Examples of the Neo-Marxist Conversational Dialectic.
There are, unfortunately, many, many examples of Neo-Marxist Dialectic in the Church. I have selected several leaders whose speech or writing can be examined for evidence of the Neo-Marxist Dialectic. By studying these, the reader can learn to spot Neo-Marxist Dialectic in action – and thereby more quickly spot false teachers before they become explicit in their false teaching.
Tim Keller
Some teachers, such as Tim Keller, have explicitly endorsed key ideas of Critical Race Theory. He penned a
piece in which he misapplied the Biblical teaching on systemic evil – which is applied only to nations or the entirety of humanity- to a racial category.
Ed Stetzer
Stetzer had a whole
series promoting the Critical Racy Theory concept of white fragility posted on
Christianity today, which was then removed upon the advent of controversy, While the post was removed, the
Facebook referer was kept in tact.
Russell Moore
Moore has been moving increasingly to the Left, promoting Critical Race Theory(CRT). He write an article in the
New York Times that affirm the CRT meta-narrative of racism. Throughout this article he engages in racial gatekeeping gaslights pretty much every white Christian as an oppressor and lifts up dark-skinned Christians. Moore even goes as far as to suggest that god is engaging in some kind of DEI motivated affirmative action in deciding where to bring revival.
When many secular Americans think of evangelicals, they think of old, white precinct captains in Iowa or old, white television evangelists and their media empires. But that’s not what evangelical Christianity is. Evangelical Christianity is committed to conserving the orthodoxy of the church, is rooted in the authority of the Bible over every competing authority and has a zeal to see people come to Christ by being “born again” through faith in him.
The center of gravity for both orthodoxy and evangelism is not among Anglo suburban evangelicals but among African Anglicans and Asian Calvinists and Latin American Pentecostals. The vital core of American evangelicalism today can be found in churches that are multiethnic and increasingly dominated by immigrant communities.
There are multiple problems with this, as Ben Simpson
notes, Moore thesis is a false dichotomy. These who vote for Trump are not primarily motivated by a racial meta-narrative
His assumption seems to be that this reality bothers white American Christians who support or sympathize with Trump. In my experience, the exact opposite is true. My ministry context has been predominantly among white American Christians, many of whom support or sympathize with Trump, and they have gladly prayed, given, and gone to the nations so that the nations might be saved. I have observed them rejoice in worshipping with brothers and sisters of other ethnicities and nationalities. I’ve watched them weep over worldwide lostness. I’ve seen them sacrifice greatly to reach the nations with the gospel. I’ve listened to them rejoice that people from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation are being saved. Yet many of these people support or sympathize with Trump. How can this be?
Dr. Moore unfortunately has set up a false dichotomy: you are either against Trump and his ideas or you are against the church. Dr. Moore’s rhetoric has gone too far.
The “false dichotomy” that Ben Simpson rightly critiques is an essential feature of any Neo-Marxist dialectic, which depends on describing every conflict as a dialectical dichotomy between oppressor classes and the oppressed classes. A Neo-Marxist dialectic in Critical Race Theory must pit whites against non-whites, with whites being oppressors. Most white Evangelicals are enthusiastic about the gospel going forth to all races because God loves all of humanity, standing in acute contrast to Moore’s zeal for God working only among non-whites as a condemnation for the white guilt of the guilty whites in his CRT-infested mind.
Matt Chandler
Chandler, who was pastor at Village Church which was known for their wokeness. “While he doesn’t endorse critical race theory, because it “has no vision for the future” Chandler believes it’s “really helpful in helping us understand how we got where we are. It helps us make sense of the past.”
And while it took him a while to accept the idea of white privilege, Chandler, who says he grew up in a predominantly black section of La Marque, Texas, accepts it as valid.
“It took a while even in my own life to realize that even though that was my background and there was a socio-economic privilege that I was not walking in, there was a layer of not having the advantage or not having the special right or even a certain level of immunity that I was granted, even being poor white trash that some of my African American friends didn’t get,” he said.
The concept of white privilege is not a helpful conceptual tool. For starters, casting it as privilege suggests that whites do not deserve the blessings they have and should be regarded as oppressors, in accordance with a Neo-Marxist Dialectic. When one looks at racial disparities – and they do exist – one will find that wealth and socio-economic status play a bigger role than race. One
study concluded
“Racial/ethnic and gender differences were small across socioemotional outcomes, and in fact, White boys were outperformed on several outcomes…Results show the clear influence of race/ethnicity in determining membership to the most disadvantaged classes…
…With the exception of educational assessments, gender and racial/ethnic inequalities within classes are either not very pronounced or in the opposite direction (e.g. racial/ethnic and gender minorities outperform White males), but differences in outcomes across classes are stark. The strength of the association between race/ethnicity and class membership, and the reduced racial/ethnic and gender inequalities within classes of advantage and disadvantage, attest to the importance of socioeconomic status and wealth in explaining racial/ethnic inequalities.
If wealth and socio-economic status play a bigger role than race in explaining racial disparities, then perhaps we should talk about education and fatherlessness rather than white privilege. White privilege is not supported by evidence, and it only makes sense if one
presupposes the meta-narrative of racism presented by critical race theory, the understanding that “
White privilege can only be understood in relation to Critical Race Theory, specifically the notion that racism is central and endemic, through Whiteness as property and interest convergence.”
JD Greear
Greear employed a textbook example of the Neo-Marxist Dialectic during an
SBC Presidential Address in 2020 when He embraced Black Lives Matter (also
here. At around the 8:50 mark in his address, he addresses the subject of Black Lives Matter. He very carefully and convincingly crafts his words in a very well done textbook example. He presents blacks as a victim class, framing them in the Neo-Marxist Dialectic he is using. He is also framing the specific branding “Black Lives Matter” as a gospel issue as his way of pushing it into focus. There are two problems right away here. One is while race issues are important, are they as important as fundamental issues of the faith such as substitutionary atonement. We need to be careful about what we set apart as a gospel issue. Being an important cultural issues does not make it a gospel issue. It would not be a gospel issue unless the meta-narrative of racism is part of the gospel. The second problem is that he is elevating the branding itself as a gospel issue and not race issues generically. One can oppose racism even while rejecting the meta-narrative of critical race theory. I would argue that Critical Race Theory is about the worst way to attempt racial healing because it exacerbates racial divisions. The Bible teaches us to pursue racial color-blindness and build our understanding of human rights on the foundation that humanity is created in the image of God. Greear does indeed speak of this, but we shall soon see that he is merely doing the fallacy of the bailey and the motte. In the quote below he is pushing a motte definition of Black Lives Matter intended solely to defend against criticism and does not represent any real world application
We know that many in our country — particularly our brothers and sisters of color — are hurting,” Greear says. “Southern Baptists, we need to say it clearly as a Gospel issue: black lives matter. Of course, black lives matter. Our black brothers and sisters are made in the image of God….”
Greear is redefining Black Lives Matter in terms of the creation of humanity in the image of God. If humanity is in the image of God and the heir to certain dignities, then black are also in the image of God and heir to those same dignities. There are some commentators who hijack the Black Lives Matter branding and plug it into the Biblical paradigm for race relations. We are instructed in Scripture that the categories of race, gender, and socioeconomic status are subordinate to our identity in Christ Jesus. Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (also Col 3:11).” It must also be kept in mind that not everybody who uses the term Black Lives Matter is a Neo-Marxist or even has any understanding of the Marxist roots of this movement. We should give grace to everyday people when we speak of such issues – more grace than I am prepared to give Dr Greear. He is not your average person. He has a Ph.D in theology and was the President of the Southern Baptist Convention. He should know better. the question remains: Is he actually plugging “Black Lives Matter” into a Biblical world-view. Sadly, the answer is no. He proceeds to switch back to the bailey definition that is the day-to-day working definition of Black Lives Matter that is used by its intellectual and political leadership.
“Let’s not respond by saying ‘all lives matter,’” Greear continues. “We understand that many of our black brothers and sisters have perceived for many years that the due processes of justice have not worked for them as they have for some others in our country….”
If we are building our doctrine of the worth of black people based on creation in the image of God, then that should lead to understand that all lives matter, including those of blacks. I would argue that the understanding that humanity is created in the image of God carries with it a moral duty to teach that all lives matter. Greear, however, wants us to walk this back. He invokes the Biblical teaching than humanity has been created in the image of God only to tell us to refrain from pushing that toward its logical conclusions. Greear is advocating that racial healing NOT be based on Biblical principles. Why? His last sentence is an insinuation that whites are the oppressors. Greear’s discourse here is not consistent with a Biblical approach, but perfectly consistent with a Neo-Marxist Dialectic. There’s more below the video of the full speech below. His remarks on Black Lives Matter begin around the 8:50 mark.
Greear has not finished his gatekeeping and framing. He proceeds to minimize the dangers of Black Lives Matter to cover his plausible deniability. He proceeds to claim that Black Lives Matter has been hijacked, suggesting that the darker, Neo-Marxist elements which defy justification are merely an aberration and excess. On the contrary, the political movement is a textbook application of the philosophical underpinnings that are roo9ted in Neo-Marxism and its child Critical Race Theory.
Greear says he has serious reservations about Black Lives Matter’s official policy proposals as listed on the website have been “hijacked by political operatives” and are “deeply at odds with my own.” As an example, he says, “saying bald things like ‘defund the police’ is unhelpful and deeply disrespectful.”
Conclusion
A Neo-Marxist Dialectic is often applied to advance agendas informed by Neo-Marxism and its child philosophies when direct promotion is inconvenient. A Neo-Marxist Dialectic allows its proponents to nominally deny adherence to Neo-Marxist philosophies while effectively promoting them. This dialectic provides them tools to rig conversation to ensure that it leads all of its participants where the manipulators want them to go by using well-known media tools of gatekeeping, framing, priming, and agenda setting .
