Some people regard critical theory as a kind of relativism. It seems to question whether there is any universal truth at all. Does using the tools of critical theory mean giving up on truth?
We need to think more carefully about that question. Traditionally, philosophers have believed that the truth of things is paramount. Meaning, on the other hand, comes later. Critical theory tends to reverse that. Most critical theorists, even if they don't agree on much else, think that meaning precedes truth. Things happen in an already meaningful world, and truth is contingent on the meaningful world.
But that's not the end of the story. Some critical/cultural theorists, such as postmodernists, have more or less given up on anything that everyone can agree on as true. Other critical theorists, particularly of the Frankfurt School, simply see truth as a promise for the future, not yet attained. We live in a time when powerful interests set the standards of discourse, in such a way that truth is defined in their own terms. Frankfurt School theorists believe that those interests have to be unmasked in order to have real discourse. Once that happens, we will be able to approach something like truth.
One might be forgiven for thinking that our age is one in which truth has all but disappeared as a value. The media is increasingly polarized, and uses tools of intimidation to assert its claim on truth. If a person does not agree with a party line, microphones are turned off, people are berated and humiliated, peoples' loyalty is questioned, and people are condemned using every illegitimate argument form that logic professors warn their students against. None of this has anything to do with a search for truth. Is truth still held as an ideal in this culture?