Propaganda pushed by the Black Lives Matter organization and critical race theory is making its way into magazines meant for middle schoolers.
By Jason Peirce OCTOBER 23, 2020
A “black lives matter” article that recently appeared in a children’s magazine popular in elementary schools, Junior Scholastic, is inflammatory, racist, and wholly unfit for students of any age.
Of course, there’s an enormous gulf between Black Lives Matter the organization, and “black lives matter” the concept and statement. Every decent human agrees with the latter. The former, however, is an explicitly neo-Marxist, racist, violent organization that, in the words of its own leaders, seeks to destroy American society as well as the core ideas on which this nation was founded.
To be sure, all Americans should learn about America’s complicated history with racism, slavery, Jim Crow, and the Civil Rights movement. The study of these issues is not a problem — Black Lives Matter the organization is. It is currently forcing highly unscientific, racist propaganda into our public schools, and Junior Scholastic’s article “Uniting For Black Lives” assisted.
Reversing the Good Work of MLK
Black Lives Matter is an organization steeped in an ideology — “critical race theory” — that reduces individuals to a racial essence based on skin color and, after assigning them a group identity, segregates them to be judged. This is racism. Both Black Lives Matter and critical race theory ignore what really matters: individual character, action, and merit. They turn the wise words of Martin Luther King, Jr. completely on their head.
The Junior Scholastic article based on these ideas therefore makes multiple, hatefully wrong claims. To begin with, it states:
Systemic racism is embedded in all aspects of American society, including our laws, policies, industries, schools, and culture – and is something all of us are a part of.
It also claims that Black Lives Matter has “grown into a movement to end white supremacy.” Then there’s the claim that white people have “advantages at the expense of people from other races and backgrounds.”
It’s noteworthy that throughout the article, when differentiating between white and black Americans, a lower case “w” is used for “white,” while an upper case “B” is used for “black.” It’s unclear what this is designed to signify. It’s also equally unclear how this signaling will help protect or provide for anyone’s individual rights, or, really, benefit the lives of any American in any meaningful way.
To the point, consider the article’s claims that “systemic racism is embedded in all aspects of American society,” and that the United States is a font of “white supremacy.” These terms, and others like them, are meaninglessly unscientific. There is no way to test such claims in the way actual scientists test hypotheses.
Where is “systemic racism” codified in American law? It’s not. Short of explicit individual acts of racism, how can anyone judge what’s in another’s heart? One can’t.
Where is it codified that white people be “advantaged”? Even if such “advantages” did exist, why would they necessarily come at the expense of people of “other races”? The article provides no data to back the claims that any disparity or inequality between individuals is due to racism. This false premise is based on another false premise, that inequality automatically equals inequity.
Using ‘Racism’ to Attack Capitalism
Modern American society is not a zero-sum game. In this great country, one’s does not necessarily come at another’s expense. Why? Because of the American dedication to individual rights and equality before the law, such rights and equality include the protection of one’s person and property, as well as the ability to keep the hard-earned fruits of one’s labor.
Individual rights and capitalism to not require taking from Peter to pay Paul. Rather, they imply voluntary exchange and giving. They’re the rising tide that lifts all boats.
Recent data indicates the Black Lives Matter organization is responsible for 95 percent of the violent riots that have engulfed this nation for over four months. The toll of the destruction includes thousands of lost lives, thousands of lost businesses, and billions of dollars in destruction — often from the very communities the group claims it wants to help. But the chaos and destruction should come as no surprise, given the leadership of Black Lives Matter’s very own words.
“If this country doesn’t give us what we want,” says Hawk Newsome, the president of the Greater New York chapter of Black Lives Matter, “then we will burn down this system and replace it. All right? And I could be speaking figuratively. I could be speaking literally. It’s a matter of interpretation.”
Then, there’s Black Lives Matter Co-founder Patrisse Cullors who states: “…we are trained Marxists. We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories.” Ariel Atkins, a Chicago Black Lives Matter organizer believes, “I don’t care if somebody decides to loot a Gucci’s or a Macy’s or a Nike… That’s a reparation. Anything they want to take, take it because these businesses have insurance.”
One Black Lives Matter community organizer from Washington, D.C. went a whole lot further, proclaiming, “I’m at the point where I’m about to put these police in a f-cking grave. I’m at the point where I want to burn the f-cking White House down.”
America, a White Supremacist Nation?
Given that the majority of the nation’s top-paid athletes and entertainers are black, we twice-elected a black president who appointed two black attorney generals, it strains credulity to claim the United States is currently a “white supremacist” nation.
Then there’s what Black Lives Matter hopes you don’t realize, such as how some of Baltimore’s most violence-plagued years took place when the city had a black mayor, black school superintendent, black police chief, a black-majority police force, and a city council that was two-thirds black.
Furthermore, it’s important to point out that the majority of violence-plagued cities share the same political party in power: Democrats. If the United States is indeed a “racist” nation, and given that Democrats and people who identify as “liberals” essentially control the bureaucratic levers of the federal government, Hollywood, the wider entertainment industry, higher academia, public schools, and the greater culture-at-large, what does this say about Democrats and liberals?
One lesson we all must learn is that treating racism this way primarily serves to breed resentment and grievances among those designated as its victims based solely on the color of their skin, and guilt for those who allegedly “benefit” based solely on the color of their skin. As many of the article’s claims hinge on the assumption that black individuals lack agency, are incapable of self-determination, and cannot succeed without white help, there’s an insidious sort of soft bigotry at play here. It’s as repugnant as it’s untrue.
The other great lesson is that this obsession with race is a distraction from any discussion of policy mechanisms that can foster and facilitate disparities and inequalities between people, regardless of the intent of the policies, and regardless of the skin color of the individual disadvantaged by the policies.
This country is not perfect. No country is. But many of the real problems we have are because we’ve moved away from the principles of individual rights. At root, that’s what so many legitimate peaceful protests are about: individual rights. If it’s not about individual rights, it’s not about peace.
So, how should we conduct ourselves in all of our relations, with all of our brothers and sisters, of all colors and creeds? It turns out it’s a simple answer after all: the Golden Rule—The Law of Love. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. If we truly seek peace and prosperity for all people, the Golden Rule is not only the best way, it’s the only way.