For a long time, the term “Critical Race Theory” (CRT) was used only in legal and academic circles. It came out of a broader, somewhat Marxist approach to philosophy: critical theory, which argues that social problems come from social and cultural structures. CRT is essentially critical theory in the context of race. In the 1970s, Derrick Bell, a lawyer and professor at Harvard Law School, started developing the concepts of CRT based on the legal state of the country. He was studying the effects of the 1954 Supreme Court Brown v. Board of Education, which banned racial segregation in schools. He noticed that while there were efforts for integration, the quality of education for Black students did not actually improve. He attributed it to something he called “interest convergence.” He argued that the only reason progressive racial legislation like Brown v. Board of Education passed was that it benefitted White people as well. In this case, it boosted international opinion of the United States during the peak of the Cold War and spurred economic growth for the South. 

Interest convergence is one of CRT’s main tenets. Another one is the idea that racism is “ordinary, not aberrational.” This means acknowledging that racism and racial discrimination are still very much being experienced by people of color, whether explicitly or implicitly—like in the form of microaggressions. This is opposed to the traditional paradigm that racism today is abnormal and ended with the civil rights movement. Another key concept is the invalidity of interpersonal color blindness, the flawed ideology which claims that the solution to racial discrimination is to completely ignore racial differences. According to CRT, following this line of thinking would mean also ignoring the role of race in history and dismissing the effects of that role in society today. It’s impossible to start disregarding race now, and color blindness is used as an excuse to not take responsibility and disengage from sometimes uncomfortable conversations around race.

A third tenet is that race is a social construct—not a biological one. Historically, people have thought of race as distinct groups of humans with inherently different behaviors and personalities. In the last few decades, this idea has largely been dismissed as a racist pseudoscience that was used to justify the oppression and violence against Black people and other marginalized groups. CRT takes this a step further by establishing that the idea of distinct "races" at all is something that people in power created arbitrarily to develop a racial hierarchy. 

The principles of CRT are designed to evaluate our social, political, and economic systems as a product of history. By doing this, they also deconstruct traditional narratives and education on race and the history of the United States. As a result, CRT is surrounded by significant controversy and faces many obstacles to public understanding.

One particularly controversial application of "CRT" is in K-12 education. Some right-wing politicians have claimed that teaching CRT in schools causes children to "hate each other," despite CRT being concerned with institutions, not individuals. Regardless, true CRT is rarely, if ever, actually taught in K-12 public schools. Instead, any sort of discussion of race or racism has been erroneously slapped with the label of "CRT," resulting in the stigmatization and even criminalization of any sort of education about, for example, the importance of racial equity, which is undoubtedly something crucial that any American student should be learning about. 

This misconstruction of CRT in schools has led to widespread bans in places across the country. For instance, in Arizona, Matt de la Peña’s novel, Mexican WhiteBoy, tells the story of a young Mexican American struggling with the complexities of his identity. “State officials cited the book as containing ‘critical race theory,’ a violation under a provision…” As articulated in the quote, the banning of the book is part of a broader attack on any kind of curriculum that instills, as they put it, “racial resentment.” On April 30th of 2021, Florida State’s Board of Education banned CRT from classrooms on the premise that it would “distort political events.” Bans like these promote a false narrative that education about America’s complete history is harmful. 

Through the media, a lot of terms and concepts gain popularity and controversy, and it’s hard to remember their original meanings. Understanding what CRT really is is the first step in starting meaningful conversations about how it should be applied and how American history and society should be reevaluated. And as students, CRT gives us another lens through which to view our education.