What do Black Lives Matter, third-wave Feminism, Critical Queer Theory, Postcolonialism, and other like social movements have in common? They all stem from Critical Theory (CT), a Neo-Marxist Philosophy. Since 2012–2013, the philosophy of critical theory has been accelerating at a rapid pace. The ideas that Critical Theory espouse are found in shows, movies, music, politics, schools, universities, shopping centres, even in the church. One can hardly go anywhere without hearing or seeing something related to Critical Theory. So, should Christians subscribe to Critical Theory and the social movements that stem from it, like Black Lives Matter? What does Bible have to say?
Critical Theory and the social movements that stem from it should be rejected by all Christians because it has an antibiblical worldview that rejects Jesus and blames all social ills on Western Society and the heterosexual white male, both of which cannot be redeemed, rather than on sin.
This article will do three things: (1) explain Critical Theory, (2) illustrate how Critical Theory is embodied in various social justice movements and how it has worked its way into Western society, and (3) biblically critique Critical Theory for the purpose of explaining why all Christians should reject it.
What is Critical Theory?
Critical Theory is an unashamedly neo-Marxist philosophy. To understand it, we need to first understand Marxism and where it failed.
Marxism
Karl Marx understood every society to have a base and a superstructure.
The base consists of society’s means of production, that is, the businesses, factories, and mechanisms that produce everything for a society, such as food, clothing, toys, houses, phones, entertainment, etc. The means of production are controlled by the ruling class, who are the rich and wealthy. The average person, then, works for the ruling class in producing the things for society and becomes increasingly impoverished as the ruling class becomes increasingly wealthier. That is, the average person works in the businesses and factories that produce what society needs and wants for poor wages, while living impoverished lives. Thus, the ruling class is on top of the base, controlling it, and the average person is on the bottom of the base, doing the labour and work for the ruling class.
The superstructure consists of a society’s ideology, worldview, legal system, political system, religions, even vocabulary.
The superstructure reflects the interests of the ruling class so that they will remain the ruling class by continuing to control the means of production and the average person who labours on their behalf. Another way of putting it is that the ruling class creates the superstructure for the purpose fooling the average person into willingly working for the ruling class for poor wages. Thus, the ruling class fools the average person into wilful oppression and poverty by means of the superstructure.
The goal for Karl Marx and Marxism was to awaken the average person to the reality that they were oppressed by the ruling class and to liberate the average person. Once awaken, the average person would then liberate themselves by violently ousting the ruling class through Revolution and taking over the means of production, which would ideally result in the spread of wealth to all people, ending all poverty and inequality.
Marxism expected uprisings from the commonfolk to happen all around the world as they revolted, ousted the ruling class, took over the means of production, and liberated themselves! Unfortunately, for Marxists, this never happened. The majority of people were content with their lives and did not see themselves as oppressed by a ruling class.
Critical Theory and Neo-Marxism
One would have thought that the failure of Marxism would have signalled its end. Unfortunately, this did not happen. Marx’s understanding of society as consisting of a base and superstructure remained, as did the goal of liberating all people. The Institute for Social Research in association with the University of Frankfurt was founded in 1923 for the purpose of developing Marxist thought. Out of this institute (more commonly called “the Frankfurt School”) came Critical Theory, which is rightly named Neo-Marxism.
Critical Theory advanced Marxism in two major ways. First, it identified the ruling class as Western society as a whole. Because Western society was founded by and ruled by heterosexual white males, the means of production is controlled by heterosexual white males. Further, because heterosexual white males were the ruling class, they created the superstructure, which means the social system favours heterosexual white males and oppresses all others, all non-heterosexual white males.
Second, Critical Theorists changes how to liberate the oppressed. In Marxism, the average folk (the oppressed) were supposed to violently rise up against their oppressors in a Revolution and overthrow them, taking control of the means of production.
Critical Theory takes a different approach. Because the superstructure is what the ruling class (heterosexual white males in this case) uses to fool the oppressed peoples into wilfully remaining oppressed, Critical Theory seeks to unmask the superstructure and change it, thus liberating the average person. The superstructure, according to Critical Theory, consists of Western ideology, Western worldview, Western religion (Christianity), Western political systems, Western legal systems, and Western speech. In short, Critical Theory seeks to attack Western Society and change everything that makes Western society what it is. Changing the superstructure will awaken the average person to their oppression and will incrementally change the superstructure to the point that it does not reflect Western society and to the point that it no longer advantages the heterosexual white male and oppresses everyone else, thus liberating the oppressed.
Critical Theory and Social Justice Movements
Critical Theory has influenced and given rise to numerous social justice movements over the past few decades, but some of these movements have become militant over the past ten years and have changed the landscape of the West. Let’s briefly look at two movements that stem from Critical Theory and embody its philosophy to get a better grasp of Critical Theory and its beliefs in order to critique it in the final section of this article.
Critical Theory and Black Lives Matter
Black Lives Matter (BLM) the social justice movement has embraced a branch of Critical Theory (CT) called Critical Race Theory (CRT), which focuses Critical Theory toward race. We can summarize Critical Race Theory, to which BLM subscribes, in three points.
First, CRT and BLM place all of society and every individual into one of two groups: oppressor or oppressed. Since heterosexual white males are the ruling class who created and sustain the superstructure, they are the oppressors. Whereas blacks who were once slaves in America are the oppressed, even today. For heterosexual white males, there is no escaping being an oppressor. By virtue of their skin colour and gender, whites are oppressors. Conversely, by virtue of their skin colour, blacks are oppressed and cannot escape being oppressed until they have completely broken down the superstructure and seized control of the means of production.
Second, the oppression of blacks primarily occurs indirectly through the cultural hegemony of the whites. White people (the oppressors) exercise power over black people (the oppressed) by virtue of the social institutions/structures, which include notions of what is good, right, and valuable.
Have you ever wondered why Black Lives Matter is attempting to defund the police? It is because they believe the police in Western society are part of the superstructure put in place by heterosexual white males to favour heterosexual white males and to oppress everyone else.
Have you ever wondered why Black Lives Matter wants to abolish the US Constitution? Again, it is because they believe the US Constitution is part of the superstructure put in place by heterosexual white males to favour heterosexual white males and to oppress everyone else.
Have you ever wondered why Black Lives Matter is not concerned with the fatherless epidemic in the black community? It is because they believe the nuclear family (one mother, one father, and children) is part of the superstructure put in place by heterosexual white males to favour heterosexual white males and to oppress everyone else. Note what blacklivesmatter.com said in its ‘what we believe’ section prior to scrubbing it from the website back in 2020:
“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.”
blacklivesmatter.com, pre-2021, emphasis added
Third, knowledge is gained by lived experience. Lived experience outweighs Western modes of gaining knowledge by logic, reason, and evidence. Have you ever noticed that white people are not allowed to discuss problems that black people have or the black community has? This is because heterosexual white males are the creators of thesuperstructure, which includes speech. Anything a heterosexual white male has to say is oppressive and dangerous! Thus, whites cannot challenge anything a black person has to say or even speak toward the issue of racism or black issues because whatever a white person says is oppressive by virtue of their skin colour.
As you can hopefully tell, Black Lives Matter and Critical Race Theory are actively employing the philosophy of Critical Theory and it is making big inroads into Western culture. There are numerous examples of public schools in the West teaching Critical Race Theory to children. Many governments have adopted this philosophy and are teaching all white children that they are racist and oppressors and there is nothing they can do about. Conversely, the same governments are teaching all black children that they are oppressed and disadvantaged by all whites and there is nothing they can do about it except over turn the entire system.
On a more personal level, I applied for a teaching position at a conservative Christian college in the USA a couple years ago. I was told the reason I was not considered for the position was because I was white. My qualifications were not considered. My teaching ability was not considered. All that mattered was my skin colour.
Further, in 2022 I had a publisher say they would not publish my monograph because I was a white Westerner; they only wanted to publish works from ‘majority world’ peoples (i.e., people from the third-world).
Critical Theory and Feminism (Critical Feminist Theory)
Modern feminism (or third-wave feminism) has embraced a branch of Critical Theory (CT) called Critical Feminist Theory (CFT), which focuses Critical Theory toward gender. First, just like every branch of Critical Theory, Critical Feminist Theory divides all of society into one of two groups: oppressor or oppressed. For CFT and modern feminism, the oppressors are men because they are the ones who control the means of production and who created the superstructure. The oppressed, then, are women.
Second, the oppression of women primarily occurs indirectly through the cultural hegemony of men. All men are oppressing women whether they know it or not because the superstructure has been created and designed to favour men and oppress women. Have you ever wondered why companies are being bullied into hiring more women, whether women want to work in those industries or not and whether the women are qualified or not? It is because they have been told they are oppressing women because the business structures of the West favour men and oppress women. The same is true with the so-called gender pay gap, which cannot be proven. CFT claims that women are paid less because they are women, even though this cannot be proven at the systemic level.
Further, have you ever wondered why we are not allowed to say “mankind” or “policeman” or “foreman” or refer to God as “He” or even say “amen”? It is because language is part of the superstructure and, thus, language was created to oppress women. It doesn’t matter what the words actually mean (for example, “amen” has nothing to do with men; it is a transliteration of the Hebrew אָמֵן and the Greek ἀμήν). The fact that some words have “man” or “men” in them means they oppress women. Language as part of the oppressive superstructure is why so many young people in the West believe words can actually kill and respond to words they don’t like with physical violence.
Third, knowledge is gained by lived experience. Men cannot speak toward women’s issues because they have not lived as women, which means no dialogue can happen between men and women at any meaningful level. Again, this is because anything a man has to say is oppressive.
Modern Feminism has made great inroads into Western society. Two examples should suffice. First, the Australian government has guidelines for spoken and written language that advocate for the elimination of gendered language (click here to read).
Second, many Christian colleges and universities in the West have adopted formal policies barring gender-specific language. Allow me to quote from two different writing/style guides. I won’t reveal the institution names, but want to press home the point that CFT has made major headway into institutions of higher learning.
“The [institutional name has been removed] recognizes that most Western European languages are androcentric and products of the widespread patriarchal culture out of which they emerged . . . . God-language is always shaped and formed by a particular cultural context . . . . Students are encouraged to use a variety of names and images for God that include female, male and non-gender specific images in their papers and tutorials.”
An Institution of Higher Education in the West, emphasis added
“In relation to avoiding gender linguistic discrimination, please ensure that you avoid the older linguistic usage in which ‘male-specific’ and ‘male-identified’ terms were used in a generic sense. The use of the word ‘man’ should also be avoided in idioms and phrases where the writer clearly intends to refer to both men and women. The same applies to pronouns such as ‘he’ and ‘she,’ occupational nouns and job titles, and other titles and naming practices. It is important to note that the conventions of English now accept the previously plural ‘they’ for use in place of the singular ‘he’ and/or ‘she’ where appropriate.”
An Institution of Higher Education in the West, emphasis added
A Biblical Critique of Critical Theory
Now that we have a grasp on Critical Theory and how it has worked its way into society through various social justice movements, we need to discern whether or not it is biblical and, thus, whether or not Christians should adopt CT or reject it. The title of this article gives away my conclusion, so let’s look at why CT is not biblical and why all Christians should reject it.
First, Critical Theory’s worldview is at odds with the biblical worldview.
| Worldview Questions | Critical Theory | The Bible |
|---|---|---|
| Who are we? | Members of different social identity groups that have no real origins (black, white, male, female, old, young, etc.). | God’s creation (Gen 1–2). If we believe in Jesus, then we are God’s children (John 1:12; Rom 8:12–17). |
| What is our fundamental problem? | Oppression that takes place between social identity groups. | Sin (Gen 3; Matt 26:26–28; John 8:34; Rom 1:18–6:23) |
| What is the solution to that problem? | Change the superstructure through activism (political, social, and economic). | Jesus’ death and resurrection. We must repent of our sin and believe in Jesus, his death and resurrection (John 20:31; Rom 1:16–17; 3:21–26; Eph 2:1–10) |
| What is our primary moral duty/purpose? | To overthrow the hegemonic power with the goal of liberating the oppressed. | To love, serve, and glorify God (Matt 22:34–40; Rom 12:1–2; Eph 1:5, 12–14; 2:10). |
Second, Critical Theory creates adversarial identities. CT posits that one’s identity is based on one’s social group and that human beings are fundamentally different; you are either part of this group or that group. Whereas the Bible teaches that all people share a fundamental identity: they are creations of God that are created in his image and are sinful because of Adam and Eve (Gen 1–3; Rom 5:12–14). The New Testament splits humanity into two groups, but these are very different from any of the groups of CT. According to the New Testament, a person is either a follower of Jesus or a follower of the Beast (Rev 13:5–18; 20:11–21:8).
Third, related to creating adversarial identities, Critical Theory posits the unpardonable sin of being a heterosexual white male. Because heterosexual white males are the ruling class and created the superstructure, they are all oppressors and, thus, inherently sinful. White males cannot escape the sin of being an oppressor because of their race and gender (i.e., because they are white and male). Thus, one’s sin is one’s immutable characteristics. The Bible also believes there is an unpardonable sin, but it is not racism (Mark 3:22–30; Rev 20:12–15). To believe that no Christian white male can cease oppressing all non-white, non-males, and non-heterosexuals is to strip power from the Holy Spirit and conclude that the Spirit is not able to help a Christian overcome all sins.
Fourth, Critical Theory advocates for moral asymmetry. There are some things that are immoral for the oppressor group, but are not immoral for the oppressed group. We see this clearly in CRT. CRT claims that whites cannot escape racism, but that non-whites are incapable of racism. The Bible, however, presents universalmoral norms that apply to everyone. God’s commands and morals are for all people, not one race or another (Rom 2:1–3:20). The Bible does have commands for certain groups (husbands, wives, slaves, etc.), but these are based on God-given roles, never race.
Finally, Critical Theory believes that hegemonic power is evil. Thus, hegemonic power should be resisted wherever it is found. This goes against the Bible, which claims that God is a hegemonic power. God (and Jesus) has complete hegemony over man (Rev 4–5; 21).
Summary and Concluding Thoughts
Critical Theory and the social movements that stem from it, such as CRT, CFT, Postcolonialism, Critical Law Theory, Critical Queer Theory, etc., are not just unbiblical; they are antibiblical. They choose a people group on which to blame all of their hardships and struggles and make that people group unredeemable and unable to defend themselves. Critical Theory does not acknowledge God as creator and ruler of all, does not acknowledge sin as the ultimate enemy that Jesus defeated, and does not acknowledge Jesus as the saviour of all mankind (yes, I said “mankind”!). In its quest to liberate the oppressed, it seeks the oppression of its oppressors. No social movement that stems from CT seeks equality; they all seek hegemony. In their quest for hegemony, they reject the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords—Jesus (Rev 17:14; 19:16).
Much of the West has entered a victim’s mentality. Many Americans and Australians are blaming their current suffering or negative circumstances on other people groups based on that group’s inherent and immutable qualities (skin colour, gender, etc.). They are not looking for those who are actively oppressing them or the causes of their sufferings (such as Sin and their own decisions), but are seeking to blame others based on arbitrary differences. This is, in my opinion, basic prejudice and racism.
There are four questions that I have for adherents of Critical Theory:
First,what group can heterosexual white men blame for their suffering? Because straight white men also suffer in this world, who can they blame for their ills and struggles? Further, if the system makes them the ruling class and the oppressors, then why are there so many heterosexual while males struggling in life?
Second, if sex, gender, and race are social constructs like many of these groups that stem from Critical Theory claim, and a person can choose one’s sex, gender, and race, then (a) doesn’t that undermine the claims of Critical Theory and the social movements that stem from it? And (b) why doesn’t everyone simply become a heterosexual white male? If you can choose your race, gender, and sexual orientation, then why not just choose to be part of the ruling class and end your oppression immediately?
Third, I am surprised evolution does not come into play regarding these issues for adherents of Critical Theory. Those who adhere to evolution could argue that the oppression of weaker groups is justified because of the way the universe evolves—the strong eliminate the weak. Weaker races, genders, and groups should be eliminated to make way for the stronger (this is the heart of evolution in my opinion). So, it surprises me that those who agree with evolution complain about their suffering instead of simply admitting they are weak and the universe through evolution is eliminating the weak. (Clearly I don’t hold to this at all, but it is a question for adherents of CT who believe in evolution. For my position on evolution, see my article on creation HERE).
Fourth, what does liberation of all oppressed groups look like? The social movements that stem from CT advocate burning down Western society (sometimes literally burning it down), but what will take its place? What does utopia look like according to CT? This is something that has never been explained clearly to me and I can’t find anything written about this in detail. What happens to the oppressors in utopia according to CT? Isn’t CT just a cycle where one oppressed group liberates itself to become the oppressors so that the next oppressed group liberates itself to become the oppressors? This does not sound like a utopia I want to be a part of.
As you can tell, Critical Theory has many flaws. It is best to reject it and adhere to biblical truth. True social change will happen as people become disciples of Jesus, through repentance of sin and belief in Jesus, and then adhere to Jesus’ commands and way of life.