What the Kyle Rittenhouse Case Teaches us About Critical Race Theory
/
Rittenhouse before the verdict is read.
“Whoo! We need critical race theory in this country.” That’s what MSNBC’s Joy Reid said on her show while closing out a segment about the Kyle Rittenhouse trial. It was in response to Rittenhouse’s emotional breakdown on the stand, after recalling the night he was attacked in the Kenosha riots. Reid decided to shift the focus on the “victims” Rittenhouse killed and injured, career criminals who chased and attacked the minor.
If you’re wondering what Rittenhouse’s trial has to do with critical race theory, please follow along.
This segment happened before Rittenhouse was found not guilty on all charges, but that didn’t stop Joy Reid or her guests from later railing against the verdict. Reid admitted the outcome was expected. Why wouldn’t it be? Rittenhouse lawfully carried the weapon and lawfully defended himself. Reid and various other legal analysts are smart enough to know that. But they’re still unhappy with the outcome. Reid ranted about our gun laws, and how they’re designed to give white men a “particular kind of freedom, and a particular kind of citizenship that only they have.” She invoked slave catchers and said they’ve used the right to commit violence to protect property. “That’s the foundational creation of the United States.” She then goes on to compare Joseph Rosembaum, Anthony Huber, and Gaige Grosskreutz—a child rapist and domestic abusers—to the famous abolitionist, John Brown.
If you’re wondering how someone could possess such a warped worldview, that’s merely the price your mind has to pay after constant exposure to critical race theory. “Critical race theory is grounded in the particulars of a social reality that is defined by our experiences and the collective historical experience of our communities of origin. Critical race theorists embrace subjectivity of perspective and are avowedly political,” (Words That Wound: Critical Race Theory, Assaultive Speech, and the First Amendment).
Nikole Hannah-Jones, of the New York Times, falsely stated, “he carried a gun he could not legally have illegally across state lines and killed two people. But, sure, y’all believe in law and order.” The gun charges were dropped because Rittenhouse was legally carrying the gun, and he never transported it across state lines, but far be it from a journalist to have the facts correct. After all, the 1619 Project didn’t need to be correct either. The narrative of America’s founding being rooted in racism and slavery is far more important than historical accuracy to the Pulitzer winner.
G.O.A.T. Hoodie
Glorious Liberty Document
Congresswoman Cori Bush claimed Rittenhouse’s verdict was due to “white supremacy in action.” She said, “This system isn’t built to hold white supremacists accountable. It’s why Black and brown folks are brutalized and put in cages while white supremacist murderers walk free.”
Colin Kaepernick, who recently compared the NFL draft to a slave auction, also weighed in. “We just witnessed a system built on white supremacy validate the terroristic acts of a white supremacist. This only further validates the need to abolish our current system. White supremacy cannot be reformed.”
President Joe Biden first said he trusted the jury’s verdict, then issued a statement acknowledging many Americans were angry and concerned, “myself included.” Vice-President Kamala Harris said there is more to do to make our justice system more “equitable.” Equity isn’t equality, nor is it justice. Equity is how you get criminals like Darrell Brooks released on a $1000 bond, who later go on to commit heinous acts like the Waukesha parade massacre.
Late-night host Stephen Colbert conceded Rittenhouse may not have broken the law. However, “If he didn’t break the law, we should change the law.”
What great immoral act did Rittenhouse commit? Defending the property of minority business owners? Providing medical aid in areas EMS wouldn’t normally go? Defending his own life that was in reasonable danger? If Rittenhouse was not armed, he could have been brutally attacked like the elderly Kenosha business owner who had his jaw broken. Worst case scenario, he could have been murdered like officer David Dorn, who was killed in St. Louis.
The sad reality is that if Rittenhouse were black, this would not be a national news story. Around the same time Rittenhouse was acquitted, Andrew Coffee was also found “not guilty” for murder, using self-defense.
But critical race theory teaches us to see colorism in everything we do. It doesn’t matter that the same gun rights that protected Rittenhouse protected Mr. Coffee. It doesn’t matter that “protecting property” isn’t an exclusively white principle. I’m sure Reid has heard of Rooftop Koreans. It doesn’t matter because they believe America is rooted in racism. To them, our system is so corrupt, the idea of living in a neutral world is rejected. But even if neutrality were impossible, is it worth torching the rights that are supposed to—and often—protect me?
According to Critical Race Theory: An Introduction, “Unlike traditional civil rights discourse, which stresses incrementalism and step-by-step process, critical race theory questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.”
“My Money My Business”
Pumpkin Spice Season Mug
Rittenhouse was a white man trying to protect property that rioters wanted to destroy at a Black Lives Matter “protest.” That is why Rittenhouse is the bad guy. It doesn’t matter if the jury thought Rittenhouse was in the right. He did an evil thing in the eyes of the radical left. Therefore, Rittenhouse needed to be maligned and destroyed. It didn’t matter if they damaged the second amendment or the right to self-defense in the process. After all, they want to deconstruct our nation and reconstruct it into their racial political utopia.
You may have wondered why the media injected so much race into the narrative, that viewers literally believed Rittenhouse shot black men. You may have wondered why Rittenhouse’s trial was continuously compared to the Ahmaud Arbery case. Business Insider even went far enough to comment on the race of the jurors, as if Kenosha had a large black population it was ignoring. The answer is simple: racism is a useful tool. It’s a means to an end.
Historical accuracy is not the point of critical race theory. Justice, objectivity, or fairness isn’t the point of critical race theory. Reshaping the world is the goal of critical race theory, and they’ll gladly use discrimination to fight racism. While using gasoline to fight a fire may seem like a risky and foolish dream to you and me, the truth is its typical, idealistic, utopia nonsense that is on-brand for a Marxist fantasy.
