns. But I think

if a lot of people on the left actually knew what CRT believes, they would realize that it goes against many of the things that they say they believe in, like equal rights, for example. And we'll explain that in just a little bit. The truth is, what started out as this obscure esoteric idea by a 1970s scholar has now expanded to characterize much of the left's understanding, not just about race, but also about human nature in general, about our society, about America's institutions, our constitution, even their understanding about truth itself. There are people in the center and on the left, professing Christians included, who will say that they don't believe in CRT, I would say that most people probably, to the center left, say that they don't hold to the

main tenets of CRT or they don't believe in all of CRT. But they will also say things that actually are derived from CRT. They just don't realize it. The concept of white privilege, for example, is a concept of critical race theory, specifically critical whiteness studies. This idea that there is a seen and unseen collection of ways that white people use to help each other that is mostly inaccessible to non-white people. Systemic racism is a concept of critical race theory. And people get really mad when I say this.

But if you read critical race theorists, you know that it's not controversial to say that the claim of systemic racism here in America today is not actually based on data. It doesn't rely on data. It's based on a narrative, on a theory, a particular perspective, a philosophy that the system is to blame for people's problems. And it sounds something like this, that slavery, Jim Crow, redlining, the war on drugs, etc. All existed not that long ago. Therefore, it is obvious that these laws are the reason for racial disparities in black people's problems today. And it sounds really believable because there's some truth in it, because those were things that happened. but that assertion has to be backed that those things are what is causing primarily or exclusively

black people's problems today. That assertion has to be backed up with factual causal arguments. It is highly debatable whether or not those policies still have a significant impact or a primary impact on disparities and outcomes today. But rather than debating it, CRT accepts it as true without debate because CRT starts with the assumption that everything is characterized by anti-black racism. Now, as a counter to that assumption, as I've said, many times, jot this down if you haven't already, read discrimination and disparities by Thomas Sol. Okay? Read discrimination and disparities by Thomas Sol. It kind of bust this fallacy that every disparity that exists must automatically be due to discrimination.

So moving on. When people say, I don't believe in CRT, but I do believe. in white privilege and systemic racism, well, then you do believe in parts of CRT. And maybe that's okay. Maybe you want to say, okay, well, I don't agree with CRT as a whole, but I agree with these things. All right. Just say that. Just say that you agree with some parts of critical race theory.

Now, I would push back on you accepting some parts of critical race theory, but I think you should at least be honest about that or be honest that you just didn't know that the things that you were pushing were a part of critical race theory and you're just now realizing it. And those are just two examples and we'll get to more on those things later. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase

narratives and we don't offer false comfort, we ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. So what I'm getting at is that it's much more prevalent and pervasive than most people realize. And we have been, like I said, gaslighted about it. Gaslighting, as I'm sure you know, is the act of making someone feel crazy for something that they shouldn't actually feel crazy for. So like if a girl accuses her boyfriend of cheating and the boyfriend says, what? You're so crazy. You're so paranoid. Why would you think that? But he really is cheating and he has given her reason to think that he's cheating. That is called gaslighting. And the leftist media love to gaslight. Just the other day, the press secretary, this whole number about Republicans, actually being the ones who wanted to defund the police.

No, she said, Joe Biden ran on giving the police more money. I mean, that kind of brazen statement as an aside is only possible when you know that you've got the media on your side and won't call you out for it. That's the same kind of thing. That kind of gaslighting is the same kind of thing that we're seen from the leftist media about CRT. First, I want to tell you so we can kind of unpack this gaslight. And I want to tell you what the definition of critical race theory is. People are always asking me for a definition. I was in Sunday school the other day. And someone in my Sunday school was like, can you please explain this to me like I'm five? And it's difficult to do because I always want to try to give you some kind of compact definition,

but there's so many layers to it. And in order to try to explain to you how it's showing, up in a way that doesn't necessarily come with the label critical race theory. It kind of, it takes a long time, but I really hope to put it in as simple terms as I possibly can. Now, you will see people on the left trying to give you a compact definition, but that's because they don't want to unveil the multiple layers that are underneath the kind of superficial definition of critical race theory, because the superficial definition of critical race theory sounds really good until you actually read what critical race theorists really

believe and want to do. So let me try to give you the simple definition and then I'm going to unpack it. And this is really important. As many times as you've heard about it, I still think it is so important for us to understand this and be able to apply this knowledge. So critical race theory is a theory developed by a scholar named Derek Bell in the 1970s. He and the proponents of CRT would say that it is simply a way to examine American history. in our current institutions through the lens of race. Bell held that racism is not an exception in society, but it's normal state. It is the usual way of doing things, he would say. It is intertwined, not just in our institutions, but in how most people live our lives in the United States.

So in other words, he would say that it is central to the human experience. And CRT seeks to examine how the centrality of race and racism has affected people's lives, black people's lives, in particular, both individually and systemically. Critical race theory is one of many critical theories. There is queer and gender theory. There is feminist theory. Critical theory is a school of thought that examines power structures and hierarchies within society and asserts that society's problems are due to these structures rather than, say, people's individual choices. The goal of the critical theorist is to liberate people from these structures. Liberate is a word that you will hear a lot.

Liberate people from these structures, from these hierarchies, what they call hegemony, typically through major societal and political changes. So the assumption of critical theory is that people are oppressed by systems that have been put in place by the most powerful in society to keep them down. Critical theory examines those systems. It offers ideas for how to finally attain liberation. Critical theory was established by the Frankfurt School in Germany, which was a school of social theory that, like Karl Marx, who wrote the Communist Manifesto, examined social conditions and hypothesized about how the poor conditions caused by capitalism in other systems could be changed by revolutionizing power structures

and hierarchies. Critical theory is not identical to Marxism. And I do think that's important to say. It's not identical to Marxism. But it is similar. So I don't have a problem with people saying that critical theory is Marxist because it is very similar to Marxism and it comes from the same school of thought. Just as Marx, the father of communism, saw the world through the lens of class oppression, rich versus poor, bourgeois versus the proletariat, greedy capitalist versus the working class, and sought to overthrow capitalism so everyone in his mind would live communally and equally in harmony without any personal profit or private property. So critical theorists see the world through the lens.

of some kind of oppressor versus oppressed. So critical race theory takes Marx's view of the world as the rich oppressors versus the poor oppressed and asserts that the world, at least in the U.S., is actually divided by the white oppressor versus the black and brown oppressed. Not primarily are we categorized by our class, but rather by our race, critical race theory holds. So when MSNBC's Joy Reid tweets something like this with 22 and a half thousand likes. And she says, it feels like someone should let folks know. Marxism is a theory that divisions in a capitalist society will inevitably lead to the collapse of the class structure. Communism is the achievement of Marxism via revolution. And critical race theory has nothing to do with either one. She has

just plain wrong. This is gaslighting. She had another thread earlier, it was a few weeks ago, about how CRT isn't being taught in schools. It's just this, it's just this, you know, far-off esoteric theory being taught in law school that has no bearing whatsoever on any conversations about race today and is certainly not influencing public school education. And we'll get to why that's explicitly wrong, too. Over maternity leave, I read what is probably, in my opinion, the simplest and the clearest breakdown of CRT in a book called Critical Race Theory and Introduction by Richard Delgado and Gene Steffen Sick to critical race scholars. Here's how they introduce CRT. They say critical race theory builds on the insights

of two previous movements, critical legal studies and radical feminism. They go on to explain from critical legal studies, it borrows the idea that there is no one right answer when it comes to the law in legal decisions. It depends on interpretation. It depends on perspective and reasoning. There's been a lot of pushback, obviously, to that theory because that kind of subjectivism when it comes to the law, as you can probably guess, is pretty dangerous. Critical race theory also uses feminism stance on the relationship between power and social roles and, quote, the unseen, largely invisible collection of patterns and habits that make up patriarchy and other types of domination. That's important because that lets us know how radical CRT is compared to most traditional

Western thought about the rule of law, due process, rights, and the concept of truth itself. CRT as a critical theory and critical theory as a product of the Frankfurt School dismisses the idea that truth about society can be discovered through objective means or through the scientific method or through data. And rather that truth is a matter of a person's standpoint within power structures that's so important to understand how it rewrites epistemology, has a new way of seeing what truth is. So this is why CRT would assert that white people, in particular, white conservatives, should be dismissed on the subject, on the subject of race or racism. Even if white people bring up data or counter logic to a particular claim about black people's oppression in the U.S.

data or any points that contradict the idea that black people are systemically oppressed because of inherently white supremacist institutions can be ignored, according to CRT, because they are coming from the wrong standpoint. The standpoint of the so-called oppressed trumps any standpoint or facts presented by someone else. This is standpoint epistemology. So critical race theory asserts that white isn't just a skin color, so you don't just dismiss people. based on their skin color, but it's actually whiteness. That whiteness is a racist system that's not completely independent from white skin, but it can be. That whiteness is also a way of being, a way of thinking. Also, it's psychological and that non-white people can actually internalize it.

So this internalization of whiteness would be demonstrated, they would say, by a black person And like Thomas Sol, who would reject the idea that America is institutionally racist today and that the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow are to blame for all of minorities' problems. He writes about this a lot and his argument is based on data. But that is dismissed because they would simply say that he has internalized whiteness and is not coming from the correct standpoint because he's not citing with a standpoint of the oppressed that says the entire American system is racist, he is to be dismissed. And that is where you get someone like the Yale psychologist a few weeks ago. You probably saw this in the news saying that white people

and people who have internalized whiteness, I guess, are mentally deranged, she argued, that we have this, that we have pathological problems. That comes from CRT. That comes from the CRT idea, basically that racism has infected everything, including white people's minds, and therefore it is impossible for white people to really know truth. They need the clarity of the oppressed minority to show them what is true. It's a very mystical, gnostic idea that, again, is not rooted in objective fact, but in a theory that is much more religious and ideological than physical or factual. So in this way, critical race theory is self-certifying. It is unfalsifiable, meaning it cannot logically be argued with. If you argue with critical race theory, the idea that black and brown people are all systemically

oppressed in the U.S., it's because you have been infected by whiteness, CRT says, whether you are white or not. And so that is why so many critical race theorists shut down debate, because it's set up in a way so that it cannot be argued against because it dismembered. misses the existence of counter facts and counter logic as something that is illegitimate because the people that are presenting it don't have the right standpoint. It's really incredible how this is duped so many people. A great example of how this manifests itself is with CRT's dismissal of the fact that Asian Americans have the lowest crime rates, the highest graduation rates, the lowest fatherlessness rates, the highest median incomes. Immigrants from India, for example,

have a far higher success rate across these categories than white people. So if this is the case, how can the central assertion of CRT be true that we live in a white supremacist system upheld by white privilege that is set up to maintain white supremacy? Well, CRT just dismisses this kind of claim with the model minority myth. Delgado describes this as the myth that Asians are industrious, quiet, good minorities that fit well within the white system of the U.S. and that that kind of myth is harmful because it ignores that some Asian subgroups are impoverished in the U.S. and because it, quote, causes resentment among other disfavored groups such as African Americans.

So remember when we were talking about a few months ago before maternity leave, a spike in anti-Asian hate crimes, a conversation that you may have noticed died out really fast because almost every single, single crime that was reported on or caught on camera was a black person perpetrating the violence, we were told that this too was actually caused by white supremacy on MSNBC, a Washington Post columnist blamed white supremacy for the violence. Professor Jennifer Ho wrote for the outlet the conversation that white supremacy is to blame for black on Asian violence. Now, according to the Bureau of Justice statistics, white people are most likely to be victimized by white people with violent crime. Black people are most likely to be victimized by black people. Hispanic people are

most likely to be victimized by Hispanic people. But Asian people are most likely to be victimized by black people. So a very logical question would be, how is this white supremacy? Because as CRT asserts, the resentment that black people may feel towards Asians is because of white people perpetuating the model minority myth. And because white supremacy defined, all of our institutions, everything that bad that happens is one way or another because of whiteness. Now, of course, CRT doesn't actually address the data about Asian Americans. I mean, you can call it what you want. You can call it a myth. The data is there. Agent Americans are most successful in generally statistically across a variety of categories than white Americans are. It is hard to explain how

that could be possible in what someone like Isabel Wilkerson calls a racial caste system that upholds white supremacy at all costs. Because remember, critical theories reject the idea that social ills have anything to do with personal choice, but rather have to do with oppressive systems. The success of Asian Americans and certain immigrant groups in the U.S. is very inconvenient to that theory because that would mean that by different choices, it may actually be possible to have different life outcomes no matter what your skin color is. And that suggestion, we are told, is wrong and it's racist. You can't even bring that up.

You see how this idea subverts, how we traditionally, look at culpability, intent, justice, evidence, truth itself, and you could see how if it characterized our justice system and our laws, it would drastically change the Western rule of law, due process, the idea of inherent rights. And that is actually what it seeks to do. And this is the most radical part of critical race theory that I just don't think most people, even on the left, realize or understand. And I'm going to explain that in just one second. The authors of this critical race theory book write about this in the book. They explain that one of the primary tenets of CRT is a critique of the liberal order.

And by liberal, that does not mean leftist. That means basically Western democratic systems and the Western rule of law and the concept of inherent rights. The critique of the liberal order in CRT is a critique of the concept of the law being colorblind. Crits, as critical theorists are a lot of times called, they believe that the equal application of the law to people of all racism backgrounds is actually wrong because they say it doesn't properly redress past injustices. This is the whole foundation of Ibermx-Kendi's book on anti-racism, that colorblind laws aren't enough because Kendi and other crits would argue that it's impossible

to be not racist. One has to be actively anti-racism. which means purposely setting up the law systems sentencing to benefit people of color, even if that means negatively impacting and discriminating against white people. So here's how they explain in the book why CRT rejects the idea of a colorblind set of rights or execution of the law. Quote, if racism is embedded in our thought processes and social structures as deeply as many crits believe, than the ordinary business of society, the root. routines, the practices, and institutions that we rely on to do the world's work will keep

minorities in subordinate positions. Only aggressive, color-conscious efforts to change the way things are will do much to ameliorate misery. So this is why activists say ACAP. All cops are bad. It actually stands for a different word, but I won't say it just in case you're listening with kids. Even if there are individually good people, that are cops, they would say all cops are still bad because there are no good cops in a racist system. Because CRT rejects the idea of judging people by their individual actions and rather judges people by group and by the systems that they uphold either actively or just complicitly. And in calling for color conscious efforts, they are calling explicitly for partiality in the law,

for certain kinds of discrimination and sentencing and all sorts of justice-related issues to show favor to some and disfavor to others based on race, to try to write past wrongs and to tear down the racist structures and the hopes that it will lead to equal outcomes for everyone. They admit that currently colorblindness is how our judiciary works. They don't make the argument that the judiciary is purposely anti-black, but that color blindness doesn't do enough to help black people. Now, I just want you to remember this, that God hates partiality. He makes this point over and over again.

Exodus 23, 3, Leviticus, 1915, Deuteronomy 117, Deuteronomy 16, 19. And many more passages and New Testament passages are explicit that God hates partiality and judgment and that he himself shows no partiality. He calls partiality either to the poor or to. the rich, evil, unjust, wrong. At the heart of CRT is a love for partiality. At the heart of God is a hatred for partiality. Let me say that again. At the heart of CRT is a love for partiality. At the heart of God is a hate for partiality, which is why the two cannot coexist in the same way that any racist system, whether it's against black or brown people or the opposite direction,

is against what God calls good. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either confused about CRT or confused about God. CRT calls for a different set of standards for black and brown people than for white people. So they judge the morality of laws, not by their impartiality, but by their impact on the so-called oppressed. This is exactly what Kendi writes about that if there is a policy that causes a disparate impact on black people. It is racist. And actually the dissent on the Supreme Court about a recent voting law basically said the same thing, that you judge a law not by its intent, not by whether

or not it was set up with the intent to be racist, but whether or not it has a disparate impact. So Kendi and other crits believe in somehow engineering society so that black people are pushed forward and white people are held back until there is magically no difference in outcome. This is what every communist has always believed, except all you have to do is switch out black and white with poor and rich. It's the same old thing. This is what Thomas Sol calls cosmic justice, which is often referred to as social justice, but he calls it cosmic justice because it is an attempt by elites, by academics, by policymakers to engineer society from the top down by holding back some groups hoisting up other groups, never realizing that this does not work

because it doesn't account for personal choice. It ends up hurting everyone except for the people doing the engineering who never have to pay for the cost of their bad ideas. It is cosmic because it is intangible, mystical, an ethereal type of so-called justice that never practically works because it gets human nature wrong, like all left-wing philosophy gets human nature wrong. It echoes every form of a collectivist type of governing ever that has always failed and ended in misery. So it shouldn't surprise us that this kind of mentality always ends in some kind of wreckage and destruction because CRT and other critical theories reject the idea of rights. Here's what Delgado and Stefan Six say about this. They,

say crits are suspicious of another liberal mainstay, namely rights. They hold that moral and legal rights are apt to do much less good than we like to think. So they go on to explain that our system grants procedural rights like that of due process, but it doesn't always guarantee what they would call substantive rights or right to housing, for example. And so crits say that this kind of system wrongly emphasizes equality of opportunity rather than what they would want it to emphasize, which is equality of results. That's what CRT wants. CRT also says rights basically just exist in the United States to serve the interest of the powerful. They give an example of free speech. Free speech, they say, protects the powerful

because hate speech tends to hurt the minority disproportionately. So it rejects the idea that more good speech can battle bad speech. Here's the funny thing. BLM is what it is because they have been allowed in a free country to criticize cops, the government, our foundation, the system, without fear of punishment. Critical race theorists get to trash the United States without fear of punishment because of free speech, it is lucrative to rag on white people, to rag on America. In a white supremacist, oppressive, what they often say is a fascist country, would any of that

be possible? In a country without a First Amendment, would that be possible? No, of course it wouldn't. So that's one huge contradiction that I actually saw reading this book about CRT is that it simultaneously questions the goodness of rights, especially a right like that of the right to free speech and yet it exercises that right to try to make its points and to push back against what it sees as hate speech or bad ideas. CRT, though, holds the reason I think why there's this contradiction and why they think the way that they do about about rights is because it holds

to structural determinism, which says that quote, according to this book, our system by reason of its structure and vocabulary is ill equipped to redress certain types of. of wrong. Hence the revolution and the revolutionary talk. Hence, the hatred on the 4th of July toward our constitution, our declaration, our founding, hence the constant talk on the left about how free speech or religious liberty and the Second Amendment, our first and second amendment rights are nothing more than ways to maintain the power of those at the top. And they don't even realize that these, a lot of people, some do, but a lot of people don't even realize that those ideas are from CRT.

CRT in school, in church, in the media is wherever there is talk of white privilege, of oppressed versus oppressor, of intersectionality, of systemic racism, in the hush that surrounds stories involving black people that don't fit the oppressed versus oppressor narrative. It is found in the spotlight that is placed on stories involving white people that do fit that narrative. CRT is not just talking about slavery and discrimination and racism. That's another form of gaslighting that we've seen from people saying, oh, people who want to ban CRT in schools or who don't want teachers, you know, teaching the principles of CRT in schools, they just don't want

people to talk, they just don't want their kids to talk about racism. They don't want their kids to learn about Jim Crow or discrimination or the Tulsa Massacre. That is not true. Doing away with CRT does not do a way with talking about those things. Actually, CRT, because it is so radical and it's meant to be radical, guys, that's not just my interpretation. Like, the people who study CRT believe that it is radical compared to the Western tradition of rule of law and due process that has created, by the way, the greatest civilization that has ever existed in the history of the world.

They know that it's radical compared to that. CRT gets in the way of us talking about racism and slavery and real oppression. It gets in the way of us talking about it factually because it purposely colors these subjects with a particular narrative in a theory rather than factual historical analysis with an aim towards improvement and unity. Because CRT at its core is revolutionary. It is explicitly anti-Western. It is explicitly anti the liberal order, anti the Western rule of law. It does not try to cover that up. That's not just me, you know, writing down that slippery slope.

That's not me trying to fearmonger. That's what it says that it is. It does not want to coincide with the Constitution or a Democratic Republic or a colorblind society. So there is no reason for your average liberal and certainly a Christian to accept any part of CRT. There's just not. Now, you can talk about, like I said, oppression and racism and real instances of injustice, and you should. But CRT is not the way to do it. It is divisive. It is partial. It is based on one man's perception of the world and history and relies on glaring omissions of data to try to support that narrative. And yet this is happening in K through 12 public schools. This was a tweet by the president of the largest teachers union. You guys know how I feel about teachers unions. Randy Weingarten, she tweeted this on July 6. She said, critical race theory is not taught in K-312 schools. The rights culture warriors are labeling any discussion of race, racism, or discrimination as such,

to try to make it toxic. They're bullying teachers to try and keep them from teaching the truth. That's what I'm talking about. That's what I'm talking about. That is not true. Here is, I'm going to read you a motion from a, um, a, recent meeting with the National Education Association, again, the largest teachers unions, one of the largest teachers union in the country. So it says this, the NIA will with guidance and implementation from the NIA president and chairs of ethnic minority affairs caucuses. It will provide an already created in-depth study that critiques empire, white supremacy, anti-blackness, anti-ingenity, racism, patriarchy, cis-heteropatriarchy, capitalism,

ableism, anthropocentrism, and other forms of power and oppression at the intersections of our society and that we oppose attempts to ban critical race theory and or 1619 project. And so Randy White Garden is lying. They are saying behind closed doors, of course, this became public that, yeah, we are against any bans on critical race. theory, everything that I just read you in that paragraph is from critical race theory. That is not saying that we shouldn't critique white supremacy where it has actually existed, but this is pushing the assertion that our entire system, that capitalism and all of the systems that have created the United States are affected by white supremacy, anti-blackness, the patriarchy,

racism, all of these different forms of oppression. and then they list the 1619 project, which has been admitted by the New York Times, by Nicole Hannah Jones herself, that was not a historical rendering of the United States. Again, just like critical race theory, it is based on narrative. It is based on an assumption, this idea that America has been built on racism and that our real founding was actually in 1619, not 1776, and that we weren't just founded with racism and slavery, but that we were founded on racism and slavery. Therefore, everything, including our Constitution, is all bunk and it needs to be done away with because nothing good can happen out of a racist system. That is radical stuff that the largest teachers

union in the country is saying that they will teach in K-12 public schools. They are saying that they also will join with Black Lives Matter at school in the Zen Education product to a call to call for a rally this year on October 14th, George Floyd's birthday. As a National Day of Action, to teach lessons about structural racism and oppression. Talking about police brutality and says USA's economy slash social order is built on interactions between different cultures and races to deny opportunities to teach truth. That word is doing a lot of work here about black, brown, and other marginalized races minimalizes.

Minimalizes. I've never heard that word, teachers. the necessity for students to build efficacy. The ancient African proverb says, know thyself. That is, if I remember correctly, a Greek proverb, not an African proverb. The teachers union also says that they are going to push back against, they're going to push back against any parent who fight against CRT. They're going to try to expose them and basically bully them into compliance,

as if these teachers own your children. They do not. As we talked about yesterday, they do not. One of the points of order from this meeting says that they are going to share publicize through existing channels information already available on critical race theory. What it is, what it is not, have a team of staffers for members who want to learn more and fight back against anti-CR rhetoric. Now, if CRT, again, isn't being taught in schools, why would you have to fight back against anti-CRT rhetoric? And share information with other NIA members as well as their community members. So they're basically trying to, bully parents into compliance and tell you that you are a racist and that you're against the truth about marginalization in this society if you are against CRT. Again, we see this movement from CRT isn't being taught to actually it has to be taught. And if you're against CRT, then you are a racist. This, to me, shows that they are losing. They know that they're losing ground on it, thankfully.

I mean, this is one I think of the rare instances where, uh, conservatives gained ground more quickly than the left could. Now remember all of our major institutions, big tech, now the government, the executive branch, the legislative branch, the major corporations, the education system, these huge teachers unions, they are all on the left. And so for conservatives to gain ground on this and to be making any kind of impact is honestly pretty impressive. when you consider the institutional power that the left has to push back on this. But at this point, like the word has gotten out to a lot of parents about what this is. And parents have experienced this.

Now, I want to play a clip of a parent of a student at a public school very calmly and reasonably talking about why the tenets of critical race theory are so damaging. My name is Ian Rice. I've got two children here in the California School District. It's very apparent here by all of the parents that have spoken that this board and the school district is failing. More importantly, I came here to talk about political race theory. This theory was never meant to be brought into grade schools, high schools, at all. It's actually taught in the collegiate atmosphere. And more importantly, the legal portion of the collegiate atmosphere to see different laws through the lens of

race from an ethics and an ethical standpoint, right? Not for grade schools and high schoolers. The problem of bringing it to high school and grade school level is that we don't have the educators to properly teach these kids. Instead, they're using it as their own agenda to indoctuate the kids to hate each other. And whether you believe that to be true or not, the reality is that's what's happening.

Critical race theory is teaching that white people are bad. That's not true. That would teach my daughter that her mother is even. You already have an educator within your staff that has pulled my daughter aside and said, well, you're a minority. So you know better than to engage in certain things. When I was brought to the school's attention,

nothing happened to that educator. Instead, my daughter was brought in, and she was ridiculed. So my question is now, with critical race theory being brought in, what is your criteria to educate the educators. And who are you to educate my children, or any of our children, in life issues? That's our job. Your job is to teach them math and science.

Our job is they teach them about life. I believe racial issues and tensions across the U.S. are nowhere near what it used to be decades ago. Do we have a long way to go? Sure. Do we still have individuals out there that need to be taught? Absolutely. But I believe the people here don't look at me as a black man.

They look at me as a man standing in front of you addressing the issue that we all are very passionate about. Now, does that man, who, if you're listening to this and you didn't see, is black, does he strike you as a racist? Does he strike you as a white supremacist? Now, Crits would say that he has internalized whiteness. But honestly, like, let's think about the logic of that kind of accusation. Does that man seem like someone who is pro-segregation, who doesn't want his child to learn about racism and slavery and discrimination in the United States? No. You are being told that as a parent, you don't have the responsibility.

You don't have the right and you don't have any reason to speak up about this stuff. But take the courage that that man showed that many parents have shown in front of their school boards. Take their courage and apply it to your own. own life. I guarantee you this makes a difference. You know how I know this makes the difference? Because the N.E. got so much pushback on this motion that they publicized or that got publicized that they ended up trying to take it down so that no one could read it anymore. The same thing with Black Lives Matter on their website used to say that they wanted to dismantle the nuclear family. And that is also a part, a subset of CRT and against the Western liberal order. They think that

to the nuclear family. It's a part of that. They're wrong, but they think that so they want to dismantle it. When people, even people on the right, raise a respectful ruckets about this kind of stuff, it can absolutely make a difference. It might not seem like it does, and it might not always be publicized when it does make a difference, but it can make a difference. And even if it doesn't right away, I promise you, I promise you that chipping away at this kind of toxicity is the right thing to do and that over time, we can gain ground. So you need to double down on this kind of stuff. Do not be scared about talking about why CRT is wrong and why it should not be taught in schools. And you know what? If the phrase critical race theory turns off the people that you're talking

to, it just makes them shut down or saying the word Marxism makes people think that you're just a fearmongering, that you're just talking about a boogeyman that doesn't exist. You don't have to use those actual terms. You should know enough now about what critical. race theory is practically what it looks like to understand when it's happening, how it's happening. And you have to equip yourself enough to be able to push back against it in a respectful way. Those of you who are in my book club on Facebook, Women's Book Club with Ali Stucky, we read tactics. A great way to have a conversation about this kind of stuff is just to ask questions.

Ask questions about it. Try to get people to define their terms and to clarify what they mean. I asked someone recently who said that they were a proponent. of critical race theory, if they were also for dismantling the Constitution and getting rid of the idea of inherent rights and colorblind law. And of course, they said, no, I'm not for that. I do think the Constitution is hypocritical. And, you know, this person was being very respectful. And we had a great conversation about it. But this person also doesn't believe they say that they agree with CRT. And then they say that they don't agree with the big part of CRT, which is basically

a huge critique and a revolution against the Western rule of law that a lot of liberals say that they like. And so I think it's really important to kind of push that and to ask those questions and to get people to be as clear and as specific as possible when it comes to what they think the problems are, when it comes to race in America, when it comes to justice in America, how they're defining racism, how they're defining justice, and not just what they think the problems are and where they're coming from, but also what the solutions are and what data they have to back that up. And we should be prepared to do that too. We have to get to the point to where we are on the same plane and using the same definitions of terms as the people on the other

side of this debate. And if that means not actually saying the word critical race theory or the term critical race theory, not actually using the word Marxists in order to have a productive dialogue, that I encourage you to do that. I understand the other side, shut down really easily and basically just call you a racist. I would say you don't even have to push it with those kind of people. You don't even have to have those conversations. There's a large swath of people in the middle who are waiting to be informed about this and whose minds are ripe to change and to go in the direction of what is actually true when it comes to this kind of stuff. Now, I want to end on one question that I see a lot or I guess one topic that I see a lot is about and

whiteness and if CRT is explicitly anti-white or if it's just coincidentally anti-white and the reaction to some of that. Okay, here's the question. Is CRT anti-white? And I understand that most people will just say yes, because certainly that's what it sounds like. And it is, but I, I posit that it is incidental. It was not actually set up to simply or exclusively or centrally be anti-white because of some kind of hatred of white people. Now, that is how it is manifesting itself, but that is not what it was set up to be. It is meant to be, just like all critical theories, anti-hierarchy, anti-white power or whiteness, which, again, can be independent from the color of someone's skin, anti-Western. Now, unfortunately, like I said, how it manifests itself is a in the explicit condemnation of white people as a whole, which sadly, inevitably, is going to push

people into a white identitarian movement that spells a whole lot of trouble for the country in the same way that black solidarity. I'm not saying that all black people are the same or all black people agree, but black solidarity arose from black people being marginalized and wrongly castigated and caricatured in the same way that any minority solidarity arises from being treated as other or being treated as less than by everyone else. So white solidarity is going to come together as a reaction to white people being constantly maligned. I don't want that.

Like I reject that. I think that we should resist that because majority solidarity along racial lines, in contrast to minority solidarity has always ended really badly throughout history. but that is human nature joining with others who are being maligned and unfairly criticized the way for the way that you are and forming an alliance to try to compete against the ones doing the maligning. That is unfortunately just what arises from this kind of tribalism. And that is not going to end well.

Like I said, I think that we should resist all kinds of that tribalism and primarily looking at each other and creating alliances on the basis of racial identity. That's what CRT pushes. And unfortunately, I think there's going to be a very negative and ugly backlash to it. So, like, my suggestion is that we all back up from using racial identity or racial essentialism as an identity, as a way to form these collections and form group identities and trying to fight against each other based on the color of our skin. That sets us back. That will not end well, like I said. And so that's one thing that I think that we have to resist is that kind of identitarianism and resentment and bitterness as a reaction

to all of this and realize that CRT is not primarily an attack on white people. It is an attack. It is an attack on what it sees as power. It is an attack on the Western rule of law. So it's, it is going to be consequential if it is taken to its logical conclusion. It is going to be consequential for people of all races equally, not just white people. And that is how I think that we have to see it. And that is why I think it is incumbent upon people of all different colors, of all different backgrounds, to fight against this where you see it. And to resist its language, to resist its ideas, to resist its indoctrination, because like all left-wing revolutions, it will end badly both for the revolutionaries and the victims of the revolution. Instead,

we have to love our neighbor as we love ourselves. Instead, we have to take on impartiality, both in our own lives and what it comes to how we teach our children, how we preach to our congregants, the kinds of laws and the policies that we advocate for. Impartiality is a principle of Christianity that God emphasizes again and again and is going to be the only way to unity. Like I said on Tuesday, we don't want to chop down the tree of liberty. Yes, we water it. We allow it to grow so that its branches grow more full and longer so that it can give more shade to people against the scorching sun of tyranny. But just because we don't like that the tree is isn't growing as quickly as we think that it should be.

That's not a reason to chop down the tree. CRT wants to chop down the tree. I can't get on board with that. All right, that's all I have to say for today. I will be back here on Monday. See you guys then. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie,

you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort.

We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us.