Structural Determinism

Social Justice Usage

Source: Delgado, Richard, and Jean Stefancic. Critical Race Theory: An Introduction, first edition. NYU Press, 2001.

Structural determinism: Concept that a mode of thought or widely shared practice determines significant social outcomes, usually without our conscious knowledge. (pp. 155–156)

These examples point out the concept that lies at the heart of structural determinism, the idea that our system, by reason of its structure and vocabulary, cannot redress certain types of wrong. Structural determinism, a powerful notion that engages both the idealistic and the materialistic strands of critical race theory. (p. 26)

New Discourses Commentary

“Structural determinism” refers to the idea that society is fundamentally organized (structured) by sweeping systems of power that impact different groups (e.g., identity groups) differently and go a significant part of the way to determining the range of possible outcomes in their lives. In general, structural determinism refers to the belief that the various “structural” elements of society have broadly deterministic effects upon outcomes for people within different groups (see also, Social Justice and identity politics). Because this view holds that the structures themselves determine outcomes (mostly at the group level) and that these outcomes are often unjust and cannot be remedied within the existing system or structures, it follows that a revolution that replaces the existing systems and structures (with Critical ones) is the remedy for this alleged fully entrenched and otherwise intractable problem (see also, disrupt and dismantle).

These structures in society might be legal, material, economic, or otherwise, though the related (Marxian) doctrine in that domain is usually referred to as “material determinism.” They can also refer to the way that language, construed as broadly as possible, and knowledge are structured and the impact that has on society and the people who live within it (see also, episteme, structural, and structuralism). Finally, they can refer to the kind of structure that institutions, policies, norms, etc., give to society in combination with or separate from those previously mentioned elements, again with an eye to the ways that systems of power shape and contour the impacts of those structures on the people who live within them (see also, superstructure). This is one of the core assumptions of the Theory of Critical Social Justice and related ideology. Structural determinism is, as such, one of the key ideas underlying concepts like systemic racism and systemic sexism, and virtually all Theories of diversity, equity, inclusion, belonging, justice, and injustice that exist within Critical Social Justice depend upon its partial or total acceptance.

For example, the doctrine of “systemic racism” is little more than the belief that our society is fundamentally organized by racist assumptions and white supremacy, and that this underlying organization of society is the ultimate cause of statistical disparities in outcomes of certain racial groups as compared with others (named, racial inequity). “Racial justice,” under this doctrine, can therefore only be achieved when the entire system is seized, reimagined, and remade (through disruption, dismantling, and ultimately revolution) in a way that has ended the current system and reorganized the new one to achieve racial equity. critical race Theory is the name of the relevant Critical Theory and related social movement that seeks to achieve this (effectively through universal adoption of its tenets and broad empowerment of its adherents).

Though the various Theories of Critical Social Justice are not, themselves, specifically Marxist (rather being Marxian), one would be correct in connecting the idea of these alleged organizing systems of power in society to Marx’s concept of the societal superstructure (and the derived Gramscian idea of cultural hegemony). In the relevant language, within critical race Theory, for example, “white supremacy” defines the superstructure of society, and systemic racism is the result, which manifests materially in racially inequitable outcomes. Critical race Theory thereby becomes a method of bringing that Marxian superstructure into question in the attempt to dismantle systemic racism and produce racial justice (a racially equitable system that operates under the control of critical race Theorists and their assumptions). The feminist doctrine of “patriarchy” operates in an identical fashion on sex and gender (see also, misogyny).

Structural determinism is, in this regard, little more than the assumption than that the imposition of these alleged systems of power (superstructures) in society is highly determinant of the range of outcomes that people can expect by belonging to some group (privileged or oppressed) touched by that power dynamic. The white supremacist system is said to benefit whites at the expensive of people of color and especially blacks (see also, BIPOC, whiteness, and anti-Blackness). Patriarchy is said to constrain women, say by establishing a “glass ceiling,” while advantaging men. Normativities, such as heteronormativity and cisnormativity, are said to do similar across the lines of straight versus gay and transgender versus cisgender, respectively. In all cases, these alleged stratifications of society will be analyzed through Marxian conflict theory and subjected to critical activism.

Structural determinism is the Critical Social Justice replacement for essentialism, which it otherwise eschews (sort of—see also, antiessentialism). Essentialism is the view that there is something intrinsic or essential about some group (usually an identity group like a race, sex, gender, sexuality, etc.) that defines how it is and thus how society will view it, its range of options and opportunities in society, norms governing it, etc. For example, sex essentialism might argue that there are essential characteristics (usually, but not always, meaning cognitive and psychological) relevant to being either male or female. Race essentialism might hold, for example, that the races are sufficiently biologically distinct as to present with inherited differences in traits, most controversially IQ, that present meaningfully (and statistically) at the group level. Biological essentialism is a term that might encompass both of these and pin biology as the underlying reason for those essential differences (see also, blank slatism). At least nominally (and in many ways veridically under its social constructivist theses), the Theory of Critical Social Justice rejects essentialism, but as it accepts structural determinism, this is frequently considered to be a distinction with little difference.

It would be most accurate to say that adherents to Critical Social Justice do reject essentialism within the full range of their social constructivism. For example, critical race Theorists maintain that race is wholly socially constructed, so they would reject race essentialism entirely. Queer Theorists often hold sex, gender, and sexuality to be largely or wholly socially constructed, and so they would reject the relevant biological essentialisms in the relevant domains. Gender-critical feminists, on the other hand, accept gender constructivism but not sex constructivism, and therefore would adhere to some degree of sex essentialism while rejecting that it bears any necessary relationship to the social construction of gender and related gender roles (see also, trans-exclusionary radical feminists). Critics of Critical Social Justice, including from within these disciplines themselves, often levy that they do uphold some essentialism alongside antiesssentialism as a consequence of the way the Theories consider identity, and the reason, at bottom, is the embrace of structural determinism.

The doctrine of structural determinism, while not necessarily ascribing any essential characteristic to the collective members of any identity group, does ascribe an essential lived experience of life as a member of that identity group under the prevailing (superstructure) systems of power. Thus, while there may be absolutely nothing biologically distinct (beyond superficial characteristics) between whites and blacks, for example, and their races can be taken to be wholly socially constructed, the doctrine of structural determinism asserts that the (societal, systemic) imposition of race creates a unique and describable experience of what it means to belong to that racial category within the prevailing system of power. This gives rise to the idea that there is an “authentic” experience of having a particular identity that is described solely by the relevant Critical Theory of identity, as a critical consciousness of the relevant structurally determinant power (super)structure is necessary to understand the circumstance of occupying that imposed identity position (see also, Woke and voice of color). Otherwise, an individual is likely to have one of many forms of false consciousness about what their sociocultural (identity-based) positionality implies about their potential outcomes and experiences in life (e.g., internalized dominance, internalized oppression, white comfort, and internalized racism, to name a few).

The practical implications of a doctrine of structural determinism (and the need to critically examine it through tools like critical constructivism) are vast and concerning. For one thing, it establishes the relevant Critical Theory as the only possible way to accurately understand the phenomenon of belonging to a particular identity group (analyzed intersectionally). For another, it largely erases the agency of the individuals in the various identity groups as any theory of determinism would. This necessitates Theory to interpret those whose stories diverge from the relevant Critical Theory very cynically, accusing deviants of being things like race traitors or model minorities or saying that they are acting white, all typically either because they have “internalized” the dominant (superstructrual) system or in their own self-interest. The so-called “soft bigotry of low expectations” is virtually unavoidable under a doctrine of structural determinism that holds that being on the relatively oppressed side of a privilege/oppression dynamic materially holds one back in significant ways. Identity-based scapegoating of “privileged” groups is also virtually unavoidable.

In the end, structural determinism creates a kind of identity-based essentialism once-removed, if we might use the expression. Moreover, this essentialism once-removed is externalized by the Theory that is doing it by claiming that any essential features associated with identity categories are not intrinsic but are imposed upon the members of that category by an oppressive society that won’t let them be otherwise (see also, minoritize). This leads to claims, say, that critical race Theory cannot racialize issues because it is actually deracializing issues where race and racism have already been imposed from outside and against their will, often by intentionally engaging in identity politics and identity-first thinking. In many cases, including under the activist doctrine of strategic essentialism, this form of activism proceeds by accepting the allegedly imposed identity and exaggerating it, either as a source of pride or as an act of strategic resistance (as in the politics of parody). Perhaps nowhere is this more conspicuous than under many of the activities of transgender activism, which frequently results in defining one’s identity by vigorously adopting stereotypical presentations and behaviors of the adopted gender identity as a willful rejection of the allegedly imposed cisgender identity norm (see also, gender performativity).

Related Terms

Acting white; Anti-Blackness; Antiessentialism; Authentic; Belonging; Biological essentialism; BIPOC; Blank slatism; Cisgender; Cisnormatvity; Conflict theory; Critical; Critical consciousness; Critical constructivism; Critical race Theory; Critical Theory; Dismantle; Disrupt; Diversity; Episteme; Essentialism; Equity; False consciousness; Feminism; Gender; Gender-critical feminism; Gender identity; Gender performativity; Gramscian; Hegemony; Heteronormativity; Identity; Identity-first; Identity politics; Ideology; Inclusion; Injustice; Internalized dominance; Internalized oppression; Internalized racism; Intersectionality; Justice; Knowledge(s); Lived experience; Man; Marxian; Marxism; Material determinism; Minoritize; Misogyny; Model minority; Norm; Oppression; Patriarchy; People of color; Politics of parody; Position; Power (systemic); Privilege; Queer Theory; Race; Race traitor; Racial justice; Racism (systemic); Reimagine; Revolution; Sex; Sex essentialism; Sexism (systemic); Sexuality; Social construction; Social constructivism; Social Justice; Structural; Structuralism; Superstructure; System, the; Theory; Trans-exclusionary radical feminism; Transgender; Voice of color; White; White comfort; White supremacy; Whiteness; Woke/Wokeness; Woman

Revision date: 8/10/21

⇐ Back to Translations from the Wokish

James Lindsay