American Opposition to 'Critical Race Theory': a Dangerous Trend
News headlines, viral videos, and heated open-board discussions are just some of the ways in which the topic of race has proliferated across the United States most recently.
Over the past year, Republican-backed legislations have emerged across America with a similar goal in mind—to restrict what should be discussed about race in schools. Discussion in reaction to such legislation has been littered with the term “critical race theory”, whilst viral videos have shown open school board discussions in which some parents have labelled classroom engagement with race divisive and hurtful.
Put simply, critical race theory (CRT) holds that race is socially constructed and perpetuated in legal institutions and social structures to the oppression of non-white, typically Black, people. This theory focuses on the United States, emphasizing the historical foundations in which structural racism has affected American society. Importantly, critical race theory is a complex, academic, and legal theory pioneered by scholars such as Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and others.
Republicans claim that CRT consists of destructive and even racist ideas. Phrased strongly, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas claimed “Critical race theory is bigoted, it is a lie and it is every bit as racist as the Klansman in white sheets”. Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin signed an executive order immediately upon assuming office in January to remove CRT from schools, defining its ideas as “inherently divisive concepts”. These sentiments clearly are growing. Legislation has been proposed in 17 states and passed in 5 states to date. Some legislation is specific, condemning CRT in teacher training, activities, and discussions supposedly related to the theory. Other legislation is more generalised, citing “indoctrinating” and “divisive” ideas.
What do parents who support such legislation have to say about the issue? One parent in Florida, Quisha King, part of the group Moms for Liberty stated “Critical race theory is teaching that if you have a certain color skin you are automatically deemed an oppressor and if you do not fall into that category, typically white, male…you are then deemed the oppressed”. Others claim that children will be made uncomfortable, that CRT itself is discriminatory, and that it is imposing a harmful doctrine on students. Specifically, many parents seem to voice concern over activities that ask students to identify their privilege.
Yet, this debate reveals confusion—and much about the nature of race itself in America. To begin, many of those opposing bans on CRT in classrooms ask an interesting question: is CRT even being taught in classrooms? Many say it is not. During a heated school board meeting about the topic in Atlanta, Georgia, school board member Trey Hutchens pushed another member to: “Show me in our curriculum where CRT is? Because we don’t even have a definition for it”. The only response that could be given was to “look on social media”. In some cases, groups of parents have even come forward opposing CRT at school board meetings where discussion of such curricula has not even been on the agenda.
CRT training is given to teachers in a few schools, to have them comprehend the role of race in aspects of American life, and potentially further contextualize their teaching. However, especially when it comes to primary and secondary (elementary and high schools), critical race theory would be too convoluted a subject to discuss with students. If CRT is understood correctly, it is a legal theory; having a conversation about whether you feel safe around police is not teaching theory.
This popular mobilization against CRT in public education, and the attempt to censor what should be said inside classes, is a dangerous trend. Censorship of what can be said in spaces of education is harmful; growth and change come from discussion and confrontation of previous conceptions. Critical thinking cannot occur if some topics are relegated as “inappropriate” for the classroom and avoided. It also reveals how Americans have not reconciled both the overt racist past, one of slavery and segregation, and the covert racial structures that have been carried into the present and continue to affect all aspects of life- from the implementation of laws and inequity of the justice system, crediting for mortgages, health issues, access to education, and much more.
The sharp backlash at attempts to have children evaluate all aspects of American history, and all truths of American history, is indicative of the fragility of American racial relations. Black Americans each day must confront the impacts of structural racism, no matter how uncomfortable, and no matter what age. Why should students not have discussions about the way privilege informs aspects of their lives or the ways discrimination has taken an institutional form—even if that means being uncomfortable? As Dr Martin Luther King Jr. said in his “Letter From Birmingham Jail”, regarding his philosophy of direct nonviolent action, “there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth”.
With this in mind, let there be tension. Instead of attempting to create a shielded environment, allow tension in the minds of students: between the America that is, and the America that could be, if confronted.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the wider St. Andrews Foreign Affairs Review team.
Image courtesy of Ted Eytan via The Communications Network, ©2022, some rights reserved.
