18 January, 2022

Why Do We Keep Hearing About Gramsci, Who Never Practiced Theories?

Posted by Socrates in 'social construct', 'social construction', Alan Freeman, Critical Race Theory, Critical Theory, Cultural Marxism, culture of critique, Gramsci, postMarxism, postmodern baloney, postmodernism, postmodernism and reality denial at 3:32 pm | Permanent Link

“Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Communist leader and theoretician who is considered the forefather of Critical Race Theory…”

The “forefather” of Critical Race Theory? Nope. Gramsci (1891-1937) spent much of his time in an Italian prison (good!), writing about silly political theories that he never got to practice, unlike Georg Lukacs, for example. Gramsci’s “cultural hegemony” theory was actually early “social constructionism” before the latter became popular circa 1960 [1]. There’s nothing new under the Marxist sun; it’s all ridiculous “theory” that is tweaked and re-tweaked endlessly. For a theory to be valid, it has to work in practice. But Marxism doesn’t work. In fact, it’s not even supposed to work. It’s supposed to destroy. Marxism equals “political time bombs” which keep exploding around the world: Cuba, Vietnam, etc.

Critical Race Theory (CRT) was originally called Critical Legal Studies (CLS, circa 1977), which was “critical theory applied to American law.” It sprang from both Frankfurt School “Critical Theory” (1937; which was Jewish) and from Postmodernist “Social Constructionism” (which was also Jewish) [2]. You can’t “Italian” your way out of that fact. More than that, CRT came largely from the Jewish law professor, Alan David Freeman, i.e., he was the “point man” for CRT after the initial birth of it as CLS [3].



[1] According to Gramsci, “hegemonic culture propagates its own values and norms so that they become the “common sense” values of all (of the people)” — Wikipedia, Jan. 2022 (i.e., society’s values and norms are unnatural, forced, bourgeoisie “social constructs”; “rich White men created all the norms and values in society — i.e., race, gender — in an effort to enslave Blacks, women and midgets!” says the crazy theory).

[2] the “Social Constructionism” facet of Postmodernist philosophy was Jewish, and was perfected by Jews such as Karl Mannheim, Edmund Husserl, Alfred Schutz, Peter L. Berger (who was a convert from Judaism to Christianity), and Max Scheler (from his “sociology of knowledge” theory).

[3] Freeman admitted his Jewishness in print in 1989:

“Alan Freeman represents the writer that virtually all persons identify as the leading spokesman for the CLS (i.e., Critical Legal Studies, which was an earlier form of CRT; the CRT movement began where CLS left off; it might be called “Phase II” of CLS. It began circa 1989) response to racism. In fact, his article Legitimizing Racial Discrimination Through Antidiscrimination Law: A Critical Review of Supreme Court Doctrine, stands out as one of the finest examples of the CLS scholarship, and probably has had the greatest influence in winning what attention the CLSM has gained from persons of color.”

-— from the law review article “The Critical Legal Studies Movement and Racism: Useful Analytics and Guides for Social Action or an Irrelevant Modern Legal Scepticism (Brit. spelling) and Solipsism?” at Mitchell Hamline School of Law, Vol. 13, Iss. 4, Article 3, 1987. Freeman acknowledged his Jewish roots in an article in 1989: “Jews can celebrate their diversity and their tradition without being hysterical apologists for the existing order. We need not all follow the lead of those like Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, the paradigm of assimilationist success…” — Alan Freeman and Betty Mensch, “Current Debate: Affirmative Action: The Misplaced Self-Delusion of Some Jewish Males”; Tikkun, Jan. 1989. First published in Tikkun, but also in Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law, 1-1-1989;

CLS began as a series of conversations between Morton Horwitz, a Jewish law professor at Harvard University, and Duncan Kennedy, a non-Jewish law professor, also at Harvard. As their new ideology took shape, more academics became involved with it. Soon, a CLS conference was planned. Roughly 25 academics were invited to the conference, which was held at the University of Wisconsin at Madison in March 1977. Of the academics who were invited to the conference, some were Marxists and some were not, some were law professors, some were sociologists and political scientists, and roughly 80% of those academics were Jews.

Comments are closed.