The State of Education: Critical Theory in the Classroom
The State of Education: Critical Theory in the Classroom (Part 1)
[This article has been published by kind permission of the author Kevin Mott and first appeared in the Bible League Quarterly and Kevin’s website in 2021. The article is written in a very clear and straightforward way providing a review of how ideological influences have impacted, especially, on state education. The author also explains in an understandable way expressions such as ‘cultural Marxism’, ‘critical theory’, ‘critical race theory’ and ‘woke’ and how those purporting this thinking have influenced/corrupted minds by turning them from biblical teaching.
The author also stands firm on the Word of God and the need for Christians to hold fast to the truth and precepts of Scripture. Drawing on his experience during lockdown, the author details how he experienced firsthand the materials his children were being exposed to and, in particular, his teenage son in an English lesson on Critical Race Theory.
We would recommend this article as a useful background to the influences within education and the useful starting point before reading more detailed books on this subject.
Again, we would thank Kevin for his generosity in allowing us to publish this article on the CViE website. We will be publishing the article in two parts and in Part 2 we will provide further detail on how to obtain the article as a published booklet.]
[PART 2 now available here]
How might one consider the subject of education in the United Kingdom in the 21st century?
To point out the fact that the system itself is broken seems a little obvious, and whilst prominent Christian voices are highlighting single issues in the broader context of society, it often feels as if the attacks we encounter are somehow separate from one another. That as Christians we stand against a dam of filth, plugging up holes where they occur and celebrating the small victories when we are successful at stemming the flow. What I would like to submit to you then, is the fact that a great number of the issues that we currently experience in education and beyond are a result of a sustained attack on core Christian values that goes back many years.
As people of the book we acknowledge that our enemy is not one simply of flesh, but a spiritual entity, and whilst we also recognise that it is God who is in ultimate control, the Bible tells us that in the midst of wolves … be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. There is, therefore, an expectation that with the help of the Holy Spirit we will also be a people of action who engage with culture, and that if we are to be successful in this endeavour must first understand where that culture is. God has put us all here to accomplish His purposes, so the fact that we find ourselves facing these challenges is by His design and no accident.
I urge you all to be aware of these fundamentally important issues so that you might recognise them and push back, offering a gospel antidote to the poison that our children and grandchildren are exposed to in the classroom, and the wider tapestry of society, each and every day.
A PROBLEM HISTORIC
If I can start then by informing you, perhaps unsurprisingly, that there has been a fundamental, revolutionary shift in Western thinking from a Judeo-Christian worldview perspective to one of Marxism, where everything is viewed through a lens of conflict, with only victims and aggressors; the oppressed and the oppressor. This is now the dominant mindset in which many people, particularly younger adults, see the world, with indoctrination beginning at a tender age in the classroom. Whilst classical Marxism pitched workers against the capitalists in power, ‘Cultural Marxism’ seeks to bring together marginalised, disenfranchised identity groups in a form of an unofficial coalition, to perpetuate the idea that there is a supposed power struggle against a capitalist society; one based on Judeo-Christian ideals that are oppressive, racist, misogynistic and patriarchal. It is the narrative that many people, across a wide political and social spectrum, have now accepted and embraced.
In 1956 Russia’s leader Nikita Khrushchev is reported to have said that Communism would “take America” and therefore the free world “without firing a shot,” and that they did not have to invade but rather destroy the US from within. It is claimed again that in 1959 Khrushchev said, “we can’t expect the American people to jump from capitalism to communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of socialism, until one day they will awaken to find they have communism.”
There is much debate as to whether or not Khrushchev made these remarks in the 1950s, but certainly, the core idea of a non-coercive takeover of Western culture is one that began many years earlier.
During his interview with The Christian Institute, the late Reverend Melvin Tinker explained that in 1921 Antonio Gramsci had been responsible for founding the Communist Party of Italyfollowing a split between the Italian Socialists, and sought about capturing the West. Although communism had taken root in Russia, attempts to sow the seeds of Marxism in the UK and other Western nations had been largely unsuccessful. Gramsci strategised that to become successful, two things must happen.
These were:
- The war of manoeuvre
- The war of position
In the ‘war of manoeuvre’, the traditional understanding of revolution was accepted, whereby you attack and bring down your enemy (government or parliament) by coercive means. However, Gramsci surmised that before a coercive takeover could take place, the way had to be prepared through the ‘war of position’ – that a society could be captured through non-coercive means. Gramsci perpetuated the idea of ‘cultural hegemony’, explaining that society is dominated by elites and that these elites occupy cultural forming institutions, such as the courts, education, media, marketing and the church. Gramsci believed that by getting the right people into those positions of power, you could begin to gradually affect change from the inside; much like cooking a lobster, you start with low heat, not a boiling pan. This non-coercion would be particularly effective at conditioning and preparing people to accept the next stage, that being the coercive strike – the manoeuvre.
I believe that we have seen this play out over the last few years in the form of silencing, censoring or removing from the public sphere individuals who disagree with the status quo, those who refuse to bend the knee and signal publicly their virtue, or dare challenge the reckless bias that has appeared in the curriculum of our schools, colleges and universities. As George Orwell once said, “if you want to know who rules over you, look at who you are not allowed to criticise.” In this sense, the government sets change in motion through policy, enforced by the courts, police, councils and other agencies. This is then promoted through education and defended by our mainstream media, big business and ‘big tech’ via social media censorship and “fact-checking” online.
Words have meaning, and he who controls the meaning of words controls the debate. I recall growing up in the 1990s when society at large would scoff at the latest reports of “political correctness gone mad,” not realising that what we were seeing, was in fact, the birth of a new religion. A religion with a theology that mixes Christianity with political activism and redefines words to suit the aims of its adherents. Where gender no longer refers to biological sex, but rather interchangeable feelings of maleness and femaleness, and how you identify on any given day. Where homosexuality is no longer a sinful sexual practice but a legitimate expression of love, and abortion no longer the murder that it is, but rather a progressive feminist right in the fight for fair healthcare against a patriarchal system that is dominated by old white men. ‘My body my choice’, not God’s body and His will be done. This new ‘woke’ religion utilises the neo-Marxist framework to conceptualise a person, group, or social problem as being affected by a number of discriminations and disadvantages. Again, feeding the idea of there only being the oppressed and the oppressor.
CRITICAL RACE THEORY
An obvious proponent of this way of thinking today is ‘Critical Race Theory’ (CRT), which is a sub-discipline of the broader Critical Theory. This social critique of society and culture relies upon Marxist ideas of power and was established by the German philosopher and sociologist, Max Horkheimer, and others at The Frankfurt School in the 1930s. Horkheimer described the theory as seeking to “liberate human beings from the circumstances that enslave them,” and CRT takes the view that the “law and legal institutions are inherently racist and that race itself, instead of being biologically grounded and natural, is a socially constructed concept that is used by white people to further their economic and political interests at the expense of people of colour.” Effectively, viewing the world through a lens of racialism, and concluding that everything in it is in some way racist. Now whilst as Christians we would agree that racism in all forms is abhorrent and sinful, we would also recognise that in the eyes of God there are just two races on earth today; those that are in Adam and those in the saviour Jesus Christ. Our identity is, therefore, to be found in the One who saved us, dying on the cross so that we might be washed clean of our sins, not in our skin colour, sexuality or perceived privilege. We cannot serve two masters.
In October 2020 many news outlets in the UK reported that during a debate on Black History Month, the then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Equalities Kemi Badenoch described “the promotion of Critical Race Theory” as a “dangerous trend in race relations” and “an ideology that sees my blackness as victimhood and their whiteness as oppression.” Following on from this the British government declared that it was opposed to CRT being taught in the classroom. Interestingly though, Badenoch did admit that some schools had “decided to openly support the anti-capitalist Black Lives Matter group, often fully aware that they have a statutory duty to be politically impartial” before adding that “we know that the Black Lives Matter movement is political.”
This is something that I had first-hand experience with during the coronavirus outbreak, when my children, who usually attend a local state school, were being educated at home. During one particular lesson, I was somewhat shocked to hear my teenage son’s English teacher promote Critical Race Theory, at one point claiming that “only brown people” could dress as Muslims, whilst warning the children about the dangers of “cultural appropriation.” The teacher then went on to read from the book ‘The Hate U Give’, which markets itself as being inspired by the Black Lives Matter movement. A movement whose chief aims are to dismantle capitalism, abolish prisons, defund the police, get rid of borders and boldly proclaim that “if change doesn’t happen we will burn down the system.” Patrisse Cullors, one of three women responsible for founding Black Lives Matter, described herself as a “trained Marxist” in 2015, whilst the UK’s former BLM leader Sasha Johnson wrote that “the white man will not be our equal but our slave” on a social media post in early 2021.
I contacted my son’s headteacher and explained that I had grown up in the shadow of the American civil rights movement, which called for us to judge a person by the content of their character, not the colour of their skin, before stating that BLM is not a group whose ethos should be encouraged or promoted in any school without a sound understanding of the agenda being pushed by the group. In response, I received a curt reply that did not address the substance of my initial complaint.
Be under no illusion that this form of education is here to stay, firmly rooted as it is in UK schools up and down the country. We must also acknowledge culture’s successful capture and redefinition of words; that when phrases like “anti-racism” are used, those utilising the term are in fact referring to the dismantling of our institutions and society as we know it. Ibram Kendi, a prominent spokesperson on this subject in the US, equates ‘anti-racism’ as in effect being “anti-capitalism.” This mindset has nothing to do with actually standing against individual cases of racism, but speaks more of a Marxist takeover, demanding reparations and redistributing wealth. In recognising this as a form of theft, we should view the ideology as being in violation of the eighth commandment, that thou shall not steal, and consider it empty philosophy and vain deceit not after Christ, that we as Christians are to war against.
QUEER THEORY
In 1989, ‘Stonewall’ was formed by a group of prominent political activists in response to the government’s passing of a piece of legislation called Section 28, which banned the promotion of homosexuality in British schools. Thirty years on, and the group proudly proclaim that almost every child in the UK now has “access to an LGBTQ-inclusive education as part of the national curriculum.” This then is another tenet of Critical Theory known widely as ‘Queer Theory’.
The Department of Education states that schools must ensure that they comply with the relevant provisions of the Equality Act (2010) under which race, sexual orientation and gender-reassignment are among the protected characteristics. These ‘protected characteristics’ also include age, disability, civil partnership and religion or belief. Again, viewing the world through that Marxist lens of society being nothing more than a collection of oppressed identity groups. By definition then, teacher training and school subjects are all framed in this way and have been for many years. This anti-Christian curriculum is now present throughout the education system, particularly in the Social Sciences, and affects children of all ages.
For younger children currently in primary education, the UK government requires that teaching on sex should be accompanied by a “balanced presentation of opposing views.” However, books promoted in my own children’s Church of England primary school include:
Red – A book about a blue crayon mistakenly labelled as “red” suffers an identity crisis in this picture book. “Funny, insightful and colourful, Red: A Crayon’s Story, is about being true to your inner self and following your own path despite obstacles that may come your way.”
And Tango Makes Three – “The heart-warming true story of two penguins who create a non-traditional family. At the penguin house at the Central Park Zoo, two penguins named Roy and Silo were a little bit different from the others. But their desire for a family was the same. With the help of a kindly zookeeper, Roy and Silo got the chance to welcome a baby penguin of their very own.”
Stella Brings The Family – “Stella’s class is having a Mother’s Day celebration, but what’s a girl with two daddies to do?”
All of the books listed here are aimed at children from as young as three years of age. All of the books feature colourful illustrations, and all are Marxist in substance, where traditional Christian teaching is stripped away in favour of language centred around identity groups, challenging conformity and being different. There is no Christ-centered alternative that offers anything close to a balance of “opposing views” in state-run education at this point, and it is a situation that is only getting worse.
In September 2019 the ‘Office for Standards in Education’, a non-ministerial department of the UK government, published its new assessment framework which extended the school’s curriculum beyond the “academic, technical or vocational.” Amanda Spielman, Ofsted’s Chief Inspector at the time, said that this was about “making clear that education is not just about teaching a good set of academic subjects really well. There is something a bit intangible and bigger than that, and it is making sure they recognise that.” An “appreciation of diversity” and “promoting respect for the different protected characteristics as defined by law,” are some of the essentials that the government believe prepare adolescent learners for life in modern Britain right now.
But if things are bad in England, then north of the border the situation has become desperate, with the Socialist government there producing a 70-page document entitled ‘Supporting Transgender Pupils in School’. Scottish authorities now treat an individual’s self-declared gender as an unquestionable fact, even when this identity is being voiced by very young children, and without the knowledge or consent of their parents. In one Edinburgh school, a headteacher recently facilitated a ‘Wear a Skirt to School Day’ to encourage boys there to show support for “diversity and feminism.”
God is no longer welcome in the classroom, replaced instead by an idol of numb tolerance that softens hearts and minds to reject God in later life, too – and these children will be the teachers, judges, politicians and policy-makers of tomorrow. This is Critical Theory in practice, and whilst this approach to social philosophy might not be taught in schools, the doctrine that underpins it is a thread woven throughout the curriculum. It is in one sense a sleight of hand, where the traditional, proper understanding of gender and family is no longer represented, no longer promoted and no longer desired.
The fact that the ‘Education Select Committee’ is seeking to leverage further control over home educators by introducing a statutory home-educated register, should rightly be a cause of concern for many Christian parents who have opted to bypass our disastrously lopsided Marxist education system.
