Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Evangelical
Politics and Religion
A Critical Race Theory Take on Afghanistan

A Critical Race Theory Take on Afghanistan

Last updated on: August 23, 2021 at 6:00 am by Gene Veith

0 Comments

A Critical Race Theory Take on Afghanistan 2021-08-21T13:29:59-04:00 Gene Veith

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Critical theory presents itself as an all-encompassing universal principle, teaching that all human institutions and cultures can be explained in terms of dominant groups exercising power over and thus oppressing other groups. Critical race theory has grown out of the American experience of race-based slavery and injustices towards black people.

But the influence of American academia spreads around the world, so it is interesting to see how non-Americans are adapting critical race theory to their own contexts and to the traditional Marxist attacks on “imperialism.” So we now have a critical race theory take on Afghanistan and its current takeover by the Taliban.

The Arabic news service Al Jazeera has published an article entitled Monsters, Inc: The Taliban as Empire’s bogeyman by Sahar Ghumkhor and Anila Daulatzai, two women described as academics working out of Australia.

Their project, using the jargon of the field, is “interrogating the presuppositions that underpin prevailing paradigms on Afghanistan.” They take up “the daunting task of offering critical theorising of Afghanistan today,” even in the face of ” the overwhelming whiteness of Afghanistan Studies.”

They accuse others of “racialising” the Taliban, but this is exactly what they do, framing the war in Afghanistan as a conflict between “white” Americans, Europeans, and their Afghan allies and the indigenous Taliban in the black role. (Never mind that radical Islamic fundamentalism is a religion, not a race.)

They then argue that there is no essential difference between the two sides, criticizing the assumption that “The ‘toxic masculinity’ of the Taliban fighters is somehow more toxic than unrestrained white violence, white occupation, white torture, white drones.”

They complain that the violence of the Taliban is portrayed as irrational, whereas the violence of the “Imperialists” is portrayed as rational, just, and unintentional. They ask, “Why have we come to see the logic of imperial violence on the Afghan population as more logical, instead of as (or more) illogical, as (or more) illegitimate, as (or more) repulsive as Taliban violence?”

I can see their point. Violence is violence. The ordinary Afghan peasant is in danger from both sides. But the point, I think, is weakened by the authors’ insistence on “racializing” the issue.

Recent reports of war crimes by the Australian and British armies which showed Afghanistan had become a killing field, as white men so desired, gesture to the continued power of white innocence, white redemption and its global reach. Western violence, to borrow from cultural anthropologist Talal Asad, is presented as unintentional and rational, despite its murderous trail, and its overarching intent is always just.

Notice what this preoccupation with “whiteness” does to the widespread fear of what the Taliban rule will mean for women. Already girls’ schools are being closed, Taliban fighters are taking young girls as sex slaves, a woman has been shot for not wearing a burqa, and a woman whose cooking was not up to par was set on fire.

But Drs. Ghumkhor and Daulatzai, two well-educated Muslim women, dismiss concerns about Afghan women because feminism is “white”:

How does one express solidarity with Afghans, and what forms of support should be abandoned? (Perhaps, white liberal feminist tears/fears for Afghan women and girls that still yet justify US imperial violence would be a good start.)

They take recourse in a narrative analysis: “The war on terror is often told like a fairytale, of Muslim women as damsels in distress, and white knights bravely fighting brutes to free them.”

So much for “theorizing,” but what about actual women being raped, locked up, and brutalized?

This brings up another aspect of critical race theory. If “whiteness” is the locus of evil, then it isn’t just the bad deeds of white people that need to be condemned. Their good deeds are also tainted by “whiteness” and so must also be condemned.

Thus, Drs. Ghumkhor and Daulatzai express harsh indignation not only against western troops, but also against western humanitarian workers (thousands of whom are now trapped in Afghanistan):

A romanticised offering of the foreign occupation provides deceptive indicators of girls in school, women working (as if this alone indicates anything) or the joys of listening to music, fashion or skateboarding. Erased in this sentimentality is how Afghans have been subjected to layers of violence in the form of “humanitarianism”.

As we have seen, critical race theory has a very broad definition of violence, encompassing not only causing physical harm but also words, attitudes, and any perception of the imposition of power. But these scholars call humanitarian workers–who have been risking their lives to give the Afghani people health care, food, and education–vampires. That charge comes in another statement that minimizes women’s rights, referring to “a vampiric aid industry, both committed to maintaining Afghan dependency, even as they speak of women’s empowerment, education and progress.”

This mindset of blaming “whiteness” for good deeds as well as bad deeds lies is evident here too, as not only slaveholders but also abolitionists are having their statues taken down. White people who fought against slavery and, by extension, those who supported the Civil Rights Movement are guilty of the “white savior complex.” Slaves actually, it is said, freed themselves. The Civil War, in which some 360,000 union soldiers died to end slavery, actually did nothing more than impose the new slavery of capitalism. And the flag under which those soldiers died has been reinterpreted as an icon of racism, something for professional athletes to publicly disrespect.

We see too how critical theory, for all of its revolutionary rhetoric, ends in support for an oppressive status quo. In the United States, critical race theory has cancelled decades of racial progress and has brought back racial essentialism. And now in Afghanistan it celebrates the death of liberal democracy and the reimposition of Islamic theocracy.

As thousands of Afghanis are desperately trying to flee their country in fear of the Taliban, we should remember to be concerned also for Drs. Ghumkhor and Daulatzai, who must be suffering terribly from the white oppression they must be experiencing in what must be, by their definition, a racist university in what they must consider the hellhole of Australia.

Photo by USAID on Pixnio

Taliban Victory in Afghanistan

whiteness

Previous Post

August 20, 2021

Where the Battle Is Raging

Next Post

August 24, 2021 Schism among the Evangelicals?

Recent Comments

0 | Leave a Comment

"I know wired earbuds are making a comeback (I never stopped using them as I ..."

reg

Luther on Tools

"VCRs, tape decks, and cassette players are all having a revival among a segment of ..."

Tom Hering

Luther on Tools

"As a (retired) lawyer I see potential liability from sharing things like power or sharp ..."

reg

Luther on Tools

"I am not sure the items you mentioned, though disused, discontinued, discarded, could be considered ..."

reg

Luther on Tools

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category America Apologetics Art baseball Bible Blog Christ Church crime Culture Economics Education Ethics Family Food Football Government History Holidays Holy Week Humor International Islam Language Law Life Issues Literature Media Medicine Movies Music Nature News Personal Philosophy Politics psychology Reformation Religions Sacraments Science sex Social Science Sports technology television terrorism Theology Uncategorized Vocation war

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was Jude?

Select your answer to see how you score.

The first martyred apostle The apostle who replaced Judas Brother of Peter Brother of Jesus

Books by This Author Books by Gene Veith

See All Titles »