I’ve been trying not to wade into this much bc I hate being reactive to foolishness, but it’s annoying as hell being a Black woman lawyer taught by a number of preeminent Critical Race Theory pioneers and see it butchered like this, from every end of the ideological spectrum.
Critical Race Theory is a form of legal scholarship that responded to a pervasive ideology that the law/legal decisions were colorblind. This should not be controversial in 2021.
Other fields then applied certain CRT tenants to their studies.
Other fields then applied certain CRT tenants to their studies.
Critical Race Theory is not “diversity & inclusion” programs. It’s not even primarily about mandating an accurate reframing of history (though it can include that).
Its founders are legal scholars who felt it necessary to apply a racial lens to understanding US laws.
Its founders are legal scholars who felt it necessary to apply a racial lens to understanding US laws.
It spun off from leftist Critical Legal Studies, which was premised on the idea that law could enforce and perpetuate injustice, instead of being some neutral, apolitical science.
But many CRT scholars felt analysis of race and the role of white supremacy in the development of US law & legal decisions was severely lacking.
CRT came in to fill in a gap in legal scholarship to explain our legal system; not to be an overarching explanation of all the things in the world.
Still, leading CRT scholars often examine the role of class, gender, and other social statuses & their relationship with the law.
Still, leading CRT scholars often examine the role of class, gender, and other social statuses & their relationship with the law.
So no it’s not taught in grade school & it shouldn’t be!
No one is teaching 2nd graders organic chemistry or calculus.
Think of this similarly & respect Black scholarship.
No one is teaching 2nd graders organic chemistry or calculus.
Think of this similarly & respect Black scholarship.
Studying case law & policy is hard AF (umm that’s why law schools exist) & that’s what CRT scholars focus on.
So if by CRT you just mean “history,” just say that.
But these are two separate fields.
But these are two separate fields.
And if you’re a mainstream media outlet trying to explain CRT without consulting or interviewing any of the current living, breathing scholars— from Kendall Thomas to Patricia Williams to Kimberle Williams Crenshaw, what are you really doing?
It’s not even about responding to the right at this point, it’s just good journalism, cuz too many damn people out here confused & it’s taken every ounce of my patience not to respond to every single person perpetuating falsehoods, from liberals, to right wingers, to “leftists.”
*tenets
CRT has been living rent-free in these people’s minds so forgive the freudian slip
CRT has been living rent-free in these people’s minds so forgive the freudian slip
and by separate I don’t mean they’re in a vacuum. they obviously interact. but in academic settings, they’re simply not the same
And y’all know I love a good resource. Folks may recommend “Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings That Formed the Movement,” (L) but it’s really an academic text, bc it was meant for this world of legal scholarship. I’d suggest “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction) (R) 
You can also just read Cornel West’s foreword in the book on the left, if you want something quick and/or just read the “Scholarship” section of Derrick Bell’s wiki
I’ll add the caveat that principles proposed by & derived from CRT are helpful learning tools for most any age.
For example, the idea that racism is a tool to maintain power relations and less about individual encounters, something taught in CRT, is not just for grad students.
For example, the idea that racism is a tool to maintain power relations and less about individual encounters, something taught in CRT, is not just for grad students.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
