Keep Critical Race Theory out of Our Schools!

Introduction

Critical Race Theory (CRT) has emerged as a polarizing issue in debates over education and societal structures. Originating in the 1970s and 1980s from legal scholars such as Derrick Bell and Kimberlé Crenshaw, CRT asserts that racism is not merely individual prejudice but a systemic feature embedded in laws, policies, and institutions (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). Proponents argue it reveals persistent racial inequalities, yet this paper contends that CRT is a dangerous ideology that undermines social cohesion, meritocracy, free expression, and genuine education. Central to this critique is the understanding that race is a social construct—lacking biological basis—exploited divisively, particularly by progressives within CRT, to pit individuals against one another. In contrast, ethnicity, grounded in tangible cultural distinctions, holds authentic significance. CRT has no place in schools or a healthy society, and this paper advocates its exclusion from public policy and education.

Race as a Social Construct: A Divisive Tool in CRT

The concept of race as a social construct is widely accepted in social sciences. In other words, race is not a biological trait but a category shaped by societal forces (Omi & Winant, 2014). Historically, race has been used to justify discrimination and hierarchy, a point CRT leverages to claim that modern systems perpetuate white supremacy (Crenshaw et al., 1995). However, CRT transforms this observation into a divisive tool. By framing institutions from schools to workplaces as arenas of racial oppression, it reduces individuals to their racial identities, overshadowing personal agency and shared humanity.

Ethnicity; encompassing language, traditions, and cultural heritage; reflects genuine aspects of identity (Appiah, 1994). Race, by contrast, is an arbitrary label that CRT amplifies to cast people as oppressors or victims. Progressives employ this construct to perpetuate an "us vs. them" narrative, as scholar John McWhorter argues, noting that CRT's focus on racial binaries fosters resentment rather than reconciliation (McWhorter, 2021). This approach undermines the potential for a unified society.

The Dangers of Critical Race Theory

CRT's implementation in education and society poses several threats, detailed below with supporting evidence:

Fosters Division

CRT emphasizes racial differences and historical grievances, fragmenting social cohesion. In schools, CRT-inspired initiatives have introduced racially segregated activities, such as "affinity groups," sparking significant backlash from parents and educators (Rufo, 2020). These practices teach children to see peers as racial adversaries rather than equals, embedding division from an early age.

Erodes Meritocracy

By attributing success to systemic privilege rather than individual effort, CRT dismisses merit's value (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). While historical inequities exist, this blanket rejection risks undermining personal accountability. Economist Thomas Sowell warns that lowering expectations based on race—a potential outcome of CRT's perspective—harms those it aims to assist, stifling progress and innovation (Sowell, 2020).

Suppresses Free Speech

CRT often labels disagreement as racism, accusing critics of "white fragility" or "internalized bias" (DiAngelo, 2018). This stifles open dialogue; which is essential to education. A 2021 survey by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) found that 66% of college students fear expressing opinions due to such accusations (FIRE, 2021). In schools, this creates a chilling effect incompatible with intellectual freedom.

Indoctrinates Instead of Educates

Rather than encouraging critical thinking, CRT imposes a singular narrative of systemic racism, urging students to adopt predefined roles—oppressor or oppressed—based on race (Lindsay, 2022). Former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has argued that this prioritizes political ideology over historical accuracy, undermining education's core purpose (DeVos, 2021).

Addressing Counterarguments

Proponents argue that CRT is vital for understanding systemic racism. While racial disparities merit attention, CRT's exclusive focus on race oversimplifies complex issues, ignoring factors like socioeconomic status or personal choices (McWhorter, 2021). A more comprehensive approach could address equity without fostering division.

Another contention is that rejecting CRT restricts academic freedom. This paper does not advocate censorship but balance. Education should offer diverse perspectives on race and inequality, encouraging students to question and analyze rather than adopt a single framework (Rufo, 2021).

Conclusion

Critical Race Theory, by exploiting race as a social construct, endangers the foundations of a healthy society. It divides rather than unites, erodes merit and free speech, and indoctrinates rather than educates. While ethnicity reflects authentic cultural identities, race is an artificial tool that progressives, through CRT, use to fracture communities. Policymakers must exclude CRT from schools and public policy, replacing it with approaches emphasizing individual rights, merit, and unity. By teaching factual history and critical thinking, society can address inequality without sacrificing cohesion.