BIRDS see the same colours as we do and in addition they see parts of the UV spectrum that we cannot. This enables them to discern subtle differences between shades of colour far beyond our ability, but this does not make them racists.
When the wood pigeons flop down in my garden and start gobbling everything in sight, the little white doves, barely half the size of their menacing cousins, display a startling ferocity: they swoop, peck, wing-batter and relentlessly drive the woodies off the property. This is not because the woodies have darker plumage but because they constitute a threat to the community by draining its resources.
When red kites drift close to the house, the rooks rise mob-handed and attack, agile black Stukas diving down on the ponderous kites and driving them back. There is nothing racist in this either, despite their differences in colouration – deep in the rook’s memory are visions of ravaged nests and snatched young.
These avian proclivities demonstrate that ‘racism’, for want of a better definition, is a behavioural trait that evolution has hard-wired into the genes of all living things for sound reasons — the protection of their young and thus the continuation of their line, the preservation of the determinants of a closely related socio-biological group and access to their habitat’s resources. Hence, the noun ‘racism’ has no moral foundation nor meaning. It is purely a misnaming of an ancient survival mechanism. The wild community has taught me some valuable lessons which, when applied to the Cult of Critical Race Theory, illuminate the full extent of its murderous agenda.
Critical Race Theory and its offspring, BLM, are 20th and 21st century creations, but the cultural and theological roots of these ideas can be traced back to the late 1800s. Modern Black Liberation Theology is credited principally to James H Cone, 1938-2018, a Leftist African-American professor and theologian at Union Theological Seminary in New York.
Cone’s Black Liberation litanies portray Jesus as ‘a poor black man who lived under the oppression of rich white people’. Cone further explains the core beliefs of this theology by saying: ‘Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community. Black theology will accept only a God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject him.’ (West, 2003)
It is therefore no surprise that reading the intellectually challenged scribblings of the CRT crew yields a plethora of meaningless neologisms, oxymora and category errors. ‘Tenet’ is the mot du jour which they use to define the individual vertebrae that form the crooked spine of their reasoning, if one can call it reasoning.
Some examples: Intersectional theory; Standpoint epistemology; Essentialism vs. anti-essentialism; Structural determinism; Empathetic fallacy; Non-white cultural nationalism/separatism; Internalisation; Institutionalised racism and, in schools, whereby our youngsters are being indoctrinated via ‘equity policy’ and instructed to ‘examine your whiteness’ and ‘check your privilege’.
This terminology and the rest of their drivel is nothing more than verbiage masquerading as erudition. Even worse, it poisons young minds at a critical point in their development, which is why these supposed scholars persist in littering their writings with metrics that then spread like canine excrement in a playground.
Tenets are principles or beliefs, the underpinnings of emerging philosophies and/or political credos. They do not constitute a hypothesis or a theorem but will probably sell books to a significant percentile of the safely disengaged metropolitan chattering classes and provide yet more encouragement for the political drones to legislate for it to be a mandatory element of school and University curricula.
One can only assume that the authors are seeking lucrative meal tickets in addition to a power base. There appears to be no limit as to what they will inflict upon others in their pursuit of wealth and the subversion of generation snowflake. Racist anti-white ideologies such as CRT, organisations such as BLM and cash cows such as institutes of higher learning are big beasts and big business; they are very profitable ones but they do need to be constantly fed to survive.
In conclusion, attempting to psychoanalyse their mind worm is a Sisyphean exercise best avoided. It is sufficient to recognise that CRT is a malignant doctrine, the product of devious, avaricious minds.