Over the past several weeks, we have heard a lot about critical race theory (CRT), but most people who live in Cape May County do not believe it exists in our schools. So, I recently attended the Lower Township School Board meetings to learn more about it and to get some answers. What I learned is that it does exist in Cape May County, but I was limited to four minutes to make comments and got none of my questions answered. I, therefore, decided to write a two-part commentary to delve into this topic, so that the readers know how dangerous CRT is, and to explain why we should be outraged over the fact that our school boards are allowing it to happen.
According to Wikipedia, the basic tenets of CRT are that racism and disparate racial outcomes are the result of complex, changing, and often subtle social and institutional dynamics, rather than explicit and intentional prejudices in individuals. In other words, racism is systemic, and the evidence is in the disparity of outcome. So, the way to combat this social injustice is to alter the outcome.
With that in mind, earlier this year, New Jersey adopted a law which requires all school districts to include instructions that highlight and promote diversity, including economic diversity, equity, inclusion, tolerance, and belonging in connection with gender and sexual orientation, race and ethnicity, disabilities, and religious tolerance. It goes on to require that students in grades K-12 examine the impact that unconscious bias and economic disparities have at both an individual level and on society, as a whole.
Although the superintendent said that they would not be teaching CRT, the board said they would be providing instructions consistent with this new law. The problem is that this new law is CRT.
The words “diversity, equity and inclusion” all seem noble, and most people see no problem with them. But, if you dig deeper, you will see that these words are a trojan horse for CRT and a culmination of a decades-long effort by the radical left to bring Marxism into our nation, and what better place to start than with the indoctrination of our children.
Most people got complacent in thinking that the fall of the Berlin Wall, in 1989, and the collapse of the Soviet Union settled the matter once and for all in favor of liberty and capitalism over the bondage of communism. But it wasn’t that easy, and over the past three decades, the Marxist proponents regrouped and re-emerged under the guise of identity politics, with buzz terms like social justice, political correctness, systemic racism, unconscious bias and white supremacy.
In an opinion article written by Christopher Rufo in the New York Post, he explained that traditional Marxism in nations such as the Soviet Union, China and Cuba focused on the classes. Karl Marx believed that the primary characteristic of industrial societies was the imbalance of power between capitalists and workers. The solution to that imbalance was revolution whereby the workers would eventually gain consciousness of their plight, seize the means of production, overthrow the capitalist class and usher in a new socialist society.
The problem was that this methodology did not work in the U.S. because it had a large middle class and rapidly improving standards of living. Most Americans believed in the American dream — that they could succeed in life through education, hard work, good citizenship, and faith in God Almighty.
So, the focus shifted from “class warfare” to “race warfare.” But the early proponents of this revolutionary coalition in the U.S. lost out in the 1960s to the civil rights movement, which sought instead the fulfillment of the American promise of freedom and equality under the law. This led to the Civil Rights Act and other laws that prohibit discrimination and provide equal opportunities to all people regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, religious affiliation, or sexual orientation.
Not to be undone, the concept of CRT evolved, which focuses on social justice, systemic racism and equality of outcome, and uses words like “diversity, equity and inclusion.” Again, these are worthy aspirations, but in the context of this new law, which focuses on race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, and gender identity, all prefaced with an unconscious bias and economic disparities, they are exactly what CRT is all about.
This law is divisive and aimed at a system of redistribution of resources and governmental control over what we think, what we do, and what we are entitled to have. This is the goal of socialism, and it has no place in our schools.
Next week, I will focus on the word “equity” and how it is used to accomplish the socialist agenda in the context of this new law.
ED. NOTE: Monzo is an attorney in Court House, where he has practiced law for 32 years. He is a graduate of Temple University School of Law, where he also received a master’s of law in taxation. His practice areas are in real estate, commercial transactions, taxation, and health care. He is also president of the local chapter of the Christian Legal Society.
