Perhaps you
have been following the story about President Donald Trump’s recent choice for the
Supreme Court in the United States of America. And perhaps you have heard
the opposition to his pick of Amy Coney Barrett because of her adoption of
black, Haitian children. How can this be
a bad thing? To understand this reasoning, one has to understand the
changing worldview in the West from Modernity to early Postmodernity to late
Postmodern tribalism. We need to
understand that all the talk about ‘Postmodernity’ is unhelpful if we do not
recognize the changes from early to late Postmodernity.
Modernity could
say, 'All lives matter' because of its belief in nature and science and
truth--essentially still agreeing with pre-Modernity and religious faith on
such issues as objective truth and the fundamental reality of nature/Creation.
Modernity did not always oppose racism and could even end up with Apartheid and
eugenics! But an opposition to racism during Modernity was also
possible. And it could lead to adopting
black children into white families or interracial marriage.
In early
Postmodernity, the celebration of diversity, the notion that truth could be
constructed and was relative, and the inclusion of the marginalized could still
oppose racism by adopting black children into white families and by supporting
interracial marriage.
But late
Postmodernity is tribal, and one of the aspects of this is critical race
theory--a combination of Marxist social theory stemming from the early 20th
century and Postmodernity's rejection of objective truths--an objective truth such as that
race is subordinate to the fact that all are human beings. Under this construct,
one must say, 'Black lives matter.'
Marxist critical
theory is a long struggle through the institutions of culture. Like Marxist political and economic thought,
critical theory interprets society in terms of power: the domination of one
group over another. In its racial
articulation—critical race theory—it involves a struggle against
'whiteness'. Robin DiAngelo's White Fragility and Willie
James Jennings' After Whiteness are examples of this iconoclasm:
the destruction of ‘whiteness’ in all its cultural dimensions. Claiming
not to be about actual 'whiteness,' just the culture of whites, it fails to
make any sensible distinction and, as a racialist theory, is, inevitably,
racist. But, as a Marxist theory, it is also coercive and violent: more
than statues are being torn down. Critical race theory combines critical
theory from Marx with Postmodernity. The
tribalism of late Postmodernity produces a racialist interpretation of society.
The Marxist element contributes violent
struggle and oppression, from cancelling culture to street violence to fake
news to denunciations to the flouting of laws and decency. As a Postmodern Marxism, it unapologetically
alters everything to support the great struggle, deconstructing history, education,
religion, law, etc.--all the pillars that establish culture. Moreover, in
its critical race theory form, it treats ‘white culture' as a homogeneous
hegemony to be toppled, including the Christianity that is intertwined with such
a construct. Once melted together into ‘whiteness’ and ‘Christianity’, it
is then a single entity to be torn down.
We can now
answer the question. How can a good thing, adoption, become a bad thing simply when the person adopting is white--and Christian--and the person adopted is black? In this new age of
Postmodern tribalism, with its critical race theory, the adoption of a black child from Haiti by a white
American Christian would be seen as a further domination by whites, an example of ‘whiteness’. Given the assumptions, given the tools of
interpretation from critical race theory, it all makes sense. Yet in this very logical result, the hideousness of the assumptions and theory and the destructive cruelty of Postmodern tribalism are revealed for what they are.
Comments