The WNBA Has Become the Next Version of the Marxist BLM PsyOp

Black Lives Matter as a movement was originally formed to promote Marxism and advance an anti-Christian, anti-family worldview to Black Americans. It was founded on the premises of pro-LGBTQIA+ supremacy. Now, we’re seeing a different play on a different front but with the same goal of indoctrinating the Black community, which has thus far been resistant to trans-dominance.

The current spat in the WNBA has morphed into a BLM-style battlefront. Whether that was planned for a while or if it’s an opportunistic move by the Globalist Elite Cabal is unknown, but the intended results are clear, albeit cleverly smoke-screened. Before I explain how the WNBA became a Marxist psyop, it’s important to see how BLM was used to achieve the same goals.

In September 2020, at the absolute peak of its cultural power, with murals on city streets and corporate logos turning black in tribute, the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation did something strange. It quietly deleted the page on its website that explained what it believed.

The Washington Examiner discovered the removal, and Fox News confirmed that visitors to the “What We Believe” page were suddenly greeted with a message reading, “Page Not Found. Sorry, but the page you were trying to view does not exist.”

Organizations do not hide their core convictions at the moment of maximum influence unless those convictions are a liability with the very people they claim to represent. That deletion was not housekeeping. It was a confession. And it invites a question that almost nobody in American media has been willing to ask plainly. What exactly was Black Lives Matter selling to Black America, and who was paying for the sales campaign?

No conspiracy theory is required to answer the first part. They wrote it down.

The deleted page, preserved forever on the Wayback Machine, declared that the organization existed to “disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages.’”

It pledged to “foster a queer-affirming network” and to free members “from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual,” as CBN News documented.

The page committed the movement to being “transgender affirming” and to dismantling what it called “cisgender privilege,” language The Blaze catalogued before it vanished.

Notice what is missing from those statements. Policing. The organization that presented itself to grieving Black families and sympathetic white suburbanites as a police reform movement devoted its founding charter to queer theory and the deconstruction of the two-parent family. Co-founder Patrisse Cullors removed any remaining ambiguity in a 2015 interview when she said, “I actually do think we have an ideological frame. We are trained Marxists.”

Sympathetic media outlets routinely described the organization as one created by queer Black women, a framing the founders embraced and publicized themselves. None of this was hidden. It simply went unread by the millions who donated, marched, and painted the slogan on plywood.

This matters because Marxism has always understood the family as an obstacle. From Marx and Engels forward, revolutionary theory has treated the household bound by marriage, faith, and generational loyalty as a competing power structure that must be broken before the state or the movement can claim total allegiance. BLM’s founding language was not an eccentric add-on. It was the whole program, stated with admirable honesty until the honesty became inconvenient.

Here is where the story turns from ideology to audience, because the community this program was aimed at is the most churchgoing population in the United States. Gallup found that 45 percent of Black Americans attend church weekly or almost weekly, the highest rate of any major racial or ethnic group in the country, well above the national average. Pew Research found that Black Americans hold somewhat more conservative views on sexuality than the general public, and that fully half say religious leaders should not perform same-sex marriage ceremonies at all.

In other words, the movement that wrapped itself in the mantle of Black America was carrying an ideological cargo that Black America’s oldest, most trusted, and most beloved institution, the church, has never accepted. The Black church survived slavery, survived Jim Crow, survived redlining and neglect, and it did so by holding fast to Scripture, to marriage, and to the conviction that children are a heritage of the Lord.

A movement claiming to speak for that community while pledging to disrupt its family structure and dissolve its Biblical anthropology was not representing Black America. It was attempting to convert it.

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? (Matthew 7:15-16)

By their fruits. So let us examine the fruits, and the fertilizer.

Grassroots movements are funded by the grass roots. This one was not. In 2016, the Ford Foundation and Borealis Philanthropy announced the Black-Led Movement Fund, a six-year campaign to steer $100 million to the Movement for Black Lives coalition, on top of more than $33 million already flowing from George Soros’s Open Society Foundations.

Read how Borealis itself described the fund’s purpose. It existed to advance “the leadership and vision of young, Black, queer, feminists and immigrant leaders.” That is not my characterization. That is the funders describing their own targeting criteria, in writing, with the word “queer” positioned ahead of nearly everything else.

Then came 2020, when the BLM Global Network Foundation hauled in roughly $90 million in corporate and foundation money in a single year, part of a staggering wave in which corporations pledged close to $2 billion to BLM-related causes. And the fruits of that harvest? Local chapters publicly complained they were starving while the national organization purchased a six million dollar Southern California compound with donor funds, a scandal that eventually drew reported federal scrutiny over allegations that donors had been defrauded. The neighborhoods where the cameras filmed the grief got murals. The ideologues got mansions.

Everything above is documented. What follows is speculation, and I will label it as such, because the difference between an argument and a fever dream is knowing which is which.

Why did the wealthiest foundations in America, institutions that employ armies of program officers and vet every grant, choose to pour nine figures into an explicitly Marxist organization whose charter targeted the nuclear family? They read the “What We Believe” page. It was their job to read it. Did they fund the mission despite that language, or because of it?

Is it coincidence that the community with the deepest Christian resistance to the sexual revolution was the one selected to receive a lavishly funded movement preaching queer theory under the banner of racial justice? When elite money flows this precisely toward this particular mismatch, the burden of explanation sits with the funders, and they have never offered one.

Which brings us to the WNBA. The BLM psyop made headway in convincing some Black Americans that protecting their lives was connected to defending LGBTQIA+ rights, but not as much as the power brokers had hoped. What they learned was that support for Black lives did not easily translate into support for transgender rights.

Now, it appears they are going from the opposite angle. It is easier to rally troops, change hearts, and indoctrinate minds with opposition rather than support. Being OPPOSED to people like Sophie Cunningham and her status as so-called “MAGA Barbie” is far easier to promote in a league that has always been dominated by Black athletes. If the “bad guys” are against males playing in women’s sports, then reliable Democrat voters in the Black community can justify being in favor of “trans rights” even if it goes against their core beliefs.

What we’re seeing in the WNBA is a continuation of the BLM psyop. It won’t be as big; chances are slim that cities will burn because Sophie Cunningham is popular with conservatives. But it may be more effective in achieving the goal of opening Black minds to accepting LGBTQIA+ brainwashing.

The original conversion efforts failed. Black church pews are still full on Sunday morning. Black grandmothers still open the King James Bible their own grandmothers held. The institution that white philanthropy could not buy and Marxist theory could not deconstruct is still standing, still preaching Christ crucified and risen, while the movement that came in sheep’s clothing sold its headquarters and scrubbed its website.

But now we’re seeing a new battle being waged against them, one that is far less obvious and potentially more effective. The wolves got the money. The church kept the faith thus far. But the risk of indoctrination is still real.

By their fruits, indeed, ye shall know them.