What do you think?
Rate this book
All One in Christ: A Catholic Critique of Racism and Critical Race Theory
What does the Catholic Church teach about racism? What should Catholics think about Critical Race Theory, which is currently being widely promoted in the name of antiracism All One in Christ lucidly explains the Church's clear and consistent condemnation of racism, showing that the condemnation is not a recent development but deeply rooted in centuries of papal teaching and Scholastic theology. This book also demonstrates that Critical Race Theory, far from being a remedy for racism, is, in fact, a new and insidious form of racism that cannot be reconciled with the social teaching of the Church and the call of Christ. Edward Feser exhorts Catholics to oppose Critical Race Theory—precisely because they are opposed to racial injustice. They must reaffirm that all human beings are rational creatures capable of knowledge and charity and redemption from sin through grace.
163 pages, Paperback
Published August 31, 2022
24 people are currently reading
182 people want to read
About the author
Edward Feser
32 books337 followersEdward Feser is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Pasadena City College in Pasadena, California. He has been a Visiting Assistant Professor at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles and a Visiting Scholar at the Social Philosophy and Policy Center at Bowling Green State University in Bowling Green, Ohio. He holds a Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of California at Santa Barbara, an M.A. in religion from the Claremont Graduate School, and a B.A. in philosophy and religious studies from the California State University at Fullerton.
Called by National Review “one of the best contemporary writers on philosophy,” Feser is the author of On Nozick, Philosophy of Mind, Locke, The Last Superstition: A Refutation of the New Atheism, and Aquinas, and editor of The Cambridge Companion to Hayek and Aristotle on Method and Metaphysics. He is also the author of many academic articles. His primary academic research interests are in the philosophy of mind, moral and political philosophy, and the philosophy of religion.
Feser also writes on politics and culture, from a conservative point of view; and on religion, from a traditional Roman Catholic perspective. In this connection, his work has appeared in such publications as The American, The American Conservative, City Journal, The Claremont Review of Books, Crisis, First Things, Liberty, National Review, New Oxford Review, Public Discourse, Reason, and TCS Daily.
He lives in Los Angeles with his wife and six children.
Called by National Review “one of the best contemporary writers on philosophy,” Feser is the author of On Nozick, Philosophy of Mind, Locke, The Last Superstition: A Refutation of the New Atheism, and Aquinas, and editor of The Cambridge Companion to Hayek and Aristotle on Method and Metaphysics. He is also the author of many academic articles. His primary academic research interests are in the philosophy of mind, moral and political philosophy, and the philosophy of religion.
Feser also writes on politics and culture, from a conservative point of view; and on religion, from a traditional Roman Catholic perspective. In this connection, his work has appeared in such publications as The American, The American Conservative, City Journal, The Claremont Review of Books, Crisis, First Things, Liberty, National Review, New Oxford Review, Public Discourse, Reason, and TCS Daily.
He lives in Los Angeles with his wife and six children.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
October 15, 2022
An important book in the line of James Lindsay's Cynical Theories and Race Marxism, but from an emphatically Catholic perspective, against the philosophy/political ideology of Critical Race Theory. The book is short, under 140 pages, but packed. There are seven chapters
1. Church Teaching Against Racism: This chapter sets out Catholic Church teaching stretching back as far as St. Paul against racist ideas, but as racism (as known today) became more prevalent in the late 1800s, the Church responded with Papal statements opposing anyone who “exalts [their] race, or the people” perverts the order of the world God created. Catholic opposition to racism rests on the pillars of “nature and grace”, the author writes, the first being the common human nature we all share, and the latter the destiny we are all offered through grace. Racial division has nothing to do with either.
2. Late Scholastics and Early Modern Popes Against Slavery: This chapter lists and quotes from may sources in the Church’s history opposing human slavery, including a bull from 1537 opposing enslavement of Indians or “any other peoples” Christian explorers should discover and demanding they be allowed to enjoy their possessions and liberty unmolested, regardless of religion.
3. The Rights and Duties of Nations and Immigrants: This chapter argues that nations and patriotism are good things, wealthy nations should assist and allow in poor immigrants, but are allowed to do so in controlled ways that benefit rather than harm those nations, and that immigrants, while preserving their culture, should assimilate as far as obeying the laws of their new nation.
4. What is Critical Race Theory: A pithy, 16-page chapter that sums it up nicely and should be read. CRT is Marxism, but with race.
5. Philosophical Problems with Critical Race Theory: This is the longest chapter which makes sense given the author is a philosophy professor. He points out many basic philosophical problems and fallacies committed by CRT writers, which they attempt – often successfully – to hide behind a smoke screen of bombast and ridicule. For example, CRT relies heavily on “the crudest” of relevancy fallacies – abusive ad hominem – asserting that any opposition to their views is racist. Generally, CRT’s philosophical failures lie in its refusal to deal with criticism in any fashion other than attacking the messenger, attacking the source, attacking the reputation, poisoning the well, circular argumentation – all methods that ignore the main issue: is what their critic says true? CRT never addresses that question. Examples: “All white people are racist, and any white person who disagrees is simply masking their racism.” This is circular, and, most significantly, never addresses whatever the person’s disagreement is. Is that person’s argument true? There is much more. This is the longest chapter.
6. Social Scientific Objections to Critical Race Theory. This chapter details how CRT’s claims do not stand up to scientific scrutiny. Its principal claim – that any disparity between races in a professional field or economic class is evidence of racist policies – ignores so many other variables that the claim is indefensible. Evidence provided shows that cultural differences explain more than racial differences, and not all members of any race come from the same cultural background – and cultures change. The author uses a lot of Thomas Sowell here.
7. Catholicism Verses Critical Race Theory. This chapter summarizes why CRT is simply not Christian and is incompatible with Catholic faith. It includes a discussion comparing the tenets of CRT to those of Nazism, and there isn’t much stretching needed to make them fit. Liberation theology is rejected because it raises “the liberation from servitude of an earthly and temporal kind” over individual “liberation from sin” (quoting Ratzinger). The nub though, again quoting Ratzinger, is this “It is painful … to be confronted with the illusion, so essentially unchristian … that a new man and a new world can be created, not by calling each individual to conversion, but only by changing the social and economic structures.” This is in fact the flaw of every political movement since Marx.
1. Church Teaching Against Racism: This chapter sets out Catholic Church teaching stretching back as far as St. Paul against racist ideas, but as racism (as known today) became more prevalent in the late 1800s, the Church responded with Papal statements opposing anyone who “exalts [their] race, or the people” perverts the order of the world God created. Catholic opposition to racism rests on the pillars of “nature and grace”, the author writes, the first being the common human nature we all share, and the latter the destiny we are all offered through grace. Racial division has nothing to do with either.
2. Late Scholastics and Early Modern Popes Against Slavery: This chapter lists and quotes from may sources in the Church’s history opposing human slavery, including a bull from 1537 opposing enslavement of Indians or “any other peoples” Christian explorers should discover and demanding they be allowed to enjoy their possessions and liberty unmolested, regardless of religion.
3. The Rights and Duties of Nations and Immigrants: This chapter argues that nations and patriotism are good things, wealthy nations should assist and allow in poor immigrants, but are allowed to do so in controlled ways that benefit rather than harm those nations, and that immigrants, while preserving their culture, should assimilate as far as obeying the laws of their new nation.
4. What is Critical Race Theory: A pithy, 16-page chapter that sums it up nicely and should be read. CRT is Marxism, but with race.
5. Philosophical Problems with Critical Race Theory: This is the longest chapter which makes sense given the author is a philosophy professor. He points out many basic philosophical problems and fallacies committed by CRT writers, which they attempt – often successfully – to hide behind a smoke screen of bombast and ridicule. For example, CRT relies heavily on “the crudest” of relevancy fallacies – abusive ad hominem – asserting that any opposition to their views is racist. Generally, CRT’s philosophical failures lie in its refusal to deal with criticism in any fashion other than attacking the messenger, attacking the source, attacking the reputation, poisoning the well, circular argumentation – all methods that ignore the main issue: is what their critic says true? CRT never addresses that question. Examples: “All white people are racist, and any white person who disagrees is simply masking their racism.” This is circular, and, most significantly, never addresses whatever the person’s disagreement is. Is that person’s argument true? There is much more. This is the longest chapter.
6. Social Scientific Objections to Critical Race Theory. This chapter details how CRT’s claims do not stand up to scientific scrutiny. Its principal claim – that any disparity between races in a professional field or economic class is evidence of racist policies – ignores so many other variables that the claim is indefensible. Evidence provided shows that cultural differences explain more than racial differences, and not all members of any race come from the same cultural background – and cultures change. The author uses a lot of Thomas Sowell here.
7. Catholicism Verses Critical Race Theory. This chapter summarizes why CRT is simply not Christian and is incompatible with Catholic faith. It includes a discussion comparing the tenets of CRT to those of Nazism, and there isn’t much stretching needed to make them fit. Liberation theology is rejected because it raises “the liberation from servitude of an earthly and temporal kind” over individual “liberation from sin” (quoting Ratzinger). The nub though, again quoting Ratzinger, is this “It is painful … to be confronted with the illusion, so essentially unchristian … that a new man and a new world can be created, not by calling each individual to conversion, but only by changing the social and economic structures.” This is in fact the flaw of every political movement since Marx.
October 20, 2022
Feser's conclusion is that CRT is gnostic, on three counts:
1. Gnosticism sees evil as pervasive and "enmeshed in the established order of things"... Thus "for Marxists it is identified with capitalism;.. For CRT, it is "white supremacy".
2. Special knowledge. Gnostics believe that only those with special knowledge would see through the appearances of things to "the underlying evil reality". CRT claims to see the unseen, unconscious racism embedded, especially, in white people. Kendi and DiAngelo are the new Marcions.
3. The gnostics tended towards a Manichean division of the world into forces of pure evil and of pure good, with only those armed with the "gnosis" able to resist. CRT folks have the gnosis, so they are OK.
Feser is avery capable christian philosopher who takes down the CRT ideology one brick at a time.
Note: the title is explicitly RC, and many of the arguments are based RCC statements on race etc. Protestants will want a bit more than this, but the book was well argued and cogent.
1. Gnosticism sees evil as pervasive and "enmeshed in the established order of things"... Thus "for Marxists it is identified with capitalism;.. For CRT, it is "white supremacy".
2. Special knowledge. Gnostics believe that only those with special knowledge would see through the appearances of things to "the underlying evil reality". CRT claims to see the unseen, unconscious racism embedded, especially, in white people. Kendi and DiAngelo are the new Marcions.
3. The gnostics tended towards a Manichean division of the world into forces of pure evil and of pure good, with only those armed with the "gnosis" able to resist. CRT folks have the gnosis, so they are OK.
Feser is avery capable christian philosopher who takes down the CRT ideology one brick at a time.
Note: the title is explicitly RC, and many of the arguments are based RCC statements on race etc. Protestants will want a bit more than this, but the book was well argued and cogent.
January 22, 2023
Simple, solid little primary on CRT ideology. Razor sharp as usual from Feser. One suspects the engagement with the original sources of CRT could have gone deeper, but I for one am glad he’s spared us that drudgery. He shows the wisdom of the Church’s social teaching while exposing the many errors and dangers of the CRT framework, and it’s fundamental incompatibility with Christianity.
February 3, 2023
All One in Christ would be a fine place for a Christian beginning an endeavor to understand the errors in Critical Race Theory to start (and, despite the book's subtitle, this goes for Protestants as well as Catholics). There's not much new to Feser's analysis, outside of an extended treatment of the logical fallacies at the root of all argumentation in favor of CRT, but he helpfully outlines theological, philosophical, and empirical challenges to the ideology. Even so, the reader is likely to remain flummoxed that anyone, much less large numbers of people, could be swayed by an ideology so absurd.
May 7, 2025
It's worth mentioning here that like many people I was at one point very sympathetic to critical race theory. Like many liberals at the time it came out (I wouldn't call myself a liberal now), I read Ta-Nehisi Coates's "Between the World and Me" and found it riveting. I followed the Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin cases and was disgusted by what I saw as the double-standard for the way black youth were treated as opposed to white youth. In short, in 2014/2015, I was of the mind our country was in need of a racial reckoning.
What changed for me? Two things. First slowly and then quickly, I became disgusted with identity politics and indentitarianism in general. Secondly, I became a Christian. I should also add that I was horrified by the murder of George Floyd and looked on approvingly at the marches and civil disobedience that followed in its wake. At some point, however, I noticed that in the book club I was in at the time the only group it was okay to speak despairingly of was white people, double so for white men. At this time, probably late 2021/early 2022, my two white children also started commenting to me of the way the "white race," "white people," and America was spoken about at school. This talk came in a few forms, mainly in the curriculum and in soliloquies from teachers that stressed "white supremacy," "colonialism," "systemic racism," and that America was "structurally racist."
After a while I realized I wasn't comfortable with my children thinking there was anything wrong with them because of their race. Just writing that sounds silly now, but it's hard for us to remember how bad things got in "peak woke" during the Covid lockdowns and after. And then on Easter Vigil 2023, I was baptized as a Christian.
How is all of this all related to Dr. Edward Feser's "All One if Christ"? Because the Christian principle that each human is made in the image of God isn't all we need to remember to treat the people around us with respect, dignity, and love, but it sure as heck gets us a long way.
The first part of the book addresses how the Catholic Church dealt with issues around race, specifically discriminatory behavior towards people because of their race, and what the Church has written about this behavior. Suffice to say, Catholicism has been "on the right side of history" throughout the centuries concerning slavery, discrimination, and colonial conquest. The fallible humans who make up the faith didn't always live up to the teachings of the Church, sometimes failing shockingly, but the teachings of the Church were clear and there to be read.
Another part of the book looks at specific authors, namely Robin DeAngelo and Ibram X. Kendi. Feser takes them to task with detailed critiques of their writing and their cultural projects in general. Everything Feser says here is correct. In the bright light of 2025, many of us clearly see (and have for several years) the entire woke project and anti-racism industry as the hustle and grift they so clearly are. Perhaps nothing, except open boarders, contributed more to Trumps's second victory as the average American's exhaustion with identity politics in all it guises, whether DEI, the sprawling and largely unaccountable NGO complex, censorship of right-wing voices during the Covid Era, and trans issues (I'm talking about the intolerance of those on the Left to even countenance trans-related issues being politically contestable. It was "shut up, bigot" all the way down). So reading Dr. Feser's book, published almost three years ago, is a salubrious reminder of what things were like at the time and why the revolt so strong (an almost 20% gain among Latino male votes for Trump from 2020 to 2024)
I strongly recommend his book whether you're a Catholic or not. Many, not all for sure, but many, secular liberals have even become exhausted by wokeness and want our country to return to "common sense," that is to say to the Judeo-Christian morality that has undergirded America for 400 years: treat people with respect, treat them as individuals, be kind, extend grace in order to expect grace, and behave honorably and with integrity. Of course, none of us are saints, so we fall short of these ideals to which we strive, but Americans don't need fancy academic jargon and analyses that divides up against one another and pits one group against another just because we sometimes fall short of instantiating a color-blind society.
What changed for me? Two things. First slowly and then quickly, I became disgusted with identity politics and indentitarianism in general. Secondly, I became a Christian. I should also add that I was horrified by the murder of George Floyd and looked on approvingly at the marches and civil disobedience that followed in its wake. At some point, however, I noticed that in the book club I was in at the time the only group it was okay to speak despairingly of was white people, double so for white men. At this time, probably late 2021/early 2022, my two white children also started commenting to me of the way the "white race," "white people," and America was spoken about at school. This talk came in a few forms, mainly in the curriculum and in soliloquies from teachers that stressed "white supremacy," "colonialism," "systemic racism," and that America was "structurally racist."
After a while I realized I wasn't comfortable with my children thinking there was anything wrong with them because of their race. Just writing that sounds silly now, but it's hard for us to remember how bad things got in "peak woke" during the Covid lockdowns and after. And then on Easter Vigil 2023, I was baptized as a Christian.
How is all of this all related to Dr. Edward Feser's "All One if Christ"? Because the Christian principle that each human is made in the image of God isn't all we need to remember to treat the people around us with respect, dignity, and love, but it sure as heck gets us a long way.
The first part of the book addresses how the Catholic Church dealt with issues around race, specifically discriminatory behavior towards people because of their race, and what the Church has written about this behavior. Suffice to say, Catholicism has been "on the right side of history" throughout the centuries concerning slavery, discrimination, and colonial conquest. The fallible humans who make up the faith didn't always live up to the teachings of the Church, sometimes failing shockingly, but the teachings of the Church were clear and there to be read.
Another part of the book looks at specific authors, namely Robin DeAngelo and Ibram X. Kendi. Feser takes them to task with detailed critiques of their writing and their cultural projects in general. Everything Feser says here is correct. In the bright light of 2025, many of us clearly see (and have for several years) the entire woke project and anti-racism industry as the hustle and grift they so clearly are. Perhaps nothing, except open boarders, contributed more to Trumps's second victory as the average American's exhaustion with identity politics in all it guises, whether DEI, the sprawling and largely unaccountable NGO complex, censorship of right-wing voices during the Covid Era, and trans issues (I'm talking about the intolerance of those on the Left to even countenance trans-related issues being politically contestable. It was "shut up, bigot" all the way down). So reading Dr. Feser's book, published almost three years ago, is a salubrious reminder of what things were like at the time and why the revolt so strong (an almost 20% gain among Latino male votes for Trump from 2020 to 2024)
I strongly recommend his book whether you're a Catholic or not. Many, not all for sure, but many, secular liberals have even become exhausted by wokeness and want our country to return to "common sense," that is to say to the Judeo-Christian morality that has undergirded America for 400 years: treat people with respect, treat them as individuals, be kind, extend grace in order to expect grace, and behave honorably and with integrity. Of course, none of us are saints, so we fall short of these ideals to which we strive, but Americans don't need fancy academic jargon and analyses that divides up against one another and pits one group against another just because we sometimes fall short of instantiating a color-blind society.
May 15, 2023
In light of the Church’s long standing history of opposing racism in all of its evil forms, Feser does a nice job explicating how and why the Church stands in opposition to critical race theory. That being said the book isn’t without its minor faults.
Admittedly, Feser’s style is a bit more dense due to the copious amounts of primary source “block text” citations included, the benefits of which greatly outweigh the density by familiarizing readers with some of the most well written encyclicals from various popes, incorporating St Thomas Aquinas, and citing the Catechism, among others. All of these references are great “further readings” for parents and children alike on the topic.
Feser aptly points out the logical fallacies of CRT, incorporates a compelling discourse on the importance of family (and unfortunate impacts of absent fathers), appropriately links CRTs widespread acceptance/ popularity with the increasing mental health, anxiety and depression ridden society showing how the CRT message plays on the mental psyche of this cadre of individuals and finally, compares modern CRT to Marxism, showing the maladies of each and how they are stunningly similar. The point of the book is clear, a rightly ordered Catholic cannot realistically support the fallacious ideology of Critical Racial Theory, precisely because of the Church’s long-standing denouncement of true racism.
The benefits of Feser’s book vastly outweigh the negatives I am about to expose, but they are nevertheless crucial suppositions. First, the book opens in unconvincing fashion. Feser, perhaps understandably, feels the need to defend the Church’s record on race and in doing so makes the under-developed argument that racism is a modern phenomenon. The argument is at best underdeveloped likely due to page/ time constraints given the book is not intended to be focused here, but rather Feser wants to get to the topic of CRT. At worst, the argument looks dogmatic and blind to a more textured history, and even a basic Old Testament biblical view of tribe v tribe consternation dating back to the Pentateuch. Between the extremes of worst and best, the result is likely that certain readers may bucket the entire work as a defense piece, before ever getting beyond Chapter 3. I strongly encourage readers to trek strongly through the first two chapters as the work gets much better thereafter. Secondly, there are at least two points in the novel where Feser argues against genetic arguments for racism. Feser clearly knows and understands logical responses of debate as he labels CRTs arguments at times with phrases such as ad hominem. These responses taking down genetic arguments for racism are not incorrect, but they do scream of a debaters “reductio ad absurdum” as arguments that different races are so genetically different are ridiculous at face value and ought to be tossed out as such.
Finally, the primary critique I have of Feser’s otherwise very thorough work, is that he neglects to fully develop a point made only in the final pages, “As Cardinal Ratzinger wrote, ‘It is… painful to be confronted with the illusion, so essentially un-Christian… that a new man and a new world can be created, not by calling each individual to conversion, but only by changing the social and economic structures.” Cardinal Ratzinger (who at the time of writing the Ratzinger Report quoted here was not yet Pope Benedict), was making a fundamental point of Catholicism and Christianity broadly. If we were meant for this world, things would be a lot different, but as it is we are not meant for this world, as Jesus tells us numerous times in scripture. No social structure, no silver bullet, exists to bring about the kingdom of heaven. The kingdom of heaven is not a “this world” reality yet to be fulfilled and realized. We are conduits of God on earth, co-heirs to eternal life in another realm. As such these “solve all” theories, are insufficient for those walking truly in the footsteps of Jesus Christ.
*** Further Reading ***
I like to incorporate other book recommendations in my reviews, and realize I have not done so here outside of simply suggesting a double click on the primary texts the author references. As such, to orient on the philosophical errors of CRT I would suggest Mortimer Adler’s “Ten Philosophical Mistakes”, especially chapter 7 which deals with what true freedom is, and therefore is the philosophical basis for debunking the CRT definition of equity. Adler was a brilliant Aristotelian-Thomistic philosopher at the University of Chicago with a lot to say on philosophical mindsets. After Adler, and in the same right, Benedict Ashley’s “Choosing a World-View and Value-System” touches on similar topics (admittedly more verbose and I prefer Adler’s work).
I also believe one of the strongest points in Feser’s book here is on fatherhood (and the family at large) and encourage folks looking for a deeper understanding of these concepts to read “The New Dad’s Playbook” by Benjamin Watson, which is an incredible testament to strong fatherhood by Christian ex-NFL tight end Benjamin Watson. Early in the book Ben touches on the importance of fathers “sticking around”. For a more explicitly Catholic view, “Man to Man, Dad to Dad” by Caulfield and Dolan pulls together fatherhood tips on a wide range of topics which is a nice supplement as well.
Admittedly, Feser’s style is a bit more dense due to the copious amounts of primary source “block text” citations included, the benefits of which greatly outweigh the density by familiarizing readers with some of the most well written encyclicals from various popes, incorporating St Thomas Aquinas, and citing the Catechism, among others. All of these references are great “further readings” for parents and children alike on the topic.
Feser aptly points out the logical fallacies of CRT, incorporates a compelling discourse on the importance of family (and unfortunate impacts of absent fathers), appropriately links CRTs widespread acceptance/ popularity with the increasing mental health, anxiety and depression ridden society showing how the CRT message plays on the mental psyche of this cadre of individuals and finally, compares modern CRT to Marxism, showing the maladies of each and how they are stunningly similar. The point of the book is clear, a rightly ordered Catholic cannot realistically support the fallacious ideology of Critical Racial Theory, precisely because of the Church’s long-standing denouncement of true racism.
The benefits of Feser’s book vastly outweigh the negatives I am about to expose, but they are nevertheless crucial suppositions. First, the book opens in unconvincing fashion. Feser, perhaps understandably, feels the need to defend the Church’s record on race and in doing so makes the under-developed argument that racism is a modern phenomenon. The argument is at best underdeveloped likely due to page/ time constraints given the book is not intended to be focused here, but rather Feser wants to get to the topic of CRT. At worst, the argument looks dogmatic and blind to a more textured history, and even a basic Old Testament biblical view of tribe v tribe consternation dating back to the Pentateuch. Between the extremes of worst and best, the result is likely that certain readers may bucket the entire work as a defense piece, before ever getting beyond Chapter 3. I strongly encourage readers to trek strongly through the first two chapters as the work gets much better thereafter. Secondly, there are at least two points in the novel where Feser argues against genetic arguments for racism. Feser clearly knows and understands logical responses of debate as he labels CRTs arguments at times with phrases such as ad hominem. These responses taking down genetic arguments for racism are not incorrect, but they do scream of a debaters “reductio ad absurdum” as arguments that different races are so genetically different are ridiculous at face value and ought to be tossed out as such.
Finally, the primary critique I have of Feser’s otherwise very thorough work, is that he neglects to fully develop a point made only in the final pages, “As Cardinal Ratzinger wrote, ‘It is… painful to be confronted with the illusion, so essentially un-Christian… that a new man and a new world can be created, not by calling each individual to conversion, but only by changing the social and economic structures.” Cardinal Ratzinger (who at the time of writing the Ratzinger Report quoted here was not yet Pope Benedict), was making a fundamental point of Catholicism and Christianity broadly. If we were meant for this world, things would be a lot different, but as it is we are not meant for this world, as Jesus tells us numerous times in scripture. No social structure, no silver bullet, exists to bring about the kingdom of heaven. The kingdom of heaven is not a “this world” reality yet to be fulfilled and realized. We are conduits of God on earth, co-heirs to eternal life in another realm. As such these “solve all” theories, are insufficient for those walking truly in the footsteps of Jesus Christ.
*** Further Reading ***
I like to incorporate other book recommendations in my reviews, and realize I have not done so here outside of simply suggesting a double click on the primary texts the author references. As such, to orient on the philosophical errors of CRT I would suggest Mortimer Adler’s “Ten Philosophical Mistakes”, especially chapter 7 which deals with what true freedom is, and therefore is the philosophical basis for debunking the CRT definition of equity. Adler was a brilliant Aristotelian-Thomistic philosopher at the University of Chicago with a lot to say on philosophical mindsets. After Adler, and in the same right, Benedict Ashley’s “Choosing a World-View and Value-System” touches on similar topics (admittedly more verbose and I prefer Adler’s work).
I also believe one of the strongest points in Feser’s book here is on fatherhood (and the family at large) and encourage folks looking for a deeper understanding of these concepts to read “The New Dad’s Playbook” by Benjamin Watson, which is an incredible testament to strong fatherhood by Christian ex-NFL tight end Benjamin Watson. Early in the book Ben touches on the importance of fathers “sticking around”. For a more explicitly Catholic view, “Man to Man, Dad to Dad” by Caulfield and Dolan pulls together fatherhood tips on a wide range of topics which is a nice supplement as well.
August 5, 2023
C’est une bonne introduction et critique concise d’un point de vue catholique de la théorie critique de la race (en anglais critical racial theory, souvent résumée par CRT). Le livre se lit vite, facilement et est très documenté si jamais on veut approfondir le sujet et/ou les sources. On retrouve donc bien les marques de fabrique de Feser. Comme d'habitude, comme les catholiques ont quasiment la même éthique que les protestants (en tout cas ceux proches des premiers, les Réformateurs, les luthériens et les réformés), le lecteur protestant peut donc dans un premier temps s'approprier toute la partie arguments rationnels qui ne fait pas appel à la Bible/la tradition. Dans un second temps, il sera bien renseigné sur la position catholique et retiendra même certaines très bonnes formulations.
La CRT est une théorie peu connue en France mais cruciale car elle est l’ancêtre du wokisme qui ne fait que la généraliser davantage. Elle consiste à dire qu’il y a deux classes, une majoritaire (les blancs) et une minoritaire (les noirs) et que les blancs oppriment les noirs par racisme comme on peut le voir dans toutes les inégalités entre ces deux groupes, et surtout que ce racisme est systémique, qu’il imprègne toute la société jusqu’au niveau légal et concerne tous les blancs qui le seraient tous sans même s’en rendre compte, tous sont racistes même s’ils le nient et que leur comportement envers les noirs est irréprochable, ils sont racistes dans leur “subconscient”.
La critique fait à la fois appel à la tradition catholique à travers des documents officiels et des paroles des papes et présente des arguments purement rationnels acceptables donc par n’importe qui même non catholique. Dans cette deuxième classe d’arguments, Feser dénonce principalement des erreurs de logiques élémentaires comme l’appel aux émotions, l’ad hominem, le faux dilemme, la pétition de principe/le raisonnement circulaire, le manque d’arguments tout court etc.
A noter qu’avant de présenter et de critiquer la CRT, Feser en profite pour présenter la vision catholique sur le racisme (avec un zoom particulier sur les conquêtes des autochtones lors de la colonisation européenne des Etats-Unis, des îles, etc.), l’immigration dans les trois premiers chapitres. Il est heureux que depuis toujours, l’Eglise catholique a condamné le racisme, en particulier les papes. Et surtout plus étonnant et agréable, les papes ont immédiatement condamné le mauvais traitement des populations autochtones lors de la colonisation par les Européens, par exemple des Indiens d’Amérique. Enfin concernant l’immigration, l’Eglise catholique a eu une position équilibrée qui reconnaît à la fois l’importance de venir au secours de l’étranger malheureux et de prioriser le bien-être et la sécurité des citoyens tout d’abord. Donc d’accepter l’immigration seulement du moment qu’elle ne met pas en danger le pays, par exemple par une guerre civile. Feser le prouve à l’appui en reprenant comme sources les papes et Thomas d’Aquin dans son De Regno.
Chapitre 1 : L’Eglise catholique et le racisme
De tout temps, l’Eglise catholique a condamné le racisme, en particulier les papes.
Chapitre 2 : Les scolastiques tardifs et les papes modernes contre l’esclavage
Feser prouve que les scolastiques tardifs catholiques (largement suivi par les penseurs catholiques même s’il y a une minorité mais qui ont été délaissés) et les papes des temps de modernes se sont ligués contre l’esclavage des Indiens d’Amérique par les Espagnols. Et dès le début, bien avant les “l’invention” des droits de l’homme, les Lumières et le consensus que nous venons d’atteindre il y a à peine environ un siècle. Pour les papes, c’est Satan qui agissait dans les coulisses des colons en leur faisant croire que les indigènes qu’ils découvraient étaient moins humains qu’eux et qu’ils se servaient de la Bible pour justifier l’esclavage.
Chapitre 3 : Les droits et les devoirs des nations envers les immigrés
Ici, Feser présente un résumé de l’enseignement catholique sur les droits et les devoirs qu’ont les nations envers les immigrés. Pour cela, il cite leurs documents officiels sur la doctrine sociale et des paroles de différents papes. De tout temps, les catholiques ont une vision positive du patriotisme (l’amour de la patrie, chercher la prospérité de son pays et conserver sa culture). Par exemple, pour Thomas d’Aquin, le patriotisme est une vertu.
La position catholique affirme deux choses :
L’importance pour les nations de venir au secours des opprimés (ex : qui fuient la misère à cause de la guerre) et d’être prêt à en accueillir
L’importance pour les nations de privilégier le bien-être tout d’abord de ses citoyens (de “ceux qui sont proches” pour reprendre l’expression de Thomas d’Aquin dans son De Regno) et seulement quand c’est possible et que cela ne met pas en péril la sécurité des habitants citoyens (ex : risques de guerres civiles à cause d’une population qui ne respecte pas les coutumes locales), accueillir les étrangers, (“ceux qui sont plus loin” toujours d’après Thomas)
Chapitre 4 : Qu’est-ce que la théorie critique de la race ?
Dans ce chapitre, Feser définit et établit diagnostic des enseignements de la théorie critique de la race. Elle consiste à voir du racisme partout derrière toute différence/inégalité entre les blancs et les noirs. Elle possède ces caractéristiques :
C’est quasiment un copier-coller du communisme/marxisme où
Le problème omniprésent n’est plus les inégalités économiques mais le racisme
Les oppresseurs plus la classe bourgeoise mais les suprématistes blancs et
Les opprimés plus le prolétariat mais les personnes d’origine africaines.
Elle est irrationnelle : elle nous plonge dans un relativisme, ne s’appuie pas sur des arguments rationnels mais joue sur les émotions (écriture aggressive et “impresionnante”) et s’appuie sur le pouvoir pour s’imposer.
Chapitre 5 : Critiques contre la théorie critique de la race
Elle commet énormément d’erreurs élémentaires de logique :
Les erreurs du hors-sujet
L’ad hominem
L’ad hominem des circonstances : rejeter un argument simplement parce qu’il est dans l’intérêt de la personne qui le présente
Ex : Un vendeur de fruits qui cite des articles académiques de médecine pour prouver aux clients que c’est bon pour la santé de manger des fruits.
Application : Les partisans de la TCR rejettent les arguments issus des sciences sociales des contradicteurs parce qu’ils défendent l’intérêt des racistes.
Poisoning the well : Ignorer les arguments de quelqu’un sous prétexte qu’il est méchant, etc.
Ex : Ignorer les arguments d’un alcolo méchant.
L’erreur génétique : dire qu’un avis est faux parce qu’il a été donné en premier ou est donné par des personnes mauvaises
Ex : Le remède au cancer a été inventé par les nazis, donc il ne peut pas marcher
Application : Un blanc ne peut pas donner son avis car il est raciste.
L’ad hominem abusif : insulter son contradicteur pour le discréditer et lui ôter de facto toute respectabilité
Ex : Traiter de communiste un homme politique qui souhaite augmenter les impôts sur les voitures pour réparer les autoroutes publiques.
Application : Les partisans de la TCR traitent automatiquement de racistes tous ceux qui ne sont pas d’accord avec eux sur absolument tout.
Fallacies of presumption
Le raisonnement circulaire
Ex : Je ne peux pas mentir à ma femme car je l’aime et je sais que je l’aime car je ne lui mens pas.
Application : A moins de déjà supposer au préalable que toutes les inégalités entre deux groupes de personnes d’origines différentes ont pour cause le racisme, tous leurs exemples ne sont pas du tout évident (ex : moins d’africains dans certaines professions s’expliquent par un manque d’éducation)
Le “special pleading” : utiliser un double standard. En voici trois applications dans la TCR, ce qui est fatal, c’est qu’à chaque fois leur tactique se retourne contre eux :
Elle dit qu’il n’y a pas d’objectivité, que quand un groupe ethnique dit une vérité, il ne présente en réalité qu’un point de vue biaisé par sa propre culture. C’est pour cela que la parole des blancs n’a aucune valeur : ils ne font qu’exprimer leur biais. Or s’ils étaient cohérents, ils devraient s’appliquer ce critère, et leur avis serait nullifié par le relativisme.
Ils disent que nier que le racisme soit la cause de chaque inégalité entre deux groupes ethniques est raciste (ou de façon plus générale une discrimination). Mais il y a des cas où ils ne sont pas prêts à l’appliquer mais auxquels ils devraient pourtant le faire pour être cohérents. Par exemple, aux Etats-Unis, il y a beaucoup plus d’hommes que de femmes en prison. Ils devraient en conclure que la cause de cela est un “sexisme” contre les hommes : ce qui est complètement absurde.
Dès qu’on donne une autre explication que le racisme à une inégalité, on est raciste. Problème : Le problème, c’est qu’ils ont le même problème quand ils jugent que tous les blancs sont affectés par de “fragilité blanche”, “de racisme inconscient”. Ils portent donc aussi un jugement “raciste” mais non pas sur les noirs mais cette fois-ci sur les blancs.
L’erreur de “l’hypostatisation” : transformer une abstraction qui n’existe pas en une réalité concrète
Ex : Dire qu’il existe système économique qui défavorise les auteurs de livres de philosophie au bénéfice des auteurs de romans qui sont du coup beaucoup mieux vendus que les premiers.
Application : La CTR prétend qu’il existe un véritable “racisme systémique” et “un suprématie des blancs”.
L’erreur de la division : attribuer ce qui vrai du tout à chacune de ses parties
Ex : Dire que chaque chien est plus affectueux que chaque chat parce qu’en général les chiens sont plus affectueux que les chats.
L’erreur subjectiviste : croire que la vérité de nos affirmations dépend du désir qu’on a qu’elles soient vraies
Ex : un fan d’allien qui est convaincu qu’ils existent vraiment parce qu’il est passionné par les alliens
Application : La confiance démesurée dans un narratif, un méta-récit où le racisme explique tout.
Pour conclure, Feser donne une dernière faiblesse : l’infalsifiabilité. Par exemple, on a le marxisme (tout est réinterprété dans une logique de lutte des classes), le freudisme (tout désaccord est pris comme un refus de reconnaître ses “désirs subconscients”) et l’astrologie (prédictions trop vagues). La TCR est infalsifiable, dès qu’une donnée ne lui convient pas, elle la réinterprète pour la rendre cohérente avec son cadre en ajoutant une hypothèse ad hoc, c’est-à-dire qui a uniquement pour but de venir au secours de sa théorie. Donc la TCR n’a pas de fondement scientifique et n’est pas empiriquement vérifiable (car pas non plus falsifiable), c’est une idéologie purement sociale.
Chapitre 6 : Critiques sociales contre la TCR
Feser en vient maintenant aux critiques des sciences sociales qu’on peut faire à la TCR. Malheureusement, les données empiriques ne viennent pas du tout la valider, bien au contraire.
Par exemple, aux Etats-Unis, il y a des inégalités entre les américains asiatiques et les blancs, les premiers réussissent plus souvent à l’école. Et pourtant, on n’en déduit pas que les asiatiques oppriment de quelque façon que ce soit les blancs.
Une proposition de la TCR est absurde : “Dès qu’une minorité est plus pauvre qu’une majorité, c’est à cause du racisme de la majorité envers la minorité.”. Feser s’appuie sur le livre de … qui donne plein d’exemples de minorités qui produisaient l’essentiel de la richesse du pays où ils habitaient. Par exemple ...
Il propose ensuite d’autres causes que le racisme : la principale étant les différences de culture. La culture africaine diffère sur de nombreux points de la culture occidentale, ce qui la rend moins propice à produire de la richesse économique. Mais elle a d’autres points forts comme le bonheur, profiter de la vie, la convivialité, l’importance de la famille, ce qui lui permet justement d’éviter des points faibles des occidentaux bien trop matérialistes et individualistes. Elle n’est pas inférieure mais juste différente.
Un autre élément d’explication est l’absence des pères au foyer et les femmes qui élèvent seules leurs enfants : un enfant dans ce cas (surtout les garçons) a plus de risque de sombrer dans la délinquance. Le père fait figure essentielle d’autorité, de discipline et même d’amour dont a besoin le fils pour ne pas devenir incontrôlé. Reconnaître cela n’a rien de raciste : même les blancs ont plus de chance d’être élevé avec une mère seule que les asiatiques. Et une fois encore, il serait absurde d’en conclure que les asiatiques de manière générale sont racistes envers les blancs.
Quand à l’existence de biais implicites même chez les blancs qui nieraient être racistes et qui ne manifesteraient aucun signe de l’être, les sciences sociales se prononcent contre : les indices qu’il en existe sont très faibles. Il est d’autre part difficile de trouver une définition scientifique neutre de ce qu’est un biais implicite. De même, il y a peu d’indices en faveur des prétendus “micro-agressions”.
Enfin, en reprenant les études de Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, Feser montre que qu’adopter dans la vie réelle le mode de pensée de la TCR peut impacter négativement sa vie mentale. Les partisans de la TCR (et plus généralement des wokistes) manifestent des symptômes typiques de personnes atteintes de troubles mentaux : une vision ultrapessimiste des choses, une généralisation hâtive, une trop grande importance accordée aux émotions, le biais de confirmation, la culpabilisation d’autrui, etc. C’est cela qui explique pourquoi il y a de plus en plus de partisans quand bien même les statistiques rapportent qu’il y a de moins en moins (et beaucoup moins) de racistes aux Etats-Unis : de 60% en 1928 à 28% en 2012. Référence : Eric Kaufmann, The Social Construction of Racism in the United States (New York: The Manhattan Institute, 2021), p. 9. Malheureusement, les réseaux sociaux contribuent à propager ce vision faussée des choses.
Chapitre 7 : Le catholicisme contre la TCR
Dans cette partie, Feser rapporte les critiques officielles du catholicisme contre la TCR. Il cite notamment encore une fois plusieurs papes qui condamnent à la fois “l’hyper-égalitarisme”, le fait de vouloir absolument imposer une égalité dans tous les domaines économiques et culturels, et le racisme.
Bien qu’ils aient condamné systématiquement la pauvreté et l’exploitation des pauvres, certaines inégalités sont naturelles et on ne devrait pas chercher à les supprimer. Il y a naturellement des gens plus aptes à gouverner dans un gouvernement que d’autres (moi par exemple je ne me sens nullement capable de cela et c’est bien comme ça), des différences culturelles qui prédisposent plus telles personnes à pratiquer telle pratique.
La condamnation du racisme s’applique à la TCR car dans sa critique, en réalité, elle pratique le racisme mais dans l’autre sens envers les blancs en appelant ouvertement à les discriminer jusqu’au niveau légal (cf. Kendi et DeAngelo).
L’Eglise catholique condamne aussi le gnosticisme (manichéisme extrêmes, ) et toutes ses formes ultérieures contemporaines totalitaires comme le marxisme et le nazisme, mais aussi la TCR qui leur ressemble énormément. Il suffit de remplacer dans les manifestes de la TCR les termes “blancs” par “Juifs” et on a un nazisme. La TCR et le nazisme ont ces points communs :
Collectivisme : voir les gens dans des groupes sans vouloir prendre en compte les différences entre les individus (ex : ne pas vouloir distinguer les blancs racistes des blancs non racistes, dire à la place qu’ils le sont tous forcément même si ce serait de façon inconsciente).
Le relativisme :
La CRT est une théorie peu connue en France mais cruciale car elle est l’ancêtre du wokisme qui ne fait que la généraliser davantage. Elle consiste à dire qu’il y a deux classes, une majoritaire (les blancs) et une minoritaire (les noirs) et que les blancs oppriment les noirs par racisme comme on peut le voir dans toutes les inégalités entre ces deux groupes, et surtout que ce racisme est systémique, qu’il imprègne toute la société jusqu’au niveau légal et concerne tous les blancs qui le seraient tous sans même s’en rendre compte, tous sont racistes même s’ils le nient et que leur comportement envers les noirs est irréprochable, ils sont racistes dans leur “subconscient”.
La critique fait à la fois appel à la tradition catholique à travers des documents officiels et des paroles des papes et présente des arguments purement rationnels acceptables donc par n’importe qui même non catholique. Dans cette deuxième classe d’arguments, Feser dénonce principalement des erreurs de logiques élémentaires comme l’appel aux émotions, l’ad hominem, le faux dilemme, la pétition de principe/le raisonnement circulaire, le manque d’arguments tout court etc.
A noter qu’avant de présenter et de critiquer la CRT, Feser en profite pour présenter la vision catholique sur le racisme (avec un zoom particulier sur les conquêtes des autochtones lors de la colonisation européenne des Etats-Unis, des îles, etc.), l’immigration dans les trois premiers chapitres. Il est heureux que depuis toujours, l’Eglise catholique a condamné le racisme, en particulier les papes. Et surtout plus étonnant et agréable, les papes ont immédiatement condamné le mauvais traitement des populations autochtones lors de la colonisation par les Européens, par exemple des Indiens d’Amérique. Enfin concernant l’immigration, l’Eglise catholique a eu une position équilibrée qui reconnaît à la fois l’importance de venir au secours de l’étranger malheureux et de prioriser le bien-être et la sécurité des citoyens tout d’abord. Donc d’accepter l’immigration seulement du moment qu’elle ne met pas en danger le pays, par exemple par une guerre civile. Feser le prouve à l’appui en reprenant comme sources les papes et Thomas d’Aquin dans son De Regno.
Chapitre 1 : L’Eglise catholique et le racisme
De tout temps, l’Eglise catholique a condamné le racisme, en particulier les papes.
Chapitre 2 : Les scolastiques tardifs et les papes modernes contre l’esclavage
Feser prouve que les scolastiques tardifs catholiques (largement suivi par les penseurs catholiques même s’il y a une minorité mais qui ont été délaissés) et les papes des temps de modernes se sont ligués contre l’esclavage des Indiens d’Amérique par les Espagnols. Et dès le début, bien avant les “l’invention” des droits de l’homme, les Lumières et le consensus que nous venons d’atteindre il y a à peine environ un siècle. Pour les papes, c’est Satan qui agissait dans les coulisses des colons en leur faisant croire que les indigènes qu’ils découvraient étaient moins humains qu’eux et qu’ils se servaient de la Bible pour justifier l’esclavage.
Chapitre 3 : Les droits et les devoirs des nations envers les immigrés
Ici, Feser présente un résumé de l’enseignement catholique sur les droits et les devoirs qu’ont les nations envers les immigrés. Pour cela, il cite leurs documents officiels sur la doctrine sociale et des paroles de différents papes. De tout temps, les catholiques ont une vision positive du patriotisme (l’amour de la patrie, chercher la prospérité de son pays et conserver sa culture). Par exemple, pour Thomas d’Aquin, le patriotisme est une vertu.
La position catholique affirme deux choses :
L’importance pour les nations de venir au secours des opprimés (ex : qui fuient la misère à cause de la guerre) et d’être prêt à en accueillir
L’importance pour les nations de privilégier le bien-être tout d’abord de ses citoyens (de “ceux qui sont proches” pour reprendre l’expression de Thomas d’Aquin dans son De Regno) et seulement quand c’est possible et que cela ne met pas en péril la sécurité des habitants citoyens (ex : risques de guerres civiles à cause d’une population qui ne respecte pas les coutumes locales), accueillir les étrangers, (“ceux qui sont plus loin” toujours d’après Thomas)
Chapitre 4 : Qu’est-ce que la théorie critique de la race ?
Dans ce chapitre, Feser définit et établit diagnostic des enseignements de la théorie critique de la race. Elle consiste à voir du racisme partout derrière toute différence/inégalité entre les blancs et les noirs. Elle possède ces caractéristiques :
C’est quasiment un copier-coller du communisme/marxisme où
Le problème omniprésent n’est plus les inégalités économiques mais le racisme
Les oppresseurs plus la classe bourgeoise mais les suprématistes blancs et
Les opprimés plus le prolétariat mais les personnes d’origine africaines.
Elle est irrationnelle : elle nous plonge dans un relativisme, ne s’appuie pas sur des arguments rationnels mais joue sur les émotions (écriture aggressive et “impresionnante”) et s’appuie sur le pouvoir pour s’imposer.
Chapitre 5 : Critiques contre la théorie critique de la race
Elle commet énormément d’erreurs élémentaires de logique :
Les erreurs du hors-sujet
L’ad hominem
L’ad hominem des circonstances : rejeter un argument simplement parce qu’il est dans l’intérêt de la personne qui le présente
Ex : Un vendeur de fruits qui cite des articles académiques de médecine pour prouver aux clients que c’est bon pour la santé de manger des fruits.
Application : Les partisans de la TCR rejettent les arguments issus des sciences sociales des contradicteurs parce qu’ils défendent l’intérêt des racistes.
Poisoning the well : Ignorer les arguments de quelqu’un sous prétexte qu’il est méchant, etc.
Ex : Ignorer les arguments d’un alcolo méchant.
L’erreur génétique : dire qu’un avis est faux parce qu’il a été donné en premier ou est donné par des personnes mauvaises
Ex : Le remède au cancer a été inventé par les nazis, donc il ne peut pas marcher
Application : Un blanc ne peut pas donner son avis car il est raciste.
L’ad hominem abusif : insulter son contradicteur pour le discréditer et lui ôter de facto toute respectabilité
Ex : Traiter de communiste un homme politique qui souhaite augmenter les impôts sur les voitures pour réparer les autoroutes publiques.
Application : Les partisans de la TCR traitent automatiquement de racistes tous ceux qui ne sont pas d’accord avec eux sur absolument tout.
Fallacies of presumption
Le raisonnement circulaire
Ex : Je ne peux pas mentir à ma femme car je l’aime et je sais que je l’aime car je ne lui mens pas.
Application : A moins de déjà supposer au préalable que toutes les inégalités entre deux groupes de personnes d’origines différentes ont pour cause le racisme, tous leurs exemples ne sont pas du tout évident (ex : moins d’africains dans certaines professions s’expliquent par un manque d’éducation)
Le “special pleading” : utiliser un double standard. En voici trois applications dans la TCR, ce qui est fatal, c’est qu’à chaque fois leur tactique se retourne contre eux :
Elle dit qu’il n’y a pas d’objectivité, que quand un groupe ethnique dit une vérité, il ne présente en réalité qu’un point de vue biaisé par sa propre culture. C’est pour cela que la parole des blancs n’a aucune valeur : ils ne font qu’exprimer leur biais. Or s’ils étaient cohérents, ils devraient s’appliquer ce critère, et leur avis serait nullifié par le relativisme.
Ils disent que nier que le racisme soit la cause de chaque inégalité entre deux groupes ethniques est raciste (ou de façon plus générale une discrimination). Mais il y a des cas où ils ne sont pas prêts à l’appliquer mais auxquels ils devraient pourtant le faire pour être cohérents. Par exemple, aux Etats-Unis, il y a beaucoup plus d’hommes que de femmes en prison. Ils devraient en conclure que la cause de cela est un “sexisme” contre les hommes : ce qui est complètement absurde.
Dès qu’on donne une autre explication que le racisme à une inégalité, on est raciste. Problème : Le problème, c’est qu’ils ont le même problème quand ils jugent que tous les blancs sont affectés par de “fragilité blanche”, “de racisme inconscient”. Ils portent donc aussi un jugement “raciste” mais non pas sur les noirs mais cette fois-ci sur les blancs.
L’erreur de “l’hypostatisation” : transformer une abstraction qui n’existe pas en une réalité concrète
Ex : Dire qu’il existe système économique qui défavorise les auteurs de livres de philosophie au bénéfice des auteurs de romans qui sont du coup beaucoup mieux vendus que les premiers.
Application : La CTR prétend qu’il existe un véritable “racisme systémique” et “un suprématie des blancs”.
L’erreur de la division : attribuer ce qui vrai du tout à chacune de ses parties
Ex : Dire que chaque chien est plus affectueux que chaque chat parce qu’en général les chiens sont plus affectueux que les chats.
L’erreur subjectiviste : croire que la vérité de nos affirmations dépend du désir qu’on a qu’elles soient vraies
Ex : un fan d’allien qui est convaincu qu’ils existent vraiment parce qu’il est passionné par les alliens
Application : La confiance démesurée dans un narratif, un méta-récit où le racisme explique tout.
Pour conclure, Feser donne une dernière faiblesse : l’infalsifiabilité. Par exemple, on a le marxisme (tout est réinterprété dans une logique de lutte des classes), le freudisme (tout désaccord est pris comme un refus de reconnaître ses “désirs subconscients”) et l’astrologie (prédictions trop vagues). La TCR est infalsifiable, dès qu’une donnée ne lui convient pas, elle la réinterprète pour la rendre cohérente avec son cadre en ajoutant une hypothèse ad hoc, c’est-à-dire qui a uniquement pour but de venir au secours de sa théorie. Donc la TCR n’a pas de fondement scientifique et n’est pas empiriquement vérifiable (car pas non plus falsifiable), c’est une idéologie purement sociale.
Chapitre 6 : Critiques sociales contre la TCR
Feser en vient maintenant aux critiques des sciences sociales qu’on peut faire à la TCR. Malheureusement, les données empiriques ne viennent pas du tout la valider, bien au contraire.
Par exemple, aux Etats-Unis, il y a des inégalités entre les américains asiatiques et les blancs, les premiers réussissent plus souvent à l’école. Et pourtant, on n’en déduit pas que les asiatiques oppriment de quelque façon que ce soit les blancs.
Une proposition de la TCR est absurde : “Dès qu’une minorité est plus pauvre qu’une majorité, c’est à cause du racisme de la majorité envers la minorité.”. Feser s’appuie sur le livre de … qui donne plein d’exemples de minorités qui produisaient l’essentiel de la richesse du pays où ils habitaient. Par exemple ...
Il propose ensuite d’autres causes que le racisme : la principale étant les différences de culture. La culture africaine diffère sur de nombreux points de la culture occidentale, ce qui la rend moins propice à produire de la richesse économique. Mais elle a d’autres points forts comme le bonheur, profiter de la vie, la convivialité, l’importance de la famille, ce qui lui permet justement d’éviter des points faibles des occidentaux bien trop matérialistes et individualistes. Elle n’est pas inférieure mais juste différente.
Un autre élément d’explication est l’absence des pères au foyer et les femmes qui élèvent seules leurs enfants : un enfant dans ce cas (surtout les garçons) a plus de risque de sombrer dans la délinquance. Le père fait figure essentielle d’autorité, de discipline et même d’amour dont a besoin le fils pour ne pas devenir incontrôlé. Reconnaître cela n’a rien de raciste : même les blancs ont plus de chance d’être élevé avec une mère seule que les asiatiques. Et une fois encore, il serait absurde d’en conclure que les asiatiques de manière générale sont racistes envers les blancs.
Quand à l’existence de biais implicites même chez les blancs qui nieraient être racistes et qui ne manifesteraient aucun signe de l’être, les sciences sociales se prononcent contre : les indices qu’il en existe sont très faibles. Il est d’autre part difficile de trouver une définition scientifique neutre de ce qu’est un biais implicite. De même, il y a peu d’indices en faveur des prétendus “micro-agressions”.
Enfin, en reprenant les études de Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, Feser montre que qu’adopter dans la vie réelle le mode de pensée de la TCR peut impacter négativement sa vie mentale. Les partisans de la TCR (et plus généralement des wokistes) manifestent des symptômes typiques de personnes atteintes de troubles mentaux : une vision ultrapessimiste des choses, une généralisation hâtive, une trop grande importance accordée aux émotions, le biais de confirmation, la culpabilisation d’autrui, etc. C’est cela qui explique pourquoi il y a de plus en plus de partisans quand bien même les statistiques rapportent qu’il y a de moins en moins (et beaucoup moins) de racistes aux Etats-Unis : de 60% en 1928 à 28% en 2012. Référence : Eric Kaufmann, The Social Construction of Racism in the United States (New York: The Manhattan Institute, 2021), p. 9. Malheureusement, les réseaux sociaux contribuent à propager ce vision faussée des choses.
Chapitre 7 : Le catholicisme contre la TCR
Dans cette partie, Feser rapporte les critiques officielles du catholicisme contre la TCR. Il cite notamment encore une fois plusieurs papes qui condamnent à la fois “l’hyper-égalitarisme”, le fait de vouloir absolument imposer une égalité dans tous les domaines économiques et culturels, et le racisme.
Bien qu’ils aient condamné systématiquement la pauvreté et l’exploitation des pauvres, certaines inégalités sont naturelles et on ne devrait pas chercher à les supprimer. Il y a naturellement des gens plus aptes à gouverner dans un gouvernement que d’autres (moi par exemple je ne me sens nullement capable de cela et c’est bien comme ça), des différences culturelles qui prédisposent plus telles personnes à pratiquer telle pratique.
La condamnation du racisme s’applique à la TCR car dans sa critique, en réalité, elle pratique le racisme mais dans l’autre sens envers les blancs en appelant ouvertement à les discriminer jusqu’au niveau légal (cf. Kendi et DeAngelo).
L’Eglise catholique condamne aussi le gnosticisme (manichéisme extrêmes, ) et toutes ses formes ultérieures contemporaines totalitaires comme le marxisme et le nazisme, mais aussi la TCR qui leur ressemble énormément. Il suffit de remplacer dans les manifestes de la TCR les termes “blancs” par “Juifs” et on a un nazisme. La TCR et le nazisme ont ces points communs :
Collectivisme : voir les gens dans des groupes sans vouloir prendre en compte les différences entre les individus (ex : ne pas vouloir distinguer les blancs racistes des blancs non racistes, dire à la place qu’ils le sont tous forcément même si ce serait de façon inconsciente).
Le relativisme :
October 5, 2023
A CATHOLIC AUTHOR STRONGLY REJECTS CRT AS FALLACIOUS, ETC.
Author Edward Feser wrote in the first chapter of this 2022 book, “Racism is widely, and rightly, condemned today. Indeed… that racism is wrong is one of the few things about which there appears to be broad agreement. But what exactly is racism, and why is it wrong? What does the Catholic Church teach on the subject?.. What should Catholics think about Critical Race Theory [CRT] and other increasingly influential ideas and movements promoted in the name of antiracism? This book addresses these questions.” (Pg. 7)
He explains, “The Church’s condemnation of racism is grounded in considerations about human nature that go deeper than anything that could be either discovered or undermined by biological science… For the Church, the source of our common dignity is primarily to be found… in the SOUL… Being spiritual, this principle cannot be detected at the genetic or any other biological level of description.” (Pg. 11-12)
He asserts, “CRT actually promotes a novel and insidious form of racism…. CRT is a grave perversion of the good cause it claims to represent, and it is utterly incompatible with Catholic social teaching… The fundamental assertion of CRT is that racism absolutely permeates … every institution and the psyches of … each individual white person… it infects even the thinking of nonwhite people insofar as they have bought into the racist assumptions that whites have about them and acquiesced to the racist policies and institutions by which whites oppress them.” (Pg. 54)
He contends, “it is no exaggeration to say that CRT is essentially a reformulation of some of the main themes of Marxism and postmodernism in racial terms. Where Marxism speaks of the conflict … between the oppressive bourgeoisie and the oppressed proletariat, CRT speaks of the struggle under ‘systemic racism’ between an oppressive ‘whiteness’ and oppressed ‘people of color.’” (Pg. 72)
He argues, “nobody who doesn’t already look at the world through CRT lenses would agree that the fact that blacks and Hispanics are underrepresented in [certain] fields BY ITSELF demonstrates that there is racist discrimination in these fields… any more than the fact that Asians are overrepresented … demonstrates that there is racist discrimination in favor of Asians… Similarly, no one who does not already look at the world through CRT lenses would interpret every statement or action that a member of a minority group might find offensive as a racist ‘microaggression.’ Critical Race Theorists read evidence of racism OUT of such inequities… only because they first read racism INTO them.” (Pg. 80-81) Later, he adds, “CRT’s extreme claims are in no way supported by any empirical evidence. Rather, they are read INTO the evidence by ideologues whose thinking is… highly influenced by various cognitive distortions and logical fallacies.” (Pg. 126)
He states, “Critical Race theory positively encourages paranoid habits of mind analogous to those exhibited by people suffering from depression and anxiety. Looking at the world through CRT lenses leads one to see racism even where it does not exist, to feel strongly aggrieved at this imagined racism, and then to treat the narrative of grievance that results as if it were confirming evidence of the reality of the imagined racism.” (Pg. 122)
He concludes, “Catholics must resolutely oppose Critical Race Theory just as they have opposed these errors of the past… The Church’s condemnation of racism is grounded both in our common nature as rational beings capable of knowledge and of charity, and in the redemption from sin made possible for all by grace. And this entails, not CRT’s ‘cancel culture’ and hermeneutics of suspicion, but rational discourse and mutual understanding. Not the demonization of any race as inherently oppressive, but solidarity and mutual respect.” (Pg. 147)
Although this book was written by a Catholic, and is published by a Catholic publishing house, it should NOT be view as ‘THE’ Catholic position on CRT. Feser’s arguments are just those made by other conservative critics of CRT, and they are NOT well-supported by Church documents, etc.
Author Edward Feser wrote in the first chapter of this 2022 book, “Racism is widely, and rightly, condemned today. Indeed… that racism is wrong is one of the few things about which there appears to be broad agreement. But what exactly is racism, and why is it wrong? What does the Catholic Church teach on the subject?.. What should Catholics think about Critical Race Theory [CRT] and other increasingly influential ideas and movements promoted in the name of antiracism? This book addresses these questions.” (Pg. 7)
He explains, “The Church’s condemnation of racism is grounded in considerations about human nature that go deeper than anything that could be either discovered or undermined by biological science… For the Church, the source of our common dignity is primarily to be found… in the SOUL… Being spiritual, this principle cannot be detected at the genetic or any other biological level of description.” (Pg. 11-12)
He asserts, “CRT actually promotes a novel and insidious form of racism…. CRT is a grave perversion of the good cause it claims to represent, and it is utterly incompatible with Catholic social teaching… The fundamental assertion of CRT is that racism absolutely permeates … every institution and the psyches of … each individual white person… it infects even the thinking of nonwhite people insofar as they have bought into the racist assumptions that whites have about them and acquiesced to the racist policies and institutions by which whites oppress them.” (Pg. 54)
He contends, “it is no exaggeration to say that CRT is essentially a reformulation of some of the main themes of Marxism and postmodernism in racial terms. Where Marxism speaks of the conflict … between the oppressive bourgeoisie and the oppressed proletariat, CRT speaks of the struggle under ‘systemic racism’ between an oppressive ‘whiteness’ and oppressed ‘people of color.’” (Pg. 72)
He argues, “nobody who doesn’t already look at the world through CRT lenses would agree that the fact that blacks and Hispanics are underrepresented in [certain] fields BY ITSELF demonstrates that there is racist discrimination in these fields… any more than the fact that Asians are overrepresented … demonstrates that there is racist discrimination in favor of Asians… Similarly, no one who does not already look at the world through CRT lenses would interpret every statement or action that a member of a minority group might find offensive as a racist ‘microaggression.’ Critical Race Theorists read evidence of racism OUT of such inequities… only because they first read racism INTO them.” (Pg. 80-81) Later, he adds, “CRT’s extreme claims are in no way supported by any empirical evidence. Rather, they are read INTO the evidence by ideologues whose thinking is… highly influenced by various cognitive distortions and logical fallacies.” (Pg. 126)
He states, “Critical Race theory positively encourages paranoid habits of mind analogous to those exhibited by people suffering from depression and anxiety. Looking at the world through CRT lenses leads one to see racism even where it does not exist, to feel strongly aggrieved at this imagined racism, and then to treat the narrative of grievance that results as if it were confirming evidence of the reality of the imagined racism.” (Pg. 122)
He concludes, “Catholics must resolutely oppose Critical Race Theory just as they have opposed these errors of the past… The Church’s condemnation of racism is grounded both in our common nature as rational beings capable of knowledge and of charity, and in the redemption from sin made possible for all by grace. And this entails, not CRT’s ‘cancel culture’ and hermeneutics of suspicion, but rational discourse and mutual understanding. Not the demonization of any race as inherently oppressive, but solidarity and mutual respect.” (Pg. 147)
Although this book was written by a Catholic, and is published by a Catholic publishing house, it should NOT be view as ‘THE’ Catholic position on CRT. Feser’s arguments are just those made by other conservative critics of CRT, and they are NOT well-supported by Church documents, etc.
December 24, 2022
Clear, cogent evaluation of Critical Race Theory (CRT).
Dr. Feser sorts through the mess of CRT ideology to give his readers a clear case as to why CRT is ultimately unchristian and evil. A couple of drawbacks of the book, is though he makes the case against CRT, my not being Catholic, found his first chapter on the soul less than convincing (and somewhat confusing, though I don’t think that counts against his argument as a whole). Secondly, even though his talk about non-uniformity is important, he doesn’t draw out the implications of what that ultimately entails. There is no doubt that we are all equal in a theological sense (in the eyes of God) and people of different races should be able to, for example, get jobs or decent housing based on based on the merit of their abilities, schooling and income. However, another Catholic thinker, James Kalb, in his book, “Against Inclusiveness” as well as Jared Taylor over at American Renaissance both recognize that “birds of a feather flock together” or that people “naturally find others like themselves,” which is to say that liberalism’s coercion of co-existence from a top-down approach is at least as harmful to some minimal extent to relations between the races as CRT.
Dr. Feser sorts through the mess of CRT ideology to give his readers a clear case as to why CRT is ultimately unchristian and evil. A couple of drawbacks of the book, is though he makes the case against CRT, my not being Catholic, found his first chapter on the soul less than convincing (and somewhat confusing, though I don’t think that counts against his argument as a whole). Secondly, even though his talk about non-uniformity is important, he doesn’t draw out the implications of what that ultimately entails. There is no doubt that we are all equal in a theological sense (in the eyes of God) and people of different races should be able to, for example, get jobs or decent housing based on based on the merit of their abilities, schooling and income. However, another Catholic thinker, James Kalb, in his book, “Against Inclusiveness” as well as Jared Taylor over at American Renaissance both recognize that “birds of a feather flock together” or that people “naturally find others like themselves,” which is to say that liberalism’s coercion of co-existence from a top-down approach is at least as harmful to some minimal extent to relations between the races as CRT.
February 2, 2024
A sincere exposition of really non-racist ethic
Feser explains the long standing, centuries old position of the Catholic church against racism and offers a rational and ethical critique of the many distorted and destructive aspects of critical race theory, specially its totalitarian disregard for reasoned discussion.
Feser explains the long standing, centuries old position of the Catholic church against racism and offers a rational and ethical critique of the many distorted and destructive aspects of critical race theory, specially its totalitarian disregard for reasoned discussion.
January 28, 2023
Rascism is real. Rascism is not good. But CRT is a joke. How this can be an academic field is beyond me. We truly have fallen from grace. Feser shows succinctly that CRT does not hold up to logical scrutiny. Worse, he shows that CRT can be a dangerous ideology.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews