In today’s America, if you express concerns about transgender ideology, question the normalization of homosexuality, or critique radical feminism, you’re likely to be labeled a bigot. That’s not because most Americans are actually intolerant or hateful. It’s because a sophisticated ideological framework—critical theory, operating through its political tool intersectionality—has redefined dissent as oppression.
This redefinition isn’t accidental. It is an intentional strategy, both ideological and political. It provides the moral basis for suppressing traditional views and creates a coalition of identity groups united not by shared values but by shared grievances. And nowhere has this strategy been more effective than within the Democrat Party, which has historically depended on coalition politics—groups with disparate interests uniting temporarily against a common “majority enemy.”
In this post, we will examine the foundations of this ideological movement, expose its strategic use of moral conflation, and demonstrate how it powers the modern left-wing political machine. We’ll draw especially from Voddie Baucham’s It’s Not Like Being Black, along with commentary from critical theory’s own critics.
Glossary of Key Terms
Critical Theory – A worldview that critiques society as a structure of domination and oppression, especially through class, race, gender, and sexuality. Developed by Neo-Marxists in the Frankfurt School.
Intersectionality – A framework that combines identity categories like race, sex, gender, and class into a unified oppression narrative, arguing that people at the “intersection” of these identities experience compounded injustice.
Coalitional Politics – Political strategy where parties form alliances among groups with differing goals to oppose a common adversary, often to gain electoral advantage.
Conflation – Blurring the distinctions between fundamentally different ideas to make them appear identical (e.g., equating criticism of transgenderism with racism).
Neo-Marxism – A modern adaptation of Marxism that replaces economic class struggle with cultural and identity group struggles.
Democrat Coalition – The political alliance of groups such as racial minorities, feminists, LGBTQ+ activists, immigrants, environmentalists, and labor unions under the Democratic Party umbrella.
How Intersectionality Hijacks the Moral High Ground
Intersectionality is built on one central idea: that all forms of social oppression are interconnected. In this framework, racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, xenophobia, and religious bigotry are all just different masks worn by the same oppressive system—usually portrayed as white, male, heterosexual, Christian, and capitalist.
But this “all-oppressions-are-equal” logic relies on a trick—moral sleight-of-hand.
Race, particularly in the American context, has a unique historical gravity because of slavery, Jim Crow, and systemic discrimination. Nearly all Americans now recognize racism as an evil to be opposed. Intersectionality leverages this moral consensus by equating racial oppression with categories that do not carry the same moral clarity—like gender identity and sexual behavior.
That’s why disagreeing with transgender ideology is labeled “transphobia.” It’s why affirming traditional marriage is branded as “homophobia.” And it’s why criticizing radical feminism is viewed as a form of misogyny. The goal is to transfer the moral authority of the civil rights movement to a broader ideological agenda—one that includes behaviors and philosophies many Americans, especially Christians, see as morally wrong.
Voddie Baucham’s Rebuke of False Equivalence
In It’s Not Like Being Black, Voddie Baucham dismantles the core argument of intersectionality. As a black Christian pastor, he understands racial injustice firsthand—but he draws a clear line between racial identity and moral behavior.
He writes:
“Race is not a behavior. Race is not a choice. To equate race with sexuality or gender identity is to insult the true nature of the civil rights struggle.”
Baucham shows that while black Americans could not change their skin color to escape oppression, individuals today are demanding not tolerance but affirmation for chosen lifestyles and gender identities—and silencing any disagreement under the banner of “equality.”
His book exposes the moral confusion intersectionality fosters—intentionally so—and challenges the church to stop capitulating to this ideological pressure.
A Strategy Tailor-Made for Democrat Politics
Intersectionality isn’t just an ideology; it’s a political strategy. It aligns perfectly with the Democrat Party’s long-standing approach: uniting diverse, even conflicting, groups under a common enemy narrative.
Historically, the Democrat coalition has included:
- Black voters (many of whom hold conservative Christian values)
- Feminists (often hostile to traditional family structures)
- LGBTQ+ activists (who reject biblical definitions of gender and marriage)
- Muslims (who may reject homosexuality and feminism outright)
- Secular progressives (who despise religion)
- Illegal immigrants (who may compete with lower-income Americans for jobs)
On paper, these groups should not get along. They hold conflicting beliefs about morality, family, God, and society.
But critical theory gives them a shared language of oppression, and intersectionality gives them a unifying framework: they are all victims of a supposedly oppressive American majority. This enables the Democrat Party to say: “We may not agree on everything, but we all agree that they—white Christian conservatives—are the problem.”
This is classic Marxist class warfare, repackaged. Instead of the bourgeoisie vs. proletariat, it’s now oppressor vs. oppressed, with identity replacing class. The end goal remains the same: revolution by any means.
The Myth of Minority Consensus
Intersectionality assumes solidarity where there often is none. Many black Americans oppose the LGBT agenda. Many feminists are uncomfortable with men entering women’s spaces. Many Hispanic immigrants hold pro-family, pro-life values. Many Muslims reject modern gender theory. And many secular progressives are growing weary of being forced to celebrate every new identity category.
And yet, the Democrat Party continues to present these groups as one, cohesive bloc.
This illusion of unity is sustained by:
- Media narratives that suppress intragroup dissent.
- Academic institutions that indoctrinate students into grievance-based identity politics.
- Corporate policies that reward ideological conformity.
- Peer pressure and public shaming that silence moderates and traditionalists within minority groups.
The truth is, many within the Democrat coalition actually share more in common with the average American—on values like family, faith, and merit—than they do with the radical leftist agenda. But critical theory tells them that to question the coalition is to betray their group’s interests.
The Role of Fear and Shame
Intersectionality would collapse without one key ingredient: shame.
If you express doubt about transgender ideology, you’re transphobic.
If you believe in biblical marriage, you’re homophobic.
If you criticize illegal immigration, you’re xenophobic.
If you affirm biological differences between men and women, you’re sexist.
If you say all lives matter, you’re racist.
The result? People stay silent, not because they agree, but because they fear the social consequences of being labeled an “oppressor.” The left weaponizes empathy against traditional values, using emotional blackmail to force compliance.
This is not about kindness. It’s about control.
A Christian and Constitutional Response
Christians must not be bullied into silence by dishonest categories. We must be people of truth and grace—loving all people while refusing to affirm what God calls sin.
We also must defend constitutional principles, like free speech and freedom of religion. These rights are under assault when the state and culture label Christian belief as hate.
We must:
- Teach young people to distinguish between immutable identity and moral behavior.
- Expose the ideological roots of intersectionality in Marxist and anti-Christian philosophy.
- Call out the strategic conflation of categories as political manipulation.
- Stand firm in the gospel, which offers identity, forgiveness, and hope—not grievance and division.
Conclusion
Critical theory and intersectionality aren’t just academic concepts. They are weapons in a political war—one that redefines good and evil, silences biblical truth, and manipulates entire voting blocs with false promises of justice.
Voddie Baucham rightly warns that “it’s not like being black”—and we would do well to listen. The Democrat Party’s coalition is not as unified as it appears. Its cohesion is manufactured, held together by shame, fear, and ideological coercion.
But the truth still matters. And the truth is this:
We are not oppressors for believing God created male and female. We are not bigots for believing marriage is between a man and a woman. We are not hateful for telling the truth in love.
The real oppression is the silencing of those who dare to say so.
S.D.G.,
Robert Sparkman
rob@christiannewsjunkie.com
RELATED CONTENT
Concerning the Related Content section, I encourage everyone to evaluate the content carefully.
If I have listed the content, I think it is worthwhile viewing to educate yourself on the topic, but it may contain coarse language or some opinions I don’t agree with.
Feel free to offer your comments below. Respectful comments without expletives and personal attacks will be posted and I will respond to them.
Comments are closed after sixty days due to spamming issues from internet bots.
You can always send me an email at rob@christiannewsjunkie.com if you want to comment on something afterwards, though.
If you have evidence that I am wrong about a material statement of fact, provide the evidence and I will gladly review it and make revisions if merited. Obviously, there are some assertions that are matters of opinion that I will not change, but I always strive to be truthful.
I will continue to add videos and other items to the Related Content section as opportunities present themselves.
I recommend these Youtube channels and commentators for good content on politics and news from a Christian and/or conservative worldview: Albert Mohler, Allie Beth Stuckey, Bill O’Reilly, CBN News, Hugh Hewitt, John Anderson Media (Australia), Nick Freitas, Ruthless Podcast (language warning), Scott Jennings, The Hot Zone with Chuck Holton, Vince Dao, and Verdict with Ted Cruz.
For livestreaming of political protests and riots by conservative commentators, check out Nate Friedman, Cam Higby, James Klug, and Nick Shirley. I don’t agree with the perspectives of all these commentators and the language of protesters is often obscene. Most news outlets will not cover these illegal assemblies, though, because it doesn’t promote their narrative.
Depictions of Jesus Christ are used in some illustrations. I realize that some including conservative Presbyterians consider this to be idolatry. I respectfully disagree with their position on this matter as the commandment forbids worshiping such depictions, and I do not worship these illustrations.