Critical race theory in action

In a lecture to Hillsdale College (Imprimis, a Hillsdale publication, March 2021), Christopher F. Rufo explains “critical race theory,” which he says is a “default ideology” that has seeped from American universities into “government agencies, teacher training programs … diversity training programs … and school curricula” over the past 30 years.

In a nutshell, he says that critical race theory sees American public life through the lens of racism rather than through class warfare, but nevertheless is just old Marxism in new clothes. If you’ve ever thought it seems to be open season on successful, white, English-speaking males in public life, you might be seeing hints of critical race theory’s efforts. Rufo’s journalistic research runs deeper than that, however; he has collected over a thousand concrete examples of critical race theory in action.

Even without knowing the theory’s basic tenets, I’ve personally seen hints of it for a long time; here’s one secondhand example.

In an MSU course studying Montana’s Indian tribes, one of my sons heard repeatedly that whites had slaughtered 60 million bison during the 1800s. Curious, he asked how that count could possibly be known. The answer he received was that he seemed defensive on racial issues.

Oops. Just a passing moment in college experience, yes, but when you need the credits and you’ve paid the tuition, you’re not likely to ask more questions at that time, and thus, according to Rufo and a goodly number of other conservatives, this is how academic folks in tiny steps become the brainwashed servants of extreme liberalism.

Expanding from academia into politics and public policy, Rufo says critical race theory “is driving the vast machinery of the state and society”. My own observations tell me this also has considerable validity, but as is typical when political preferences are involved, it is not the whole story.

What Rufo fails to consider is something I learned as a teacher: neither young folks nor adults automatically grab every pearl cast before them. Given whatever background we have when we encounter “critical race” or any other theory, sensation, fact, or whatever, we’re as likely to ignore, forget, or rebel against it as to adopt it. Despite the little UM incident and others like it within and outside of academia, my son is staunchly conservative.

I didn’t encounter overtly politicized thinking in my undergrad years in the ‘60’s, but I did encounter it in my education profession and in graduate work starting in the ‘80’s and ‘90’s. I’m glad I did, because how else would I know with some certainty what contemporary political, social, religious, or cultural influences were really about? But in fact, while I’ve encountered questionable ideas (almost daily, if I watch TV,) I’ve never had to adopt them. I’m free to evaluate, ignore, or oppose to whatever degree I have stomach for.

Rufo mentions that conservative professors begin to fear for their jobs and reputations, so they do concede to “those pushing these anti-American ideologies”. That’s an unfortunate, unhealthy intellectual environment, but I do wonder – when it’s that serious, isn’t it time to man up instead of clamming up?

Critical race theory may be grounded in real problems, but nevertheless I agree that over all it should be knowledgeably and rationally opposed, as Rufo does in this lecture. Unfortunately, opposition nowadays seems to come most often in the form of deliberate nastiness, sometimes violence, certainly some craziness. This trend makes me pessimistic, because it reminds me of another thing I learned in school: you can’t fix crazy, and if crazy really wants to get you, it will.

Ron Rude, Plains