I suspect that one major problem, especially affecting non-specialists (of whom I am a member) who nevertheless believe themselves to be experts in critical theory, is the attempt to integrate and unite Marx, Gramsci, Critical Theory, Critical Legal Studies, Critical Race 1/

2/ Theory, intersectionality, postmodernism, poststructuralism, anti-essentialism, dominance theory, etc., etc., into one large, tight, intellectual project, though this has never been considered the case—at least not among actual theorists working within each camp.

3/ For example, Critical Race Theorists (CRTs) have consistently noted the tension between their own set of ideas and that of postmodernism (PM) and poststructuralism (PS), from the very outset of the movement.

4/ Angela Harris, for example, described the CRT project, some thirty years ago, as indeed drawing on PM and PS methods of critique and deconstruction, but likewise argued that they are ineffective and counterproductive when real life liberation is the goal.

5/ That is, CRT includes the techniques of unmasking provided by, e.g., Foucault, but necessarily remains committed to a “Modernist” understandings reality, due to the subject at hand (race) and the end sought (liberation). She writes:

6/"CRT’s commitment to the liberation of people of color—and the project of critical social science (generally) and normative legal scholarship (in particular) as a way to further that liberation—suggest a faith in certain concepts and institutions that postmodernists lack.

7/ "When race-crits tell modernist stories, they assume that “people of color” describes a coherent category with at least some shared values and interests. They assume that the idea of “liberation” is meaningful-that racism is something that can one day somehow cease to exist,

8/ "or cease to exert any power over us. Modernist narratives assume a “real” reality out there, and that reason can bring us face to face with it. And modernist narratives have faith that once enough people see the truth, right action will follow: that enlightenment leads to

9/ "empowerment, and that empowerment leads to emancipation." (“The Jurisprudence of Reconstruction”)

Derrick Bell concurred:

"Critical race theory scholarship is characterized by frequent use of the first person, storytelling, narrative, allegory, interdisciplinary treatment

10/ "of law, and the unapologetic use of creativity. The work is often disruptive because its commitment to anti-racism goes well beyond civil rights, integration, affirmative action, and other liberal measures. This is not to say that critical race theory adherents automatically

11/ "or uniformly “trash” liberal ideology and method. Rather, they are highly suspicious of the liberal agenda, distrust its method, and want to retain what they see as a valuable strain of egalitarianism which may exist despite, and not because of, liberalism.

12/ "As this description suggests, critical race theory scholarship exhibits a good deal of tension between its commitment to radical critique of the law (which is normatively deconstructionist) and its commitment to radical emancipation by the law (which is normatively

13/ "reconstructionist). Angela Harris views this tension—between “modernist” and “postmodernist” narrative—as a source of strength because of critical race theorists’ ability to use it in ways that are creative rather than paralyzing."

14/ (“Who’s Afraid of Critical Race Theory?,” p. 78)

And we see the same tension in current CRT scholarship. For example, Patricia Hill Collins assesses “Francophone Social Theory” in her 2019 book, Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory.

15/ Like Harris and Bell, she lauds postmodernist and postructuralist critiques of power relations and their deconstructive methods, but questions their title to “critical theory” for lack of commitment to an ethical core, to social justice, and to liberation theory, as well as

16/ overall lack of “reflective accountability.”

"Marxist social theory, the Critical Theory of the Frankfurt school, existentialism, liberation theory, and British cultural studies all have a critical impetus at their core. Other projects may carry the mantle of critical social

17/ "theory, as in the case of postmodernism and poststructuralism, yet they might be more wedded to criticizing society than to reforming or transforming it." (Location 3039)

In one last modern example (2019), Devon Carbado and Cheryl Harris explain much the same while

18/ assessing intersectionality thirty years following Kimberle Crenshaw’s formative work. They, like Bell and Collins, agree with Angela Harris’—and CRT theorists’ in general—critique of postmodernism; in particular, its radical anti-essentialism contrasted with CRT’s continued

19/ commitment to “Modernism”:

"CRT’s early repudiation of a certain kind of anti-essentialist critique cleared the ground for the articulation of a range of important ideas, among them these: There is something irreducible that we might call race (though the meaning of race

20/ "shifts over time and place, is historically contingent, and intersects with and is shaped by other axes of social differentiation. There are people we might call “Black” (though the content and experiences of blackness are not static but a function of particular social,

21/ "legal, cultural, and ideological processes). There is a social force we might call “racism” (though its content and effects, and the technologies through which it is expressed, are neither transhistorical nor predetermined). And there is a phenomenon that we might call

22/ "whiteness (though its boundaries are never fixed or fully articulated but are constituted and reconstituted in the service of racial power." (“Intersectionality at 30: Mapping the Margins of Anti-Essentialism, Intersectionality, and Dominance Theory”)

23/23 What these examples show is that it is very important to not conflate ideologies. Marxism is not Critical Theory is not Poststructuralism is not Postmodernism is not Critical Race Theory and, increasingly, is not Intersectionality.