The Virus of Deconstruction: How a French Theory Paralyzed the West

In 1966, a delegation of French authors and thinkers attended John Hopkins University in Baltimore to present a new technique of interpretation for Literature and Culture. A young philosopher, Jacques Derrida, was one of the delegates representing the concept of deconstruction which would later become an infection to all areas of the Western World.

This evolution of thought would proliferate for the next twenty years as individuals like Michel Foucault, who emphasized issues of power/relation and domination and Gilles Deleuze, whose concepts were based on a rhizomatic philosophy, would be brought back to the United States and become intertwined with the concepts of identity politics and critical theory in America.

This inclusion eventually returned to become the ideological underpinning of what we now identify as “Wokeism“ throughout the World today.

Left to right: Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze. Three French philosophers whose ideas would outlast them - and not always for the better.

The methodology of deconstruction has become the most successful mental virus developed against any Civilization. The following will explain how deconstruction works, its devastating effect on our society, and how we can implement a viable method to eradicate this virus.

From Method to Ontology & Here Comes the Trap

At the heart of the deconstruction methodology rests the deceptively simple thesis which states that all truths are an expression of power. In the deconstructive worldview all of our “truths”, be they sacred texts, laws, scientific facts, norms, hierarchies and institutions, are not representative of the truth, but rather conceal an oppressive system of dominance over others beneath the “truths”. So, deconstructing will reveal the “power relation underneath the mask of the truth”…

Expressed in this manner, it appears harmless and somewhat beneficial, right? After all, who wouldn’t want to live in a world where everybody uses some form of critical thought?

What makes this methodology so dangerous is that it lures you into believing that critical thought is not only acceptable but is a positive thing. Although deconstruction may seem like a path of inquiry, it actually serves as an ontological framework for understanding how we see the world as humans. The difference between these two statements does not just relate to how each approach will end up, but rather how these approaches will create our civilization as we know it today. A civilization that is able to question its societal norms and values will not only allow for the potential of reform and creating a more just society, but will also be able to move forward and continue to grow.

In contrast, if a civilization believes that their current norms and values are nothing more than systems of oppression and domination, then this will lead to the collapse of that civilization, as there will be nothing to defend.

Therefore, everything that makes up a society’s infrastructure, borders, laws, scientific principles, language, historical records, and biological (or gender) identities, will be fundamentally suspect, negotiable, and ultimately “deconstructable.”

The Anatomy of a Mental Virus

Deconstruction functions exactly like a biological virus. It exhibits three distinct characteristics that make it incredibly difficult to eradicate once it takes hold in a culture’s institutions.

It Self-Replicates

Once the virus is established within a host institution, it will transform everything and everyone associated with that organization into a conduit for the virulence of the virus.

For example, if we are to consider science to be a system of patriarchal oppression, then that implies that we must deconstruct the scientific method as it pertains to science.

If we are to consider language to be a colonial product, then we must reinstate the colonial language.

If we are to consider the meritocracy to be a system of racial oppression, then we must eradicate the meritocracy altogether.

If we are to consider the biological (or gender) identities to be social constructs, then we must create our own social constructs in place of the biological constructs that have been defined by traditional society.

It is Non-Falsifiable

This virus was designed specifically to be impervious to critique. Defending conventional norms makes one an oppressor; denying one’s status as such reinforces one’s claim to privilege.

Any “objective” facts presented are tainted by the oppressive power dynamics from which they were derived.

Any reasoned arguments presented will further be rejected as products of a patriarchal, Euro-centric society.

There is no avenue of escape. The manner in which objections are designated inadmissible demonstrates that this is not about reasoned philosophical debate; rather, this reflects the precise epistemological structure of a cult.

And have I seen this virus affecting people very dear to me!

It Self-Refutes, But Does Not Care

The idea of Deconstruction is fundamentally self-refuting. If “every truth is an exercise of power,” then “every truth is an exercise of power” is simply an exercise in power and thus useless. Everything Deconstruction proposes is philosophically empty on its face.

However, this is of little concern to the Virus, isn’t it? Its intent is to create a tool for political effectiveness, and it is extraordinarily effective at achieving that goal. It both disarms the opposition and empowers its supporters; it not only renders the defender impotent but also liberates the aggressor.

The Virus is the quintessential example of a politically asymmetrical tool.

The Production of Diminished Humans

The most tragic legacy that this virus has left behind is the psychological devastation felt by the generations affected by it. We have now created a whole generation that knows how to deconstruct everything, but has never been taught how to create anything.

This generation understands the concept of suspicion, but does not understand the concept of admiration. This generation sees power dynamics wherever they look and sees beauty nowhere. This generation can write a thousand pages about how oppressive Shakespeare was, but not one sentence that will remain relevant for the next one hundred years. The distinction between having critical intelligence and using critical intelligence as a way of posturing has become blurry.

When a person’s mind is fed only on deconstruction, it becomes sterile. This person can no longer build anything; and because of this, this person is anxious, unstable, and completely disconnected from striving for excellence.

The Three Pillars of Civilization

The existence of a Civilization is based on 3 Basic Beliefs:

1) The ability of Reason to discover Objective Truth

2) The ability to distinguish between Good and Evil

3) The responsibility of each generation to pass down the culture that has been passed down to them

The work of the Deconstructionists has systematically destroyed all 3 beliefs. While the work of the Deconstructionists was not necessarily intended to be malicious, but rather, a manifestation of a playful intellectual pursuit, the product of a fascination with the concept of Suspicion, and a Bourgeois rebellion against their own culture (whose prophets had produced their works).

As a result, a civilization that has lost confidence in the existence of Objective Truth or Goodness, and who has no faith in their own cultural Heritage, will have no desire to defend itself, and will instead, simply issue apologies in anticipation of their demise.

How to Cure the Virus

Fortunately, for us, a “mental virus” can only exist in so long as we allow it to exist by giving it authority over our discourse. In other words, when we refuse to engage with a mental virus, we stop giving it a “life.”

It dies as soon as we quietly, firmly reaffirm that there exists a truth, a beauty, a good, and an inheritance worth protecting. And it dies as soon as we stop asking permission from the deconstructors to build.

The builders of the world have always had the last word versus the commentators of the world. They will always have the last word. There will be a time when only that which has been built will remain. There is no place for deconstructed items. We have now entered an age of building, and therefore, it’s time for us to stop deconstructing.

By Dr Ioannis Syrigos

References

Cusset, F. (2008). French Theory: How Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze, & Co. Transformed the Intellectual Life of the United States. University of Minnesota Press.

Big Theory: How America Brought French Theory to the World. (n.d. ). Villa Albertine.

Lawlor, L. (2006, revised 2021 ). Jacques Derrida. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Barron, R. (2024 ). The Philosophical Roots of Wokeism. Acton Institute, Religion & Liberty, Vol. 34, No. 1.

Krausz, J. (2025 ). The Relationship Between Deconstructionist Postmodern Society and the Decline of Traditional Western Values: The Problem of ‘Post-Truth’. Hungarian Conservative.