Understanding the Motivations Behind the Opposition to Critical Race Theory

In the first ten months of 2021, nine states passed bills banning critical race theory, although none explicitly mentioned the term. They prohibit discussions of how racism impacts laws and policies and restrict diversity training. Critics argue that critical race theory (CRT) blames all white people as racist. But this claim misses the point. CRT examines laws and institutions, not people.

The Origins of the Opposition

There is a wide range of opinions about whether or not it’s appropriate to teach “critical race theory” in public schools. This spring, the topic has exploded in the political arena, as several states are considering bans on the theory’s use in classrooms.

The prevailing argument against CRT is that it promotes the idea that whites have an inherent superiority over people of color and that the United States has irredeemable roots of racism. Some critics also say the theory is anti-American, claiming that it encourages students to view their country as a flawed democracy with racist underpinnings.

Some scholars argue that racial inequality in America is so complex and entrenched that it requires a more sophisticated analysis than the simple view that “racism” is a problem of individual prejudices and acts. They advocate for a deeper look at how social constructs like race and power shape the world around us and influence our laws, institutions, and ideas about justice and fairness.

Others, including Heritage Foundation experts, argue that CRT is essential in a balanced curriculum because it helps teachers understand the complexity of societal problems and how they affect individuals. They add that attempting to ban the discussion of CRT is counterproductive, as it will only create a climate in which teachers are afraid to discuss complex issues with their students.

The Logic of the Opposition

Critical Race Theory (CRT) is not widely popular in the United States as a political theory. It is often portrayed negatively in popular books and criticized by some—particularly conservative Republicans—as divisive.

These criticisms often focus on CRT’s emphasis on power. But while there is much debate about how best to challenge power differentials, CRT is not about dividing people into “oppressor” and “oppressed” groups or encouraging prejudice and intolerance.

Instead, it focuses on how racism and bias are interwoven into everyday life. This means that even when people don’t mean to be racist, they can make choices contributing to racial injustices.

This logic drove many civil rights leaders, including the founder of Black Lives Matter, to use CRT as a lens for addressing racial justice issues. They recognized that the system of oppression was not going to change overnight. It would require a lengthy, careful examination of how power and race are linked.

The current backlash against CRT results from the fact that it is perceived as being too politically charged and ideological. In the eyes of some, it is a divisive ideology that seeks to bring partisanship into the classroom. And that’s dangerous, especially at this moment in history when our nation’s racial and social dynamics are so tense.

The Final Words

Many opponents of critical race theory claim that it teaches students that white people are inherently racist and that America is a racist country with irredeemable roots. These false claims create a convenient bogeyman for those unwilling to face our nation’s complicated history of slavery and racism. These efforts to ban the discussion of race and racism in schools are based on misinformation, fear, and political motives. They will harm our children, silence voices of diversity, and make it harder to talk honestly about our nation’s past.

Proponents of the bans argue that discussions of race and racism in school classrooms are divisive and will lead to violence. This gross overstatement ignores that violent crimes against black people are far more likely than violent crimes committed by white people.

Scholars and legal professionals studying racial justice often use Critical Race Theory as a framework for understanding how laws, policies, and institutions perpetuate racism. They also use it to challenge the belief that racial inequality can be solved by expanding rights and providing individuals with access to courts and lawyers. In the end, the movement’s goal to ban the teaching of Critical Race Theory is to censor the truth about our nation’s past and its continuing legacy of racial injustice in the present.

The Arguments of the Opponents

In the past year, critical race theory has gone from a barely known academic framework to a political rallying cry for some on the right. It’s been used to attack a candidate for governor in Virginia and state legislatures nationwide.

Often portrayed as a rebranding of the Black Power movement, the idea behind CRT is to challenge conventional thinking about discrimination and racism in America. The goal is to examine how racial issues are baked into the fabric of the legal system and society rather than isolated incidents that can be solved with laws and quotas.

Critics of CRT say it creates a negative dynamic by emphasizing racial identity and dividing people into oppressed and oppressor groups. They also argue that it undermines individual autonomy and encourages intolerance.

These arguments aren’t new, but they have gained momentum in recent months amid national conversations about race that began with protests over the police killing of George Floyd and continue to evolve as President Trump and some members of Congress seek to curb efforts to teach students about the role of racism in our history.

As a result, many state lawmakers have introduced legislation banning teachers from discussing racial inequality in their classrooms or otherwise challenging the status quo. Some of these bills explicitly mention critical race theory, while others don’t. Here’s what you need to know about this trend and how conservatives can fight against it.